There. I said it

I do not believe that there is anything objectionable, morally speaking, about watching porn. As a matter of basic principle, I hold that nothing that happens with consent of all the parties involved can be morally wrong. Hence, if someone decides to be filmed while having sex, and someone else decides to watch this (presumably after remunerating the creators in a more or less direct way), it's absolutely fine and no business of anyone else.

Because in my humble opinion any act is permissible unless proven wrong, the best way to justify my claim is to address some of the common objections. (Of course, please feel free to raise these and similar ones in the answers, but then please address the counter-arguments given.)

1. Religious objections: Many (if not all) religious institutions are strongly opposed to porn. If their arguments are purely of the form "porn is wrong because god said so", then I don't think they are relevant to this conversation. If their arguments are of the form "god told us porn is wrong, and he wants only good for us so we'd be smart to listen to him" then it should be possible to reach the same conclusion without referencing religion.

2. Objections on the basis of harm to the actors: It is certainly true that many porn actors suffer as a result of the work that they do in various ways (the opposite side of the debate will surely be better suited to discuss this). However, they have made a free choice to engage in this line of work, and presumably they found that the rewards outweighed the downsides. It is not up to the consumers to judge the choices made by other people involved in the industry.

3. Objections on the basis of harm to the viewers: There are reportedly downsides to watching porn, such as the possibility of addiction and (some claim) worse sexual performance/decreased satisfaction. However, it seems to be within the rights of the viewer to inflict that on themselves. (For comparison, most people don't hold it immoral to drink alcohol and smoke cigarettes, despite similar considerations.)

These are some additional assumptions: Since what is wrong for one person is not necessarily wrong for another, let me specify that the viewer I have in mind is an adult (hence, the question of what impact porn has on teens is irrelevant to this thread) and is not in a situation where they are expected to avoid watching porn (e.g. they're not married to a person who finds porn objectionable). Assume also that porn is not obtained illegally, but feel free to assume it depicts whatever act you need for your argument to work (withing the boundaries of the law). I think the gender and orientation should be irrelevant, but just because of statistics I'm mostly interested in a heterosexual male viewer.

Cc. Seun
Mynd44
dominique
lalasticlala
MJBOLT
IAmSabrina
MuttleyLaff
budaatum
Johnydon22
Nnennag6
LordReed
funmisticqueen / funmisticqueen2
hahn
offpoint
Ishilove
CAPSLOCKED
Ubunja
Martinez39

I'll comment on this thread after Sunday service.

you own your life bro, no one can dictate what you want for you.
but make sure you buy enough Vaseline

Vic2Ree:
There. I said it

I do not believe that there is anything objectionable, morally speaking, about watching porn. As a matter of basic principle, I hold that nothing that happens with consent of all the parties involved can be morally wrong. Hence, if someone decides to be filmed while having sex, and someone else decides to watch this (presumably after remunerating the creators in a more or less direct way), it's absolutely fine and no business of anyone else.

Because in my humble opinion any act is permissible unless proven wrong, the best way to justify my claim is to address some of the common objections. (Of course, please feel free to raise these and similar ones in the answers, but then please address the counter-arguments given.)

1. Religious objections: Many (if not all) religious institutions are strongly opposed to porn. If their arguments are purely of the form "porn is wrong because god said so", then I don't think they are relevant to this conversation. If their arguments are of the form "god told us porn is wrong, and he wants only good for us so we'd be smart to listen to him" then it should be possible to reach the same conclusion without referencing religion.

2. Objections on the basis of harm to the actors: It is certainly true that many porn actors suffer as a result of the work that they do in various ways (the opposite side of the debate will surely be better suited to discuss this). However, they have made a free choice to engage in this line of work, and presumably they found that the rewards outweighed the downsides. It is not up to the consumers to judge the choices made by other people involved in the industry.

3. Objections on the basis of harm to the viewers: There are reportedly downsides to watching porn, such as the possibility of addiction and (some claim) worse sexual performance/decreased satisfaction. However, it seems to be within the rights of the viewer to inflict that on themselves. (For comparison, most people don't hold it immoral to drink alcohol and smoke cigarettes, despite similar considerations.)

