MORE EVIDENCE That Christians Should NEVER Vote for Democrats!

This is from David Strom at HotAir: 

Democrats are looking under the couch cushions for votes, so a new PAC has come up with a sure-fire strategy for harvesting a few: advertise on pornographic sites. 

It is absolutely disgusting that the Democrats’ strategy to overcome Kamala Harris’ problem with men is to claim Trump will ban porn. They are telling men *we are the party that will protect your porn.*

No Christian can justify supporting this. pic.twitter.com/Ly3BqksLrW

— Megan Basham (@megbasham) October 12, 2024

Pornography [tragically] is ubiquitous, so no doubt you will reach a lot of male voters this way. I doubt that the ones searching for heterosexual pornography will flock to Kamala Harris, though. Perhaps the PAC should consider limiting its expenditures to so-called "sissy" porn since that's who rolls with them.

 

I'm not, shall we say, thrilled with the normalization of pornography and am absolutely appalled at the celebration of it in the public square by the left. Human beings are fallen, so I understand that porn will always be with us. But it matters quite a bit whether it is kept in the shadows or paraded out in public, and it matters even more if it is embraced and celebrated as it has been lately. The left now encourages children to participate in sexually-charged events. ...

The Democratic Party now mocks any and all things sacred because they compete with and challenge their one sacred rite: sexual liberation. That's why Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer (and Harris campaign co-chair) didn't think twice about mocking the Eucharist, playing a dominatrix priestess giving a Dorito communion to a sexual acolyte after doing a podcast about abortion. 

Kamala Harris, San Francisco Democrat, never met a drag queen she didn't like. There used to be a day when "a chicken in every pot" was the campaign slogan. For Harris, it is "a drag queen in every classroom." Here our esteemed Vice President is with drag queen "Patti Gonia" at a… pic.twitter.com/A7jJfa4J7a

— Robert A. J. Gagnon (@RobertAJGagnon1) July 24, 2024

...We have made progress waking people up. Ultimately, it will be the Democrats themselves who convince ordinary people to leave their party. It takes a lot to rewire a person's perceptions. But the Democrats are working hard to build the porn coalition, and most people don't want to be part of that. 

I hope most Americans don't want to be a part of the "porn coalition," but I have my doubts. I sure hope that proves to be the case with this election. 

Trevor Grant Thomas
At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith, and Reason.
www.trevorgrantthomas.com
Trevor is the author of the The Miracle and Magnificence of America
trevorgrantthomas@gmail.com

The Price of Porn: It’s Probably Higher than You Think

A little over a week ago, someone attempted to blackmail me. On August 12, I received this message in an e-mail:

Hope you do not really mind my english language sentence structure, because i'm from Germany. I infected your system with a trojan and now have all of your private data out of your operating system.

It previously was set up on an adult page then you have selected the video and clicked on it, my program instantly got into your os.

And then, your cam documented you soloing, also i caught a footage that you've seen.

Just after a little while this also pulled out your device contacts. If you ever wish me to clear off your everything i have got - transfer me 450 dollars in bitcoin it is a cryptocurrency. [An account address was given.] 

At this moment you will have 24 hours. to make a decision The minute i will receive the deal i'll get rid of this footage and every little thing entirely. Otherwise, you should remember that your video is going to be submitted to all your contacts.

Though it wasn’t the case in my instance, to heighten the level of threat, sometimes these e-mail scams even contain passwords used by the recipient. This is a new type of scam dreamed up by criminals seeking to prey on those who, because of their immoral behavior, have made themselves vulnerable to such a scheme.

Having never before received such a message, I was taken aback. However, because I knew that I had not done what the accuser had claimed—and because of the bad grammar and other clues—I was never frightened that the threat was real. I suppose a clear conscience is worth at least $450.

Evidently, some have been frightened enough to fork over the money. Business Insider reports that according to analysis of bitcoin wallets, “Some scammers have even made over $50,000 from the blackmail scheme.” To paraphrase Proverbs (28:1), though the threat is empty, the guilty will pay.

The ability to hack into other digital lives, along with the rampant use of online pornography, has made such a scam possible and profitable. As I’ve noted recently (more than once), the plague of porn has resulted in obscene numbers for obscene behavior. Consider:

People watched 4,392,486,580 hours of porn on PornHub in 2015. Just to put that in perspective, that means that in one year, people around the world spent 501,425 years watching pornography—on one porn site. 

