OnMyWayUp, I’d still like to know your further opinion on this topic?

This would require research to substantiate. I don’t think we can decide this based on casual observations of history. One of my favorite quotes is “the plural of anecdote is not data”. In other words, just because some countries had “bad morals” when they fell, does not necessarily mean that the morality was in any way related to the fall.

I wish I had the time to provide the research.  My opinions are based upon casual observations as you had indicated.  I am sure I can find evidence to support my statement.  Then I am sure you and Drachen will do the same.  In the end we will have gotten nowhere.

[quote author=“grisjuan”]
[quote author=“TruthSeeker”]When are freedoms considered taken too far?

I would say “when they hurt others” - which I think is a very Libertarian definition. But I do not think pornography hurts individuals or society enough to ban it. It is something that large numbers of people want to have available. Compare it to tobacco or alcohol - both of which cause much greater concrete harm. Shall we ban them too?

If large numbers of people want to watch child pornography, what’s wrong with that?  They can look but not touch.  It doesn’t hurt anyone, right?

See my point?  Where do you draw the line?  Obviously a lot closer than I would like.

[quote author=“grisjuan”]

[quote author=“TruthSeeker”]If the biblical zealots get their way, who really gets hurt?  Are not the principles set forth in the bible meant to help us and not hurt anyone?  Please give this serious thought before you respond!

The discussion here has been quite serious - I’ve been really happy since these are all topics than can get people riled up.

Sex education and sexually transmitted disease information would become less available - which mainly hurts young people in my opinion.

I too enjoy a good civil debate, as long as people do not get their emotions in the way and allow anger to lure them to the dark side. :wink:

You mentioned sex education and disease info.  Obviously we would not need any of this for the schools if this content was not so easily accessible.  If we banned abortions, then there would be a REAL price to pay for kids to take something God created and pervert it.  I do not expect you to agree with me, but its true.  Kids would think twice if there were real consequences for their actions.  Instead, our society gives people a way out of being responsible.  (as usual)

Presumably the children used to create it are being abused. Most people creating pornography understand what they’re doing. On the other hand, there’s no logical reason why “faked” child porn (ie. drawings and Photoshopped images) are illegal, albeit exceedingly creepy. The real stuff should absolutely be illegal - it’s abetting child abuse and up the chain, someone does get hurt.

With all due respect, if you have no intention of backing up your claims or at least discussing them, why bother to make them?

I seriously doubt people would stop having sex because we removed any sexual material from schools or entertainment. The sex drive is one of the basic motivations of animal life. Want to reduce the abortion rate? Look at Sweden and Holland. Both countries have sex ed in schools, education about contraceptives (and availability) and extensive family planning systems. Both have lower abortion rates and lower teen pregancy rates than the United States does.

With all due respect, if you have no intention of backing up your claims or at least discussing them, why bother to make them?

To get the point of his opinion across and the fact that there are facts but most of us have much more important things to do than to preach to ignorant and closed minds.

[quote author=“FrodoID”]OnMyWayUp, I’d still like to know your further opinion on this topic?

:?:
What more do you need to know? I think in the content of all my posts you can grasp my opinions on most of the election. As well as with the following paragraphs.

[quote author=“TruthSeeker”]***OnMyWayUp, you should check this guy out.***

Bush is a closet christian? Where do you get that? He had well known christian pastors come to the White House for prayer for both him and the country… Not exactly keeping things under profile… It isn’t like he can declare laws favoring Christianity and frankly if he did, I would want him out of office. The day religious amendments are made to the Constitution is going to be the first day our country begins to fall completely. Regardless of which religion it is. Even Christianity. This always has and always will be a country of, at least a so-called, religious freedom.  Sure there will be athiests who disregard respect to those religions residing in America as there will also be religious people who disregard respect to other religions.  But I would say our country is as near to as perfect as we will get on Earth.
I don’t agree with how you have no loyalty to this country simply because of the fact that it is very, very screwed up.  I say that that is all the more reason to make sure you do the best do you can to steer it back into the right direction. I had checked out Peroutka… I definitely agree with

The very first presupposition of American government is that there exists a Creator God, yet our taxpayer-funded schools teach our children that He either doesn’t exist or that they can’t mention His name. 

as I am a highschool student and I see it everyday.. in every class… Biology to History to English… even math :? . 

[quote author=“TruthSeeker”]I realize my guy will not win, but my conscience will not allow me to vote for the “lesser of two evils”. Peroutka is a true class act. We all deserve a guy with character like his.

