Author: kevin Date: To: 'AML Discussion List' Subject: RE: [AML] Curing pornography (was Do Violent Movies Increase Crime?)
I think what Michael's doing is making the assumption, as I do, that the
recent increase in Church leaders addressing pornography is not based on a
forum- or media-fed cycle but on the fact that problems with sexual
misconduct in wards and stakes, once discovered and dealt with, frequently
involve pornography. Of course people may overstate and misattribute
pornography's effects, which leads to talk based on talk, but I trust that
at the core of all those Conference addresses are actual experiences of the
kind that i80 posted yesterday on this list and Pres. Hinckley occasionally
reads ex cathedra in the form of personal letters sent to him.
Take away pornography, and there will of course still be people with
impaired abilities to form healthy sexual relationships who abuse others.
Everyone's right who has cautioned about the causality-correlation fallacy.
However, to morbidly paraphrase WH Auden: pornography is not the stuff of
abuse, but it makes excellent kindling. And that's my literary tie-in.
Kevin
--From Eugene--
On a contrary note, Michael is pointing to a painfully ironic tautological
reality: the more people talk about sex, the more people will talk about
sex. Which means that the more the subject is raised in public forums and
the more acceptable public discussion of the subject becomes, the faster
that problem will appear to grow. This can actually be a very good thing.
But it looks very bad while it's going on.
Eugene Woodbury
---From Michael---
We know that a problem with pornography is on a rise within the church.
We know that because it's become a regular staple in General Conference
topics every half a year, as well as local sermons. It's a veritable
D-Day-sized attack on pornography. And this has been going on for some