These are some additional assumptions: Since what is wrong for one person is not necessarily wrong for another, let me specify that the viewer I have in mind is an adult (hence, the question of what impact porn has on teens is irrelevant to this thread) and is not in a situation where they are expected to avoid watching porn (e.g. they're not married to a person who finds porn objectionable). Assume also that porn is not obtained illegally, but feel free to assume it depicts whatever act you need for your argument to work (withing the boundaries of the law). I think the gender and orientation should be irrelevant, but just because of statistics I'm mostly interested in a heterosexual male viewer.

Cc. Seun
Mynd44
dominique
lalasticlala
MJBOLT
IAmSabrina
MuttleyLaff
budaatum
Johnydon22
Nnennag6
LordReed
funmisticqueen
hahn
offpoint
Ishilove
CAPSLOCKED
Ubunja
Martinez39

You have articulated a point of view I have been attempting to put into words. The religious objections to porn are mostly based on the uncomfortable nature of talking about sex. The view that it is a private matter not to be exposed to all eyes to see sparks a turmoil in the mind of the religious therefore the god must be correct in being against porn even though no where in their holy books does the god even make reference to porn but somehow they know what the god wants because it just happens to tally with their feelings on the matter.

Vic2Ree:
There. I said it

I do not believe that there is anything objectionable, morally speaking, about watching porn. As a matter of basic principle, I hold that nothing that happens with consent of all the parties involved can be morally wrong. Hence, if someone decides to be filmed while having sex, and someone else decides to watch this (presumably after remunerating the creators in a more or less direct way), it's absolutely fine and no business of anyone else.

Because in my humble opinion any act is permissible unless proven wrong, the best way to justify my claim is to address some of the common objections. (Of course, please feel free to raise these and similar ones in the answers, but then please address the counter-arguments given.)

1. Religious objections: Many (if not all) religious institutions are strongly opposed to porn. If their arguments are purely of the form "porn is wrong because god said so", then I don't think they are relevant to this conversation. If their arguments are of the form "god told us porn is wrong, and he wants only good for us so we'd be smart to listen to him" then it should be possible to reach the same conclusion without referencing religion.

2. Objections on the basis of harm to the actors: It is certainly true that many porn actors suffer as a result of the work that they do in various ways (the opposite side of the debate will surely be better suited to discuss this). However, they have made a free choice to engage in this line of work, and presumably they found that the rewards outweighed the downsides. It is not up to the consumers to judge the choices made by other people involved in the industry.

3. Objections on the basis of harm to the viewers: There are reportedly downsides to watching porn, such as the possibility of addiction and (some claim) worse sexual performance/decreased satisfaction. However, it seems to be within the rights of the viewer to inflict that on themselves. (For comparison, most people don't hold it immoral to drink alcohol and smoke cigarettes, despite similar considerations.)

These are some additional assumptions: Since what is wrong for one person is not necessarily wrong for another, let me specify that the viewer I have in mind is an adult (hence, the question of what impact porn has on teens is irrelevant to this thread) and is not in a situation where they are expected to avoid watching porn (e.g. they're not married to a person who finds porn objectionable). Assume also that porn is not obtained illegally, but feel free to assume it depicts whatever act you need for your argument to work (withing the boundaries of the law). I think the gender and orientation should be irrelevant, but just because of statistics I'm mostly interested in a heterosexual male viewer.

The flaws here are rather unmistakable.

1. Religious objections: why should we take your own position to be true, that is, what is the force behind your declaration that whatever people do consensually is morally right? In what way are you not establishing yourself as God with that claim? Since you effectively are, why then is it irrelevant what a competing God has to say about it? The issue here would be which of you is the true God so that we will listen to Him, would it not?

2. Harm to the actors: in gangsterism, gangsters mostly make a free choice to get into the game, why then is it a crime when they kill and maim each other? Why too is it depraved to watch them doing these things to each other in videos? For another example, why is it outlawed to spectate at duels to the death?

3. Harm to the viewers: I am loath to debate your position here, but I would point out that if you have the right to inflict such harm on yourself, you also have the responsibility to accept the blame for it. It is foolishness to use yourself in this way and then turn around and blame God for the consequences that result from your own free choice.