On PornHub, people watched 87,849,731,608 porn videos. As the porn site hastened to point out, that’s 12 porn videos viewed for every single person on the planet.

With numbers such as those, it’s little wonder that savvy criminals thought they could dupe more than a few into literally paying for their sin. If one sends out 10,000 threatening emails, the odds are in one’s favor that a large portion of the recipients are indeed porn users. And among the users, there’s probably no small number trying to keep their lurid online life a secret. Almost certainly there are more than a few husbands, wives, politicians, teachers, and even ministers and pastors who would gladly pay $500 to $1,000—maybe more—to keep their porn lives from becoming public knowledge.

At $500 per recipient, with 10,000 emails, the scammers have to have only a one percent “success” rate in order to net $50,000. What’s more, when our conscience is troubled, our thinking is not clear, and we become easy targets for criminals. If we’re sweating whether someone really does know our sin, we often miss clues such as bad grammar, the absence of our name in the email, and so on, that might reveal the scam.

As we’ve become a culture nearly bereft of shame, sadly, many Americans would probably not care if their porn use was publicized. As the previous link reveals, when you concoct a foolish song and dance that hails your “sex junk,” declares that “sexuality’s a spectrum,” and demands that “Sex how you want it; It’s your god*amn right!” are you really going to care if anyone knows of your porn habit?

A few have even become rich and famous because they turned their personal lives into a porno. How many so-called celebrities have become well-known millionaires because a sex tape was “leaked?” How many others will be lured into trying the same, hoping to get similar results? Either way—whether or not earthly fame and fortune are achieved—lives are ruined.

Miriam Weeks—aka Belle Knox—the infamous Duke freshman who decided to pay for college with a career in the porn industry, describes her first scene as a porn star:

“I remember getting naked, and the guy said, ‘You have cuts on your legs. You're a cutter.’ He could tell I had written the word ‘fat’ in my thigh, so he started calling me fat.” Once they called “action,” she was pushed to the ground and slapped. “And I said, ‘Stop, stop, stop. No, no.’ And then they stopped, and they were like, ‘We have to keep going.’” 

“And I was like, ‘Just please don't hit me so hard.’ But it went on like that, me getting hit, pushed, spit on. I was being told I was fat, that I was a terrible feminist, was going to fail all my classes, was stupid, dumb, a slut. But I got through it. You know how you kind of zone out sometimes? I just disassociated.’”

She just “disassociated.” Nevertheless, Miss Weeks went on to complete her brief porn “career” and graduate from Duke—where she majored in, of course, “Women’s Studies” and “Sociology.” She is now—of course—in law school in New York. Is there any doubt she will soon be donning a vagina hat, joining in the #metoo chorus, lamenting the plight of women and telling us to vote for democrats?

One of the great lies of the porn industry, whether for a participant or a consumer, is that one can simply “disassociate” such activity from the rest of one’s life and whenever you like, just leave it behind. It’s a terrible lie. Whether disease, death, or despair, for decades now, porn use has wrought havoc on an addicted American culture. Divorce, sexually transmitted diseases, sexual assault, child sexual abuse (even in the church!), and other wickedness has roots in, or ties to the use of pornography. Thus, whether or not you are duped into paying blackmail, you will pay for your porn use. There is a way out. Confess, repent, and get help from those who know well your plight.

(See this column at American Thinker.)

Copyright 2018, Trevor Grant Thomas
At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith, and Reason.
www.trevorgrantthomas.com
Trevor is the author of The Miracle and Magnificence of America
tthomas@trevorgrantthomas.com

Hugh Hefner’s Real Legacy: Disease, Despair, and Death

A timely and stunning statistic befitting the recent death of America’s patriarch of pornography: a shocking 110 million Americans—over one-third of our population—are saddled with a sexually transmitted disease. According to The New York Times,

The incidence of chlamydia, gonorrhea and syphilis is increasing, according to a new report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. An estimated 110 million Americans now are infected with a sexually transmitted disease. 