Yes this is very true and I completely agree.  But in this case we must accept the “lesser of the two evils” and then later, when our country’s top candidates aren’t so important to the country’s international image. Then we can vote for who it is that will really help this country rise again.
Peroutka does seem to be an extremely strong Christian man and has great values.  But it is the exact same situation as what happened in California’s election.  Davis as the prime Democratic candidate and Schwarzenegger as the prime Republic candidate but McClintock had an even better agenda.  However, to vote for McClintock (a marginally better increase in political stance) would have divided the Republican votes just like the Democrats for Lincoln… at least we Republicans have learned from other’s mistakes. 
Anyways I feel he would be an awesome president and his values are very good.  Yet I really don’t like that the Constitution party is bashing Bush so much.

I’ve seen this thread out of control….There is one thing that should not be discussed at the dinner table its politics and religon….

I would love to say some of my views….But, I will like to stay friends with more than half of you…

[quote author=“OnMyWayUp”]
[quote author=“FrodoID”]OnMyWayUp, I’d still like to know your further opinion on this topic?

:?:
What more do you need to know? I think in the content of all my posts you can grasp my opinions on most of the election. As well as with the following paragraphs.

I wrote a long posting to you, where I tried to address every aspect of your posting in an elaborated way. I gave you my arguments, opened different viewpoints within it and thus introduced new opposing aspects on my side where I really awaited your opinion.

Instead of giving me your turn of new arguments and opinions to continue this discussion in an academic and—for both sides—beneficial way, which I was really looking forward to, you instead chose to ignore my contribution and are obviously not willing to elaborate any explanation concerning my viewpoints and aspects.

I am very disappointed about this. I believe that such a behaviour within a discussion is either a proof for the fact that you as the opponent are not really knowing why you are defending your position and never really have thought about it or questioned it, or it is showing a total lack of respect for whatever reason.

I am again very disappointed about this, because I—and others—invested time and thought in their postings.

I don’t think that it would be useful to continue the discussion in any way. You say that you don’t have the time to elaborate to “ignorant and closed minds” why they are wrong but fail to give even the slighest statement about why you should be so right. In my eyes, this is not only an invalid but almost embarassing way to propagate your statements.

I might have understood you, but you don’t give us any chance to do so.

Please restrain from any further discussion, because propagating a viewpoint would also mean accouting for it by means of giving arguments to those who are willing to accept them in a grown up way.

And yet again you are wrong as well. I have already heard your arguments plenty of times in other debates. I have understood what you were trying to tell me by already knowing what I have heard from people I have met with in real life who share your beliefs. Why make you guys waste your time re-typing to me what I already know with maybe one or two adjustments of your opinion? I gather them from content of your posts and I would expect you to gather it from mine as well.

Why is it that you expect me to debate with you in an “academic and—for both sides—beneficial way”? I do not agree with your standpoints. Clearly I understand your viewpoints. I would never simply assume that you are incorrect because I don’t believe it. I have done my homework and it has led me to understand exactly where others stand and, for moments, believe it how logical it is. However, my beliefs come from a source that you would simply mock about rather than treat it in a “grown up way”. The Bible.

And do not even think of telling me to restrain from this discussion because my posts are, in your opinion, arguing in an un-“grown up way”. I’ve had more successful “academic” debates with adults than other adult-to-adult debates I’ve been present at. You are no one to whom I will answer.

Your anticipated argument will follow.

[quote author=“OnMyWayUp”]Why make you guys waste your time re-typing to me what I already know with maybe one or two adjustments of your opinion?

I agree it is unlikely that we wiill change any minds - at least not the strong partisans or the religious, but maybe some people will learn a few new things.

For example, you are voting for Bush because “Kerry favors abortion and gay-rights… anyone that sick should is no way be allowed in office.” But yet Bush supports civil unions (just like Kerry) and opposes gay marriage (just like Kerry). On balance, Bush may still be the candidate for you, but on gay rights, their positions are almost identical.

[quote author=“TruthSeeker”]If large numbers of people want to watch child pornography, what’s wrong with that?  They can look but not touch.  It doesn’t hurt anyone, right? See my point?

Society should protect children from abuse and exploitation. Child pornography is illegal and rightly so.

[quote author=“FrodoID”][quote author=“OnMyWayUp”]
I’m not saying it’s sick to admire a naked girl… but the fact that your married is the sick part.  It is like betraying the fact that you even married her. You didn’t marry her to go and check out other women because she isnt good enough, Does she know you check out porn?
My parents have no problem with me being naked.  I personally was always more modest. That has relevance with tmkt ckecking out porn while being married.