Now, to be clear, I am not interested in changing your mind. I came into the thread because I was curious about what might be on it. I got a more effective argument than I expected and I decided that it was dangerous enough to respond to.

I also note that atheism appears a favorite lean-to for people who are bitter at God for the things that they have suffered and for those who don't want any inhibitions on their sexual behavior.

Ihedinobi3:

The flaws here are rather unmistakable.

1. Religious objections: why should we take your own position to be true, that is, what is the force behind your declaration that whatever people do consensually is morally right? In what way are you not establishing yourself as God with that claim? Since you effectively are, why then is it irrelevant what a competing God has to say about it? The issue here would be which of you is the true God so that we will listen to Him, would it not?

2. Harm to the actors: in gangsterism, gangsters mostly make a free choice to get into the game, why then is it a crime when they kill and maim each other? Why too is it depraved to watch them doing these things to each other in videos? For another example, why is it outlawed to spectate at duels to the death?

3. Harm to the viewers: I am loath to debate your position here, but I would point out that if you have the right to inflict such harm on yourself, you also have the responsibility to accept the blame for it. It is foolishness to use yourself in this way and then turn around and blame God for the consequences that result from your own free choice.

Now, to be clear, I am not interested in changing your mind. I came into the thread because I was curious about what might be on it. I got a more effective argument than I expected and I decided that it was dangerous enough to respond to.

I also note that atheism appears a favorite lean-to for people who are bitter at God for the things that they have suffered and for those who don't want any inhibitions on their sexual behavior.

Your arguments are very good arguments for "why you shouldn't watch too much porn".

However, I remain unconvinced (not that you care obviously) that it is a valid argument for "why it is wrong to watch porn".

To elaborate on the difference, let me first point out that the reasoning only applies in a case when one watches too much porn, but does not apply when one watches moderate amounts of porn. It is possible to get addicted to pretty much anything (and my increasing lack of faith in humanity makes me doubt if the quantification "pretty much" is really needed); this does not necessarily mean that all potentially addictive things are wrong. Would you, for instance, argue that drinking wine is wrong just one the basis that you can become addicted and ruin your life as a result? (Fair enough if yes, but then we have a deeper disagreement.)

Perhaps more controversially, I am not convinced that even if even moderate use of porn had the potential to be harmful that would make watching porn wrong, merely stupid. For comparison, I don't think it would be morally wrong of me to be obese to the point of it being life-threatening, or even to commit suicide for that matter. In absence of some external factors these are rather sub-optimal choices, but still choices I have the right to take.

harkandey:
you own your life bro, no one can dictate what you want for you.
but make sure you buy enough Vaseline

Thanks bro

LordReed:


You have articulated a point of view I have been attempting to put into words. The religious objections to porn are mostly based on the uncomfortable nature of talking about sex. The view that it is a private matter not to be exposed to all eyes to see sparks a turmoil in the mind of the religious therefore the god must be correct in being against porn even though no where in their holy books does the god even make reference to porn but somehow they know what the god wants because it just happens to tally with their feelings on the matter.

I think from a religious perspective, sex goes far much further than that

The porn industry is notoriously exploitative. They generally post ads that look like ads for normal acting jobs, because most women do not actively search out jobs in the porn industry.
https://verilymag.com/2015/08/porn-industry-playboy-mansion-sex-trafficking-belle-knox-rashida-jones-holly-madison

When you say that nothing can be morally wrong when parties consent, I would agree, with the provision that consent has to be informed. People entering the porn industry are generally not informed of what the risks are, of what they are getting themselves into.

There are also links between sex trafficking and pornography.
http://humantraffickingsearch.org/the-connection-between-sex-trafficking-and-pornography/

About 36% of porn stars were molested as children. They have high rates of drug and alcohol addiction. They are among most countries' most vulnerable and desperate citizens. Then they get suckered into a job that makes them less employable, in an industry rife with drugs and assault, and tends to warp people mentally.

I don’t think this makes pornography wrong in itself, but the way the industry is now set up is unethical. Stronger Unions and better government oversight would be good first step.

I'm not interested in the arguments for or against porn.
Just here to enjoy an intellectual discussion.