Chlamydia is the most common S.T.D., and the number of cases rose 4.7 percent from 2015 to 2016… Adolescents and young adult women have the highest rates of chlamydia: one survey found that 9.2 percent of girls aged 15 to 19 were infected… The rate of primary and secondary syphilis in 2016 is the highest it has been since 1993, and it increased among both men and women from 2015 to 2016. Men account for almost 90 percent of cases, and most are among men who have sex with men. 

Rates of syphilis increased in every age group and all races, and they were highest among people in their twenties.

Additionally, more than one out of every six people aged 14 to 49 has genital herpes. (Thus the rise of all of the Valtrex commercials on TV.) Among many other tragic outcomes, the rampant rate of STDs in America is the real legacy of notorious sexual provocateur, Hugh Hefner. Thanks to the desire to make our own rules when it comes to sex, following the lead of Hefner and his like-minded moral deviants, we find ourselves with STD rates in the U.S. at an all-time high. According to the CDC, there are more than 20 million new cases of STDs in the United States every year. As CNN recently reported,

“STDs are out of control with enormous health implications for Americans,” said David Harvey, executive director of the National Coalition of STD Directors. The coalition represents state, local and territorial health departments who focus on preventing STDs. 

“If not treated, gonorrhea, chlamydia and syphilis can have serious consequences, such as infertility, neurological issues, and an increased risk for HIV,” said Harvey.

Also among the “serious consequences” of many of these STDs: cancer. In addition to cervical cancer, which is caused by certain types of the STD, Human Papilloma Virus, just days ago, the Los Angeles Times reported on (surprise!) the “anal cancer epidemic” that exists among homosexual and bisexual men. The article notes that men who engage in homosexual activity are 100 times more likely to contract anal cancer than HIV-negative men “who exclusively have sex with women.” The article also declares that, “Some in the medical community have identified anal cancer as the next big crisis among HIV-infected gay and bisexual men.” I have breaking news for the medical community: there will always be a “next big crisis” looming for men who treat the human septic canal as a vagina.

Nevertheless, and no-doubt taking their cues from perverts like Hefner, this past July, Teen Vogue—a magazine whose target audience is teenage girls—took it upon themselves to instruct their young readers on the finer points of sodomy. The article, entitled “Anal Sex: What You Need to Know” and subtitled, “How to do it the RIGHT way,” declares itself to be “anal 101, for teens, beginners, and all inquisitive folk.” The garbage piece ends with this shocking admission:

That being said, yes, you will come in contact with some fecal matter. You are entering a butthole. It is where poop comes out. Expecting to do anal play and see zero poop isn’t particularly realistic. It’s NOT a big deal. Everyone poops. Everyone has a butt.

This, from a member of the “party of science.” Forgetting to floss one’s teeth every now and then is “NOT a big deal.” Hillary’s choice of pant suits is “NOT a big deal.” Global climate change is “NOT a big deal.” Choosing to engage in sodomy—even once—can have horrific life-changing—even deadly—consequences. Of course, “anal 101” neglects to mention the rampant disease associated with such disgusting behavior. In other words, like Hefner’s Playboy magazine, Teen Vogue is an accomplice in the shocking rise of STDs among America’s youth.

In a sick attempt to justify promoting evil and dangerous sexual activity, just as they have with killing children in the womb, the left has now stooped to “normalizing” (an STD is “pretty bad*ss; it’s like a sex wound”) and even celebrating (with a “#ShoutYourStatus”) STDs. The perverse gotta pervert, I suppose. As Matt Barber concluded, political correctness needs to be declared an STD.

Of course, one need not contract an STD to suffer as a result of the plague of pornography. A 2015 UK Telegraph article on porn use among British youth contains a shocking revelation from a general practitioner (Sue):

“I’m afraid things are much worse than people suspect.” In recent years, Sue had treated growing numbers of teenage girls with internal injuries caused by frequent anal sex; not, as Sue found out, because she wanted to, or because she enjoyed it – on the contrary – but because a boy expected her to. “I’ll spare you the gruesome details,” said Sue, “but these girls are very young and slight and their bodies are simply not designed for that.”