Uh, hello? Of course it’s okay to look at other women. I’m not touching them, am I?

I for myself, I’m 22. Of course I’m not married. But the same things apply in case that I have a girlfriend.

Of course my girlfriend would be upset when I sleep with another girl. That would be cheating, that would be betrayal. It never happened, but she sure would be right to be mad at me.

But just looking at other girls? Why not? Or would I now suddenly have to cover my eyes whenever a naked woman walks by - at the beach, at the pool, in the sauna, in magazines or in television? Well, that would basically mean that I wouldn’t be able to go swimming or into the sauna at all, because you really can’t avoid nakes people there.

She may look at naked men, if she likes to - I don’t care, as long as she just looks and doesn’t touch. And with “don’t touch” I don’t mean any friendly touch, I mean deliberately sexual touches.

In fact I know many girls who don’t have any problem with porn. I even know some few girls who like porn themselves (most others just think it’s stupid, however) and last but not least there are normal everyday couples which even like watching porn together. That’s in their bedroom, that’s their sexual life and we don’t have to care at all.

So, to come back to all your questions:

First, no, I didn’t marry (or date) her to go out and check out others because she isn’t “good enough”, I married (or dated) her because I decided she was the best for me, and I still like to check out others which are not as good as mine, but still nice to look at.

Secondly, it’s certainly not like betraying her. I’m not betraying her with anything. She can fully trust in me and in the fact that I won’t cheat on her and go out to have sex with other women. I’m still noticing that other womens exist but give her the privilege of being the very special one by not having anything to do with all those other women, even if they are more than just good looking. That’s a compliment.

Uh yeah, you understand that other women exist… is that something that we are supposed to applaud you on? Hell my 5 year old cousin can tell you that women exist and that there is going to be some that he will go out with and at some point someone which he will marry. That doesn’t mean he, or I, am out there having sex with as many girls now so that we don’t have to ‘betray’ our wife/girlfriend later.
Basically, I don’t understand how this is an argument to my question. I don’t care if you think your are or are not betraying you wife based on whether or not you are actually touching a women or merely looking. It’s my belief that even looking at another girl is lust and that lust for another women is your sin. (1st John 2:16)

[quote author=“FrodoID”]Lastly, yes, if I check out porn, she usually knows that I check out porn. Granted, most guys won’t go to their wife or girlfriend to say “hey, honey, I’m gonna look at porn, okay?” or “wow, I just saw some GOOD porn!” but their female counterpart usually knows that there are times and places where their guy watches porn. And he still likes having sex with her. And I’m not talking about the relationships where everything is centered around sex, and I’m also not talking about the relationships where both watch porn together for whatever reason, I’m talking about your “normal” everyday relationship.

Further showing signs of extreme decay in the moral systems of both Europe and America. I know many older brothers and sisters of friends and it is sad that they consider it such a normal thing when it isnt. Biblically not only should you not be having sex period until you are married but then to make it worse you are watching other people having sex for money or, supposedly, as an expression of “art”.
To think that we humans have considered ourselves so superior through such expressions of “art” and “liberal freedoms” is pretty much abominable in God’s opinion. (1st Corinthians 6-13-20)

[quote author=“FrodoID”]I’ve never been to the USA, but sometimes I really get the impression that, in some states, people there have some problems with sexuality, like it’s something unwanted or something “evil”? Is that really true? And is it true that you can’t even see any girl or woman topless at the beach, the bath, the sauna or wherever? What are you hiding from?

There is nothing wrong with sexuality. Of course your don’t close your eyes because you see a naked women walking by but by checking her out head to toe, you are again being lustful. It isn’t so much that it is an “evil” to be naked, but it is more of a respect to the womens’ bodies, which were created in the image of God, not to be naked as biblically it lays claim that “the body is the temple of God” (1st Corinthians 6:19).
It allows more sin on behalf of the viewer to lust for that womens body.

[quote author=“TruthSeeker”]Wasting a vote or sending a message?  I’m voting for Michael Peroutka of the Constitution Party.  Bush is a closet Christian at best…

And another piece of evidence I have found that explicitly disproves your statement is this one by the Adult Video News:
[quote author=“AVN”]“President Bush is a fundamentalist Christian, arguably as radical in his beliefs as al Qaida is in theirs, and as such has a seriously unhealthy view of human sexuality.”

Now true I understand that this is coming from a porn magazine and their views are some of the most skewed you can get, but I still stand by my opinion that Bush is most definitly not a closet Christian.