Let's be clear: porn stars are prostitutes. Both male and female, they are paid to have sex. The fact that the person paying them is not the person having sex with them is beside the point. When you watch porn, you are contributing to the payment of these prostitutes even if you are not paying for the service, as someone is paying for your technical capacity to watch the video - typically an advertiser. By watching the video you make the advertiser pay the performers. If you obtained the porn through a service such as BitTorrent, you are both part of the expected overhead for the producer and thus contributing to the payment of the prostitutes, and also guilty of stealing someone's intellectual property.

There is also the matter of 'amateur' porn. If you watch this kind of video, you have no way of knowing that all of the people involved agreed to release it. You may be consuming revenge porn, which is clearly a violation of the person who wanted the material to remain private. Conversely, it may not actually be an amateur production but rather made to look like one in the interests of titillation. There's no way you can tell. And by the way, those girls on the 'casting couch' know exactly what's going on...

It can also be shown that your contribution to this prostitution is wrong.

First is a matter of consent. It's understood that sexual consent must be freely given or else the act constitutes rape - something that is clearly immoral.

That isn't limited to forcible rape. Threats and implied threats also negate consent. And a threat can be positive or negative: "do this or I will harm you" and "do this or I will prevent you from avoiding harm" are morally equivalent.

Most people who go into prostitution - whether on a private basis or for the creation of porn - do so because they feel they have no other choice. Many come from extremely vulnerable backgrounds and are facing personal crises. They may be living with drug addiction, debt, or some other pressing need. I have read that many young women get started in pornography in order to fund an abortion. They smile for the cameras, but that does not mean they are in a happy situation. This means that the sex they are having is not through free consent, but rather in the face of an imminent threat.

It is wrong for society to use prostitution as a safety net for vulnerable young women. If this option were effectively controlled, the citizens of a civilised country would find a way to open up other options for them.

Sex is also a basic human drive, and can be the source of much joy and intimacy. Its beauty stems in part from the fact that it always comes from a free desire on the part of the people involved. This is negated in prostitution, as prostitutes engage in sexual activity that they do not otherwise want, because they are being paid for it. Yes, apart from the consent issues mentioned above they choose to do so, but they should be protected from making this choice in order to be able to enjoy a fundamental part of the human condition.

There is only one circumstance under which you could watch porn and know that you are not violating anyone's rights: if all the people featured in the video are personally known to you, and you are certain they are giving it to you freely. This is an outlier situation, but I would argue that it is still negative because it will make your subsequent relationship with your exhibitionist friends decidedly awkward.

TheArranger:
The porn industry is notoriously exploitative. They generally post ads that look like ads for normal acting jobs, because most women do not actively search out jobs in the porn industry.
https://verilymag.com/2015/08/porn-industry-playboy-mansion-sex-trafficking-belle-knox-rashida-jones-holly-madison

When you say that nothing can be morally wrong when parties consent, I would agree, with the provision that consent has to be informed. People entering the porn industry are generally not informed of what the risks are, of what they are getting themselves into.

There are also links between sex trafficking and pornography.
http://humantraffickingsearch.org/the-connection-between-sex-trafficking-and-pornography/

About 36% of porn stars were molested as children. They have high rates of drug and alcohol addiction. They are among most countries' most vulnerable and desperate citizens. Then they get suckered into a job that makes them less employable, in an industry rife with drugs and assault, and tends to warp people mentally.

I don’t think this makes pornography wrong in itself, but the way the industry is now set up is unethical. Stronger Unions and better government oversight would be good first step.

This answer shows that there is a certain level of dishonesty involved in recruiting new actors, and that they are subjected to a level of coercion which makes the decisions they make non-consensual.
Something to ponder on.

Vic2Ree:

This answer shows that there is a certain level of dishonesty involved in recruiting new actors, and that they are subjected to a level of coercion which makes the decisions they make non-consensual.
Something to ponder on.

I also recommend Netflix's "Hot Girls Wanted" documentary that shows how the process actually works, for 18-21 years old girls getting hooked into the porn business through shady tactics.

johnydon22:


I think from a religious perspective, sex goes far much further than that

How do you mean?