Yeah, no one’s body is “designed for that.” The boys were “expecting” such from their young girlfriends because they had bought into one of the many lies of porn. Instead of worrying over the condition of their skin or what earrings went with their new outfit, many of the young girls Sue was treating found themselves battling incontinence. Imagine the shame of a youth—because they bought a favorite and common lie of the left (sex without consequences), the muscles of their rectum are stretched out such that they must live in daily fear of soiling themselves.

Furthermore, the porn saturation of America, along with most of the rest of the Western world, has resulted in longtime and widespread devastation that extends far beyond the physical. If you think “saturation” too strong, consider:

People watched 4,392,486,580 hours of porn on PornHub in 2015. Just to put that in perspective, that means that in one year, people around the world spent 501,425 years watching pornography—on one porn site. 

On PornHub, people watched 87,849,731,608 porn videos. As the porn site hastened to point out, that’s 12 porn videos viewed for every single person on the planet.

That, my friends, is the sad math of porn addiction. As a result, tens of millions of teens and adults worldwide have little to no idea what is a healthy sexual relationship, or, in many cases, how to have any type of a healthy relationship with those who share the gender of the objects of their sexual fantasies. Any notion of self-sacrifice and service to another is abandoned, and sex becomes an end unto itself. Regular porn consumers (especially men) literally lust after porn-like encounters in order to be sexually satisfied. In the minds of many men, porn has reduced women to a commodity to be consumed and an object to be abused (e.g., 50 Shades of Grey Dismay).

Breaking the bonds of trust between husbands and wives, porn has destroyed millions of American marriages. Porn use within a marriage leads to a long list of troubling issues. A recent study revealed that once porn enters a marriage, the chances of divorce double. Driven by lust that was born of porn consumption, millions of young adult Americans are shunning marriage in favor of the hook-up culture.

Thus, whether born out of wedlock, killed in the womb, or forced to witness the destruction of the most important human relationship in their lives, over the last six-plus decades, tens of millions of American children have suffered because of their parents’ selfish sexual desires. As I’ve noted before, if these children survive the womb, they face a wide array of difficulties.

Hugh Hefner was prince of the pimps. He was a destroyer of lives and cultures. The level of his destruction is so wide and deep that it will only be fully known in the light of eternity. If you are trapped in his world, turn and flee now. There is hope and healing, and there are those who can help.

(See this article at American Thinker.)

Copyright 2017, Trevor Grant Thomas
At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith, and Reason.
www.trevorgrantthomas.com
Trevor is the author of the The Miracle and Magnificence of America
tthomas@trevorgrantthomas.com

Hey Ashton Kutcher: Tell the Whole Truth about Sexual Immorality

As his recent and moving testimony before the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee reveals, Ashton Kutcher seems to be doing some great work combating the horrendous evil of world-wide sex trafficking. I wish him much success, and I hope he continues his efforts for many years to come. However, I challenge Mr. Kutcher to go even further when it comes to battling evil in the sexual realm.

As he began his speech, Kutcher passionately declared that he was there to “defend the right to pursue happiness.” He, of course, was referencing the U.S. Declaration of Independence. However, he made a couple of mistakes in declaring that the “right to pursue happiness” was “bestowed upon all of us by our Constitution.” I thought perhaps it was simply an error in semantics. However, Mr. Kutcher doubled-down on his misunderstanding of our rights and in his next sentence said, “I believe that it is incumbent upon us as citizens—as Americans—to bestow that right upon others.”

Mr. Kutcher’s biggest mistake was not in referencing the Constitution instead of the Declaration; it was in his misunderstanding about where the rights of humans originate. Our rights are not “bestowed upon us” by any human being or any document created by human beings. As the Declaration of Independence reveals, we are “endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable [indisputable and irremovable] rights.” In other words, our rights come from God and not from man.

The job of men and women is to provide good government that guards those rights. (Kutcher later declared himself a product of our public school system, so I suppose we should cut him some slack here.) Mr. Kutcher’s current “day job,” as he described it, is as the chairman and co-founder of Thorn. Thorn’s motto declares the company to be the “digital defender of children.” Thorn works to prevent the sexual exploitation of children by fighting against human trafficking and the proliferation of child pornography. This work is what got him an audience with the U.S. Senate.

