Why do the same people who want the Commandments removed from places think pornography is acceptable ART?

Question

Pornography is immoral.
The Ten Commanments are just so...decent...AND NEEDED by society!

We have been to the Louvre in Paris where naked statues out-number the clothed by a LOT but I did not think they were pornography. There is a line and I think decent people just know where that is.

Answer 1

Well, my goodness, RLP - you can't put signs up telling people not to kill or steal - that''s not fair to the murderers and thieves who can't read!

I just had a student come to me with a problem, and my mentor agrees with me that it is a *big* problem. This student is in a 200 level English class, and has to do a project on gay porn. This is a very young girl, and she was very offended - not so much that it was gay porn, but that it was porn at all. The instructor should have made that clear in the *catalog* so students could make the choice if they want to do a class project on pornography.

The poor kid had been to the Dept Chair, and he (typically) blew her off. She went to talk to the Associate Dean Friday - I hope they're going to help her. If you are going to cover such a controversial, potentially offensive material as pornography in a college course, you should inform the students of that.

If you don't agree, how would you feel if the project had been on the Bible?

Answer 2

The 10 Commandments are religious doctrine.

Pornography and immorality are subjective. Not everyone view the same things as indecent. Is Michelangelo's David indecent? Some would say yes (it is, after all a NAKED man), and some would say no (it is a work of art). The question is - where do we draw the line? Is sex immoral? Is nudity immoral? Did not God create both? Would you consider a movie with a married couple having sex with each other pornography or a work of art? What I consider immoral may be very different than what you consider immoral. Does that mean that I (or you) have no morals or does it simply mean that we have different tolerances? If the human body was created by God, it should be considered a work of art, not something to be ashamed of.

I don't agree with the Commandments being displayed in PUBLIC places because it displays a public endorsement of religion, unless equal space is offered to ALL religions. I do agree that the Ten Commandments are decent and good rules to live by. Most of those who follow them have them memorized. Displaying them, payed for with the tax dollars of non-Christians as well as Christians, is not necessary for those who follow them. For those who don't, shoving religious doctrine down their throat won't make much of a difference.

Answer 3

"Pornography"is a loaded term. Too many people use it to refer to mere nudity or to tasteful erotic material, both of which have their place-- except to mentally-disturbed prudes.

As for the Ten Commandments, I disagree that they are "so decent". You cannot have Biblically-based laws without Biblically-based penalties, and if you study the Old Testament you'll see that the penalty for violating most of these Commandments is stoning. Is that the kind of America you wish to have? God help us!

We CANNOT have both the First Commandment AND the First Amendment backed by force of law. One or the other must be void. The First Amendment gives us Freedom of Religion, and that means ANY religion! The First Commandment says to worship only Yahweh, and the Pentateuch prescribes DEATH otherwise.

And as far as I'm concerned, I'll covet my neighbor's ox any time I want, and there's nothing you should be able to do about that!

Answer 4

Well, some things that you may label as pornography ARE art, however, if you were to get naked and pose for a sculpture, painting, photo, etc.; I would clearly call that obscene.

The 10 commandments, however, ARE Christian and not EVERYONE is Christian... get my drift???

Nudity is NATURAL and if you believe in God, well, that's the way He/She made us, right???

I, myself, have done some nude modeling for a friend of mine who is a photography student, and by all means and definitions, it is art.

Answer 5

I've never suggested removing any religious articles from anywhere, dearie. And as far as what YOU consider art, there's no accounting for taste.

This is the USA where we have freedom of the press, and that means I have to tolerate things like handbills from the KKK and NeoNazis. That's how it works, dear. That's the deal.

If you don't like something, look away, turn the channel, click the remote. You have a right NOT to listen or look, too.

Then, read my blog about obscenity, and about all the white middle class soccer moms that purchase all the steamy erotica. Read the numbers.

And, as in all things, there's quality and there's crap. It's a "free market" economy, remember? It's your choice if you want to restrict your reading to Ladies Home Journal as opposed to Danielle Steel or a classic author like D.H. Lawrence.

Milton protested in 1644 about the Church wanting to get control of the printing presses, and I'm telling you the same thing - you don't have the right to designate what's allowed.

You're entitled to your opinion - not a censor's magic marker.

Oh, one last lesson in religion and the relativity of taste and offense. Take a deep breath and read this question carefully:

Q: What would a devout Mormon or Muslim say about your photo?

Answer 6

Pornography is not art. It is a lewd but lucrative manipulation of the beauty of the human body for cheap thrills and immoral acts. I am torn on the issue of displaying the 10 Commandments in public areas or government buildings, but I am not ashamed of my GOD, like most of America is by sheer definition of their godless pseudo-culture.

Answer 7

now, lets try to keep from going down the road that lumps two relatively separate groups together. now, i don't think that the commandments should be displayed in government forums like courthouses, not because i don't think they are needed (they are) or because i don't live by them (i do), but because i can imagine how i would feel, as a christian, if symbols of buddhism or sikh or any other religion were displayed. if i'm not comfortable with someone else's religion on the courthouse, then i can't be comfortable with imposing my religion on others like that.

as for the porno, my god. who would consider that art? :P

Answer 8

The commandments belong in church helmet head. Porn is a choice and neither you or The Pope (or ruth/shrink) has the right to decide what people do in the privacy of their own homes. So much for your morals.

Now you want to control art too eh? I've got news for you sexophobes - there is nothing dirty or shameful about the human body. If you guys would loosen up and try sex right instead of under the covers in a pitch dark room while clutching a bible - you might actually enjoy yourselves instead of being so repressed.

*Now I see where it comes from. Daddy the online cross dresser - or was some surgery involved? No wonder you're confused.

New York v. Ferber was not about real child pornography - it was about cartoon characters depicted as children. As usual the fundies try and smear the ACLU as being "pro whatever I hate" when the truth is it's a lie.

The Ferber decision noted:

We note that the distribution of descriptions or other depictions of sexual conduct, not otherwise obscene, which do not involve live performance or photographic or other visual reproductions of live performances, retains First Amendment protection.

From the ACLU;

The ACLU opposes child pornography that uses real children in its depictions. Material, however, which is produced without using real children, and is not otherwise obscene, is protected under the First Amendment. H.R. 4623 attempts to ban this protected material, and therefore will likely meet the same fate as the provisions stricken from the Child Pornography Prevention Act (CPPA) in Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition.

I don't care about one little decision on a ten commandments ruling - fact is the good guys have won the vast majority.

Answer 9

Nobody wants the Ten Commandments removed from Churches and Temples, where they belong.

The point has simply been made that official government buildings are no place for prostheletyzing your religion.

There are millions of Hindus who think greater devotion to Lord Krishna is needed by society. Do you want those messages in at city hall?

Answer 10

Nobody should need to trot out court decisions to define their morality. And to say that morality stops at your front door is a dangerous position, so long as your kids live on the other side of that door.

What else stops mattering at your front door?

Think about it.