NnennaG6:
Let's be clear: porn stars are prostitutes. Both male and female, they are paid to have sex. The fact that the person paying them is not the person having sex with them is beside the point. When you watch porn, you are contributing to the payment of these prostitutes even if you are not paying for the service, as someone is paying for your technical capacity to watch the video - typically an advertiser. By watching the video you make the advertiser pay the performers. If you obtained the porn through a service such as BitTorrent, you are both part of the expected overhead for the producer and thus contributing to the payment of the prostitutes, and also guilty of stealing someone's intellectual property.

I can't see why it's relevant whether they are prostitutes or not.

NnennaG6:

There is also the matter of 'amateur' porn. If you watch this kind of video, you have no way of knowing that all of the people involved agreed to release it. You may be consuming revenge porn, which is clearly a violation of the person who wanted the material to remain private. Conversely, it may not actually be an amateur production but rather made to look like one in the interests of titillation. There's no way you can tell. And by the way, those girls on the 'casting couch' know exactly what's going on...

True. Although this is a very particular set of circumstances.

NnennaG6:

It can also be shown that your contribution to this prostitution is wrong.

First is a matter of consent. It's understood that sexual consent must be freely given or else the act constitutes rape - something that is clearly immoral.

That isn't limited to forcible rape. Threats and implied threats also negate consent. And a threat can be positive or negative: "do this or I will harm you" and "do this or I will prevent you from avoiding harm" are morally equivalent.

Most people who go into prostitution - whether on a private basis or for the creation of porn - do so because they feel they have no other choice. Many come from extremely vulnerable backgrounds and are facing personal crises. They may be living with drug addiction, debt, or some other pressing need. I have read that many young women get started in pornography in order to fund an abortion. They smile for the cameras, but that does not mean they are in a happy situation. This means that the sex they are having is not through free consent, but rather in the face of an imminent threat.

If they have no better alternative, I can hardly blame the porn industry for providing one. I would most certainly blame the society, or the local government, for not providing a better option. But if these women are in a situation where they are desperately in need of money then it does not invalidate their ability to give consent. If I were starving, I might sell my family heirlooms and, while unfortunate, this would not be theft. I could get a job, presumably hard and not at all glamorous - else someone in a better position would have already taken it, and that would not be forced labour. I can see no reason why there should be special rules for anything having to do with sex. I want to stress, though, that I consider it deeply unfortunate that people end up in debt and all other types of difficulties, and that another way out for them should exist.

NnennaG6:

It is wrong for society to use prostitution as a safety net for vulnerable young women. If this option were effectively controlled, the citizens of a civilised country would find a way to open up other options for them.

Sex is also a basic human drive, and can be the source of much joy and intimacy. Its beauty stems in part from the fact that it always comes from a free desire on the part of the people involved. This is negated in prostitution, as prostitutes engage in sexual activity that they do not otherwise want, because they are being paid for it. Yes, apart from the consent issues mentioned above they choose to do so, but they should be protected from making this choice in order to be able to enjoy a fundamental part of the human condition.

What about people who have a much less sentimental approach to sex? I don't see how anyone has the right to tell them who to have sex with and under what conditions.

IAmSabrina:

I can't see why it's relevant whether they are prostitutes or not.


True. Although this is a very particular set of circumstances.



If they have no better alternative, I can hardly blame the porn industry for providing one. I would most certainly blame the society, or the local government, for not providing a better option. But if these women are in a situation where they are desperately in need of money then it does not invalidate their ability to give consent. If I were starving, I might sell my family heirlooms and, while unfortunate, this would not be theft. I could get a job, presumably hard and not at all glamorous - else someone in a better position would have already taken it, and that would not be forced labour. I can see no reason why there should be special rules for anything having to do with sex. I want to stress, though, that I consider it deeply unfortunate that people end up in debt and all other types of difficulties, and that another way out for them should exist.


What about people who have a much less sentimental approach to sex? I don't see how anyone has the right to tell them who to have sex with and under what conditions.