In addition to his work at Thorn, Kutcher also declared that another part of his day job is to be the father of his two young children. No doubt his role as the father of a two-year-old daughter and a two-month-old son has greatly enhanced his passion for fighting the scourge of human sex-trafficking. If Mr. Kutcher really wants to stand up and defend his children and rescue and defend other children, he would do well to note that there are other dangers beyond sex-trafficking and child pornography lurking in the sexual realm.

And as horrific as is child pornography and the child sexual slavery that is the result of sex-trafficking, far more children are ensnared into a different type of sexual slavery—one in which Mr. Kutcher himself has had a hand.

Ashton Kutcher would almost certainly not be in this position (technology entrepreneur/investor) if it were not for the tens of millions of dollars he’s made from his TV and movie career. Tragically, much of this career has involved “entertainment” that presents and promotes a wide array of sexually immoral behavior—everything from teenage sex to adultery, fornication, pornography, and the like.

Two of the television shows that prominently featured Kutcher—That ‘70s Show and Two and a Half Men—were regularly labeled as some of the worst programs on television by the Parents Television Council (PTC). Writing about That ‘70s Show in 2005, PTC noted,

Frequently included on the PTC's Top 10 Worst list, this series once again earns a spot for its casual and irresponsible treatment of teen sex and drug use, which are depicted as risk- and consequence-free. Frequent references are made to pornography and masturbation. In one episode, for example, Kelso [Kutcher’s character] decides that he has to start respecting women, so he gives Fez his entire collection of pornographic magazines. Jackie says that giving Fez a "box full of nudie magazines" is like giving a monkey a loaded gun, to which Fez replies, "No, it's not. A monkey with a loaded gun can hurt a lot of people. I can only hurt myself." When they see Fez later, he looks exhausted because he has done nothing but look at pornography all day. Episodes also endorse smoking marijuana as harmless fun.

Sex traffickers and child pornographers aren’t born, they’re made. As those on the front lines of the battle against child pornography have often noted, almost all adults who are engaging in child porn got their start with adult pornography. As was noted at The Witherspoon Institute several years ago,

The link between adult and child porn is observed globally, and it is nothing new. Fifteen years ago, at the 1996 World Congress against Commercial Sexual Exploitation of Children, Margaret Healy stated in a paper titled “Child Pornography: An International Perspective” that “with the emergence of the use of computers to traffic in child pornography, a new and growing segment of producers and consumers is being identified. They are individuals who may not have a sexual preference for children, but who have seen the gamut of adult pornography and who are searching for more bizarre material.” (Emphasis added)

Likewise, almost all who are ensnared in the illicit world of adult pornography were first tantalized by what could be called the “soft-porn” (or at least, sexually graphic) images that exist in large numbers of TV sitcoms, dramas, motion pictures, music videos—even television commercials. As I’ve often noted, for decades now Hollywood has lied about sex and promoted the raunchy, perverted sexual agenda of modern liberalism. Sadly, for much of his professional life, Kutcher (along with Mila Kunis, his current wife and mother of his two children), has been right in the middle of this smut.

With multiple generations of American youth exposed to such sexual immorality, it is little surprise we live in a “hook-up” culture where women and men both are often seen as little more than a means to a selfish sexual end. Put another way, men and women across the U.S. have become objects to be used—as Kutcher put it to the Senate—“for the momentary happiness of another.”

The tragic results of this are detailed nearly daily: tens of millions of helpless children have been slaughtered in the womb, and tens of millions more are born out of wedlock and immediately thrust into broken and dysfunctional homes. Among many other tragic outcomes, in his testimony, Kutcher himself notes that children in foster care (almost always at least partly the result of a broken home) are four times more likely to be exposed to sexual abuse. Kutcher called this a “breeding ground” for trafficking.

I don’t how many more times it needs to be said, but here it is once again: broken families—families without a loving and married mother and father—are a “breeding ground” for a wide variety of sad outcomes for children. In addition to sexual abuse and prison (something else Kutcher mentions), there’s physical abuse, drug abuse, poor health outcomes, poor education results, and so on. In other words, in spite of the best efforts of liberals and their like-minded allies to ignore or explain away what common sense and sound morality have always revealed, the biblical family model produces the best results for children.

So Mr. Kutcher, if you want to be a complete advocate for the health and well-being of children the world over, abandon your notions of “social liberalism,” (Kutcher has described himself as a “fiscal conservative but a social liberal.” Another note to Mr. Kutcher: If you’re a “social liberal,” then you’re a liberal.) and support, live, and defend what the Bible reveals on the family and sex. The God that bestows upon us the right to pursue happiness that you so passionately defended before the U.S. Senate has also clearly revealed His plan for the family and sex.

(See this column at American Thinker.)

Copyright 2017, Trevor Grant Thomas
At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith, and Reason.
www.trevorgrantthomas.com
Trevor is the author of the brand new book The Miracle and Magnificence of America
tthomas@trevorgrantthomas.com

Rolling Stone, et al. Bemoan the Culture They Helped Create

Why is anyone surprised that Rolling Stone would flub a rape story? Since when did a magazine so devoted to a liberal worldview, and that borders on—and, by my standards, crosses over into—pornography, become a trusted source for matters involving women and sexual assault?

For over four decades, Rolling Stone has spilled thousands of gallons of ink glorifying the hedonistic, misogynistic culture of sex, drugs, and rock-and-roll. Its covers have been adorned with nude men and women—sometimes together. Pornography is a regular topic, and it’s almost always put in a positive light.

In April of this year, Rolling Stone did a near 4,000-word exposé on the infamous Miriam Weeks—aka Belle Knox—the Duke freshman who decided to pay for college with a career in the porn industry. Describing America’s reaction to the news of a barely-out-of-high-school 18 year-old—without the knowledge and consent of her parents—becoming a porn sensation, the author declares, “On the one hand, said some, why shouldn't a consenting adult engage in a perfectly legal profession in order to better herself through higher learning? And what right does society have to tell women what to do or not do with their bodies, anyway? But, on the other hand, you know, WTF?” As if those of us who stand aghast at Miss Weeks’ decision can only manage “WTF?”

I won’t link to the piece. It’s full of vulgarities and perversions, and it paints as rosy a picture as possible for a still teenage girl who has prostituted herself to the point that her first scene as a porn star was described as:

“I remember getting naked, and the guy said, ‘You have cuts on your legs. You're a cutter.’ He could tell I had written the word ‘fat’ in my thigh, so he started calling me fat.” Once they called “action,” she was pushed to the ground and slapped. “And I said, ‘Stop, stop, stop. No, no.’ And then they stopped, and they were like, ‘We have to keep going.’” 

“And I was like, ‘Just please don't hit me so hard.’ But it went on like that, me getting hit, pushed, spit on. I was being told I was fat, that I was a terrible feminist, was going to fail all my classes, was stupid, dumb, a slut. But I got through it. You know how you kind of zone out sometimes? I just disassociated.’”

She just “disassociated.” One of the great lies of the porn industry, whether a participant or a consumer, is that one can simply “disassociate” such activity from the rest of one’s life. In other words, as any good liberal knows, porn consumption or participation is just like the consumption or participation in an abortion—it’s no big deal.

Rolling Stone was so impressed with Miss Weeks that, just two weeks prior to running the disastrous “A Rape on Campus” piece, they published her defense of prostitution in their opinion section. That’s right, a publication that wants us to take them seriously when it comes to a matter as grave as rape, devoted a part of their opinion pages to a 19-year-old who, in addition to now devoting her life to porn, has also added “prostitution apologist” to her résumé. Miss Weeks informs us that prostitutes are only trying to make an “honest living,” and we should avoid the notions of “abused hookers and human traffickers” that are so often associated with prostitution.

Unsurprisingly, Miss Weeks could hardly be more wrong. As I noted back in April, prostitutes are a tragic example of what often results when women use their bodies as a means to an end. Prostitutes are more likely than any other group of women ever studied to be, among many other terrible things, victims of rape and homicide.

In 2008, Nicholas Kristof of The New York Times points out that, “The mortality data for prostitutes is staggering.” According to a study by The American Journal of Epidemiology, the “workplace homicide rate for prostitutes” is 51 times that of the next most dangerous occupation for women—working in a liquor store. The average age of death of the prostitutes in the study was 34. The Journal concluded, “Women engaged in prostitution face the most dangerous occupational environment in the United States.”