Happy Sunday, Sabrina

Prostitution is a dangerous job that causes psychological harm to the people who participate in it. Public prostitution - pornography - further damages the reputation of the people who engage in it and can lead to severe, lifelong discrimination against them in their social and work life. Many employers would fire a worker who was found to have appeared in pornography. They and their immediate family members face ridicule and ostracism, particularly affecting their children.

Right or wrong, legal or illegal, the fact is that many communities look down on prostitutes. This can affect their friends and family members who had no choice about their participation in paid sex.

Contributing to the prostitution industry, by consuming pornography, draws more people in and harms both the performers and their relatives.

NnennaG6:

Happy Sunday, Sabrina

Prostitution is a dangerous job that causes psychological harm to the people who participate in it. Public prostitution - pornography - further damages the reputation of the people who engage in it and can lead to severe, lifelong discrimination against them in their social and work life. Many employers would fire a worker who was found to have appeared in pornography. They and their immediate family members face ridicule and ostracism, particularly affecting their children.

Right or wrong, legal or illegal, the fact is that many communities look down on prostitutes. This can affect their friends and family members who had no choice about their participation in paid sex.

Contributing to the prostitution industry, by consuming pornography, draws more people in and harms both the performers and their relatives.

I agree that it's a bad thing that people having worked in pornography face discrimination. However, the people who I think are to blame for this are the ones who are discriminating, not anyone else. In fact, it feels like purposefully avoiding pornography would actually contribute to the problem: it would make pornography (and by extension porn actors) more taboo.

IAmSabrina:

I agree that it's a bad thing that people having worked in pornography face discrimination. However, the people who I think are to blame for this are the ones who are discriminating, not anyone else. In fact, it feels like purposefully avoiding pornography would actually contribute to the problem: it would make pornography (and by extension porn actors) more taboo.

No society reveres prostitutes. While it would be ideal to live in a culture that treats everyone with dignity and respect, that is not the real world.

What you can do about it is to avoid contributing to the industry. You deny it the profits that it seeks, and prevent the possibility of contributing to discrimination by recognising a coworker in a porn video.

Courting/dating is one thing, but the things that often accompany it (physical intimacy/sex particularly); are problematic/sin.


"Now concerning the things of which you wrote to me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman. Nevertheless, because of sexual immorality, let each man have his own wife, and let each woman have her own husband." - 1 Corinthians 7:1-2

Peace and blessings!

NnennaG6:

No society reveres prostitutes. While it would be ideal to live in a culture that treats everyone with dignity and respect, that is not the real world.

What you can do about it is to avoid contributing to the industry. You deny it the profits that it seeks, and prevent the possibility of contributing to discrimination by recognising a coworker in a porn video.

I think we have very different visions of the worlds we want to aim at. Admittedly, both are (at least for now) impossible utopias, but I think we can aim to get closer to them. It seems to me, if I understand you correctly, that you would want a world with no prostitution and no porn whatsoever. In this world, it would be a safe assumption that my coworker has never been a part of a porn video. Come to think of it, such a world would be better than the one we live in. In the world I want to aim at, it could well happen that my coworker starred in a porn video and it's not a problem, everyone is OK with it. Of course, that is not an achievable goal right now, but we can move a little closer to that. Maybe we can make it so that it makes their life more complicated, but is not a complete disaster.

Vic2Ree:
There. I said it

I do not believe that there is anything objectionable, morally speaking, about watching porn. As a matter of basic principle, I hold that nothing that happens with consent of all the parties involved can be morally wrong. Hence, if someone decides to be filmed while having sex, and someone else decides to watch this (presumably after remunerating the creators in a more or less direct way), it's absolutely fine and no business of anyone else.

Because in my humble opinion any act is permissible unless proven wrong, the best way to justify my claim is to address some of the common objections. (Of course, please feel free to raise these and similar ones in the answers, but then please address the counter-arguments given.)

1. Religious objections: Many (if not all) religious institutions are strongly opposed to porn. If their arguments are purely of the form "porn is wrong because god said so", then I don't think they are relevant to this conversation. If their arguments are of the form "god told us porn is wrong, and he wants only good for us so we'd be smart to listen to him" then it should be possible to reach the same conclusion without referencing religion.