Why are men more violent toward prostitutes? Because in prostitution, a woman’s humanity is removed. She becomes little more than a commodity to be consumed. Thus, a very unhealthy attitude toward women in general is fostered. Studies have shown that men who regularly use prostitutes are more likely to be sexually aggressive with women who are not prostitutes.

Of course, in pornography, women (and men) are also commodities to be consumed. Gail Dines, a highly regarded academic, author of Pornland: How Porn Has Hijacked Our Sexuality, and considered “the world's leading anti-pornography campaigner,” concludes that “the earlier men use porn, the more likely they are to have trouble developing close, intimate relationships with real women.”

Dines adds that, “Some of these men prefer porn to sex with an actual human being. They are bewildered, even angry, when real women don't want or enjoy porn sex.” Of course, such anger often results in violence. Dines also notes that “porn sex” is becoming increasingly violent (as Miss Weeks’ experience demonstrates).

“We are now bringing up a generation of boys on cruel, violent porn,” Dines says, “and given what we know about how images affect people, this is going to have a profound influence on their sexuality, behavior and attitudes towards women.” In Dines’ research, she has found that the prevalence of porn means that men are becoming desensitized to it. Thus, men are getting caught in the vicious cycle of looking for images that are ever more harsh, violent, and degrading toward women.

Ms. Dines goes on to describe images that are too horrible to mention here. “To think that so many men hate women to the degree that they can get aroused by such vile images is quite profound,” she concludes. Additionally, Dines points out that, “Pornography is the perfect propaganda piece for patriarchy. In nothing else is their hatred of us quite as clear.”

Yet women like Miss Weeks ignorantly and defiantly conclude that it’s the “conservative Bible Belt culture of the South” that makes a “highly misogynistic and oppressive atmosphere for women.”

In early 2013, the insufferable Lena Dunham, doing her best Miley Cyrus imitation on the cover, also had a spread in Rolling Stone. Dunham, who, when she’s not writing (and performing in) TV shows and books that promote and glorify abortion, casual sex, drug use, and everything else that makes a liberal’s life complete, also takes topless selfies in support of the abortion mill known as Planned Parenthood.

Demonstrating that, for liberals, not all rapes and rapists are created equal, it seems that Planned Parenthood is also in the business of protecting pedophiles. A recent investigation reveals that girls as young as 10 were taken by their abusers to Planned Parenthood facilities for abortions and birth control. Because Planned Parenthood staff failed to report the crimes, the sexual abuse continued for years. Some girls were brought repeatedly for abortions, yet no questions were asked.

Earlier this year, the pro-life group Live Action caught Planned Parenthood giving dangerous and violent sexual advice to girls as young as 15. According to American Thinker’s Drew Belsky (Live Action’s communications director at the time), “As viewers can see in our preview, Planned Parenthood has an institutional policy of endorsing and recommending dangerous sexual behaviors to underage girls. These include whipping, beating, breaking the skin, and asphyxiation. Remember, the counselors in these videos believe that they are talking to a 15-year-old girl.”

“Whipping, beating, breaking the skin, and asphyxiation”—sounds something like what often occurs during a rape.

Glenn Harlan Reynolds, in USA Today, recently pointed out more liberal hypocrisy when it comes to rape. Terry Bean, the co-founder of the largest pro-homosexual advocacy organization in America, the Human Rights Campaign, was recently arrested and indicted on two felony counts of third-degree sodomy and one count of third-degree sexual abuse after allegedly having sex with a 15-year-old boy he met online last year.

Bean is also co-founder of the Gay and Lesbian Victory Fund and is a major donor to the National Democratic Committee and a major financial supporter of Democrats across the U.S., including Harry Reid, Hillary Clinton, and Barack Obama. Bean has made multiple trips to the White House and has even been on Air Force One. In other words, on issues related to homosexuality, Bean has the ear of virtually every leader in the Democrat Party.

Rolling Stone, Lena Dunham, Planned Parenthood, and other such liberals to whom “the narrative” is the priority, can never be trusted to tell the whole story when it comes to matters as grave as rape. Worse, the sexual perversions that plague our culture are the direct result of the efforts of liberals across the U.S —from our campuses to our courts. In other words, on sexual assault, liberals are mourning a culture that they helped to create. 