2. Objections on the basis of harm to the actors: It is certainly true that many porn actors suffer as a result of the work that they do in various ways (the opposite side of the debate will surely be better suited to discuss this). However, they have made a free choice to engage in this line of work, and presumably they found that the rewards outweighed the downsides. It is not up to the consumers to judge the choices made by other people involved in the industry.

3. Objections on the basis of harm to the viewers: There are reportedly downsides to watching porn, such as the possibility of addiction and (some claim) worse sexual performance/decreased satisfaction. However, it seems to be within the rights of the viewer to inflict that on themselves. (For comparison, most people don't hold it immoral to drink alcohol and smoke cigarettes, despite similar considerations.)

These are some additional assumptions: Since what is wrong for one person is not necessarily wrong for another, let me specify that the viewer I have in mind is an adult (hence, the question of what impact porn has on teens is irrelevant to this thread) and is not in a situation where they are expected to avoid watching porn (e.g. they're not married to a person who finds porn objectionable). Assume also that porn is not obtained illegally, but feel free to assume it depicts whatever act you need for your argument to work (withing the boundaries of the law). I think the gender and orientation should be irrelevant, but just because of statistics I'm mostly interested in a heterosexual male viewer.

Cc. Seun
Mynd44
dominique
lalasticlala
MJBOLT
IAmSabrina
MuttleyLaff
budaatum
Johnydon22
Nnennag6
LordReed
funmisticqueen / funmisticqueen2
hahn
offpoint
Ishilove
CAPSLOCKED
Ubunja
Martinez39

This is straight from Hell. Beware

LordReed:


How do you mean?

I mean, from a religious perspective/theological standpoint, sex is more than just a physical activity that should be kept secret between the participants

LordReed:


You have articulated a point of view I have been attempting to put into words. The religious objections to porn are mostly based on the uncomfortable nature of talking about sex. The view that it is a private matter not to be exposed to all eyes to see sparks a turmoil in the mind of the religious therefore the god must be correct in being against porn even though no where in their holy books does the god even make reference to porn but somehow they know what the god wants because it just happens to tally with their feelings on the matter.

1 Thessalonians 5:22 Abstain from all appearance of evil.

Romans 1:32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

1 Timothy 5:6 But she that liveth in pleasure is dead while she liveth.

1st John 1:15 -17
15 Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him.

16 For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the LUST OF THE EYES, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.

17 And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever.

Matthew 5:28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

Put all these Scriptures together, you will know that watching porn is a sin. Those involved are not married partners and they are fornicating. Anyone who takes pleasure in those committing sin are also guilty. Watching it can also stimulate you to commit immorality. Just ask for grace to overcome if you are a child of God.

TruthinAction:


1 Thessalonians 5:22 Abstain from all appearance of evil.

Romans 1:32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

1 Timothy 5:6 But she that liveth in pleasure is dead while she liveth.

1st John 1:15 -17
15 Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him.

16 For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the LUST OF THE EYES, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.

17 And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever.

Matthew 5:28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

Put all these Scriptures together, you will know that watching porn is a sin. Those involved are not married partners and they are fornicating. Anyone who takes pleasure in those committing sin are also guilty. Watching it can also stimulate you to commit immorality. Just ask for grace to overcome if you are a child of God.

...very well said...thanks for the biblical references...

TheShopKeeper:


...very well said...thanks for the biblical references...

You are welcome.

Vic2Ree:


Your arguments are very good arguments for "why you shouldn't watch too much porn".

However, I remain unconvinced (not that you care obviously) that it is a valid argument for "why it is wrong to watch porn".

To elaborate on the difference, let me first point out that the reasoning only applies in a case when one watches too much porn, but does not apply when one watches moderate amounts of porn. It is possible to get addicted to pretty much anything (and my increasing lack of faith in humanity makes me doubt if the quantification "pretty much" is really needed); this does not necessarily mean that all potentially addictive things are wrong. Would you, for instance, argue that drinking wine is wrong just one the basis that you can become addicted and ruin your life as a result? (Fair enough if yes, but then we have a deeper disagreement.)

Perhaps more controversially, I am not convinced that even if even moderate use of porn had the potential to be harmful that would make watching porn wrong, merely stupid. For comparison, I don't think it would be morally wrong of me to be obese to the point of it being life-threatening, or even to commit suicide for that matter. In absence of some external factors these are rather sub-optimal choices, but still choices I have the right to take.

Did you mean this response for me? I have been trying to find the connection between your response and my counters.

1. In what way does my argument that your claim to moral authority is questionable translate to the idea that one should not watch too much pornography?

2. In what way does my counter that harm to the actors is clearly not dismissible as a free choice translate to the idea that one should not watch too much pornography?

3. In what way does my counter that harm to the user should not be blamed on God when it results from the user's free choice translate to the idea that one should not watch too much pornography?

johnydon22:
I mean, from a religious perspective/theological standpoint, sex is more than just a physical activity that should be kept secret between the participants

Which just happens to go so well with their discomfort in talking about sex yeah? Isn't that convenient.

LordReed:


Which just happens to go so well with their discomfort in talking about sex yeah? Isn't that convenient.

Yes, that's exactly the reason for their conservativeness on sex

TruthinAction:


1 Thessalonians 5:22 Abstain from all appearance of evil.

Romans 1:32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

1 Timothy 5:6 But she that liveth in pleasure is dead while she liveth.

1st John 1:15 -17
15 Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him.

16 For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the LUST OF THE EYES, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.

17 And the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth for ever.

Matthew 5:28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

Put all these Scriptures together, you will know that watching porn is a sin. Those involved are not married partners and they are fornicating. Anyone who takes pleasure in those committing sin are also guilty. Watching it can also stimulate you to commit immorality. Just ask for grace to overcome if you are a child of God.

Nothing you have written here is specific to porn. You listed catchall verses that can be made to cover a variety of actions, depending on which one you want to condemn and which one you want to allow. I have had someone quote these same scriptures at me to condemn Wrestlemania/WWF or violence in movies meanwhile the same person loved detective shows and when pressed on why he would condemn one and not the other, his response was along the lines of, detective shows demonstrate critical thinking while completely ignoring the violence.

NOBODY can CHANGE an already MADE UP MIND not EVEN GOD though He created us yet he gives us *FREE-WILL* but whatever you *choose* has its *rewards* whether positive or negative.
if you want to know what is *pornography*
I DARE YOU TO ASK THE HOLY SPIRIT to *REVEAL WHAT IS PORNOGRAPHY TO YOU* then you can come and tell us what *HE SHOWED YOU*

Just say this in your heart/mind or mouth "Holy Spirit, reveal to me what is pornography"

He is always ready to attend to ANYBODY WHO COMES TO HIM thus "...anyone who comes to me, I will never send away" {John 6:37}.
GREAT GRACE DEAR.

LordReed:


Nothing you have written here is specific to porn. You listed catchall verses that can be made to cover a variety of actions, depend on which one you want to condemn and which one you want to allow. I have had someone quote these same scriptures at me to condemn Wrestlemania/WWF or violence in movies meanwhile the same person loved detective shows and when pressed on why he would condemn one and not the other, his response was along the lines of, detective shows demonstrate critical thinking while completely ignoring the violence.

Its very obvious a huge lot of them just saw the topic and decided to give a knee-jerk response without actually reading the OP

Your title is misleading and somewhat invalid. You say "there is nothing wrong in xyz". Nothing wrong-is an absolute moral stand. Nothing is equivalent to 0,empty,null etc. Like, saying, there is No light (power), or no credit in my phone. For a balanced argumnt, the issue is in establishing if your stand is valid? To do so, the difficult thing is in defining morality then deriving THE MORALITY i.e the STANDARD of Morality. After this STANDARD HAS been objectively extracted, then the question can be weighed against it? If you say no no this is splitting hairs then you are invariably saying we should simply go by an intuitive subjective informal universal (?) standard of morality? But if we accept that we arent being objective at all? Your stand is actually an attack on the subjective non formal intuitive standard (the kind that makes ppl boil with rage when some1 cons them of their hard earned money. The kind that makes inmates beat up a child sex offender). But your attack uses absolute claims and appeals to a standard ,without expressing this standard or pointing to it. Hence, it is invalid.
Any1 answering you is ASSUMING the STANDARD,often subconsciously, and building his response off from there.