(See this column at American Thinker.)

Copyright 2014, Trevor Grant Thomas
At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith, and Reason.
www.trevorgrantthomas.com
Trevor and his wife Michelle are the authors of: Debt Free Living in a Debt Filled World
tthomas@trevorgrantthomas.com

"The Porn Myth"

As far as I can tell, Naomi Wolf is no Christian, nor is she even a conservative. In addition, just within the last week she has been heavily criticized for perpetuating some rather "wacko" conspiracy theories. However, she has written something recently that I believe reveals one the more significant and sad truths when it comes to the plague of pornography.

She misses the mark quite a bit, and I may deal with this later, but for now I just want to share some of what she reveals:

The onslaught of porn is responsible for deadening male libido in relation to real women, and leading men to see fewer and fewer women as “porn-worthy.” Far from having to fend off porn-crazed young men, young women are worrying that as mere flesh and blood, they can scarcely get, let alone hold, their attention...

But does all this sexual imagery in the air mean that sex has been liberated—or is it the case that the relationship between the multi-billion-dollar porn industry, compulsiveness, and sexual appetite has become like the relationship between agribusiness, processed foods, supersize portions, and obesity? If your appetite is stimulated and fed by poor-quality material, it takes more junk to fill you up. People are not closer because of porn but further apart; people are not more turned on in their daily lives but less so.

The young women who talk to me on campuses about the effect of pornography on their intimate lives speak of feeling that they can never measure up, that they can never ask for what they want; and that if they do not offer what porn offers, they cannot expect to hold a guy. The young men talk about what it is like to grow up learning about sex from porn, and how it is not helpful to them in trying to figure out how to be with a real woman...

The whole piece is worth reading and is here. Of course, it's somewhat graphic, but not in a vulgar way. Again, I may come back to this later and deal with how Wolf is not completely accurate in her critique of pornography.

Trevor Grant Thomas
At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith, and Reason.
Trevor and his wife Michelle are the authors of: Debt Free Living in a Debt Filled World
tthomas@trevorgrantthomas.com

Answering Steve Siebold

Per Steve Siebold’s letter to the editor in the Gainesville Times March 14: Yes, it would be immoral to associate oneself with an organization that has devoted itself to pornography—even if the “cause” might be deemed moral. In other words, (of course) the end does not justify the means. One would think that a man who, according to one of his many websites, “ranks among the top 1% of income earners in the professional speaking industry worldwide,” would be aware of this.

Obviously Mr. Siebold has built his house on a foundation of sand and resides in the flimsy world of moral relativism, as he declares that I was “suggesting that an agreed-upon set of morals has been established by society.” He concludes, “They have not. The religious community can kick and scream that the Bible dictates morality, but until they present sufficient evidence of its divine inspiration, they will continue to be marginalized.” Marginalized or not, when a person lives under a “morality” that justifies pornography, abortion, etc., is it little wonder that we are now debating “post-birth abortion?”

He then calls Ben Franklin an “atheist.” Franklin wrote his own epitaph which declares: “The body of Benjamin Franklin, printer, like the cover of an old book, its contents torn out, stripped of its lettering, and guilding, lies here, food for worms. But the work shall not be lost; for it will, as he believed, appear once more in a new and more elegant edition, revised and corrected by the Author.”

Also, at a very crucial point at the Constitutional Convention in May, 1787, Franklin gave a short, but resounding speech. (The debate over representation was becoming very bitter, and the Convention was on the verge of breaking up.) In it he said, “In the beginning of the contest with Britain, when we were sensible of danger, we had daily prayers in this room for Divine protection. Our prayers, Sir, were heard, and they were graciously answered…I have lived, Sir, a long time, and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth: ‘that God governs in the affairs of man.’ And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid?…We have been assured, Sir, in the Sacred Writings that except the Lord build the house, they labor in vain that build it."

Doesn’t sound like an atheist to me. Mr. Siebold needs to take some of his vast “mental toughness” (see his website) and devote a little of it to studying American history.

Copyright 2012, Trevor Grant Thomas

At the Intersection of Politics, Science, Faith, and Reason.
Trevor and his wife Michelle are the authors of: Debt Free Living in a Debt Filled World
tthomas@trevorgrantthomas.com