First Openly Gay Congressman dies... hero or villain?

I think the political sideshow needs to stop, that's what I think. Its not about "Us-versus-Them". What's really at the heart of the issue is whether or not crimes have been commited. If they have, then let the Law deal with both parties. Injecting some kind of political spin simply because they are political figures doesn't cover up the fact that some alleged crimes have taken place.As far as Studds being lauded by his contemporaries, despite a sex-scandal, doesn't shock me anymore than the National Endowment of the Arts considers looking into a woman's cervix with a flashlight and a speculum on stage would be called 'art.'Crazy times we're livin' in, eh?Edited by nemesis_juggernaut, : italics

---

"There is not in all America a more dangerous trait than the deification of mere smartness unaccompanied by any sense of moral responsibility." -Theodore Roosevelt

Yeah, I don't even want to speculate. So, what part of Portland do you live? East or West? I live in East County which is pretty damn ghetto. I think its time to move.

Oh dear. Perhaps if it was more situational or personal to you, you might think differently on this matter. What if we sent your sons to Uncle Foley and Auntie Stubbs for summer vacation-- would that effect your frivolous disposition?

---

"There is not in all America a more dangerous trait than the deification of mere smartness unaccompanied by any sense of moral responsibility." -Theodore Roosevelt

I agree with your first premise that it isn't the gay factor, its the sleaze factor that is troublesome. But you dismantled your own argument by saying that it wouldn't bother you if your sons or daughters were approached sexually by a bunch of horney guys. Its a little disheartening that you think grown men should have sexual relations or even be allowed to make sexual innuendos to your own children, but you refer to two politicians for doing the very thing you condone for your own children. I don't understand that. What does their status have to do with it? Say a 19 year old camp counselor was making sexual advances toward your daughters. Would that be worse than, say, a 63 year old man who lived nearby? So, you don't object to two grown men hitting on boys but its no longer okay when they are in positions of power and don't disclose their sexual preference beforehand? That's backassward to me. Can't argue with that.

---

"There is not in all America a more dangerous trait than the deification of mere smartness unaccompanied by any sense of moral responsibility." -Theodore Roosevelt

What's the difference in your mind? How about the prevalence of child molestation, period? Its disturbing. I don't care where child molestation comes from because its all wrong. Whoever is commiting it should find their way on Dateline NBC with Chris Hansen as far as I'm concerned. But I couldn't help but noticing the bigotry in the matter. If I said that Asians have a penchant for little kids would that be unduly singling out a group or would I be spot on in my assessment? That would probably be unfair to all Asians, eh.

---

"There is not in all America a more dangerous trait than the deification of mere smartness unaccompanied by any sense of moral responsibility." -Theodore Roosevelt

Even though I'm assertive in my opinions, I refrain from childish antics whenever possible. Sin is sin. And though I recognize that certain denominations tend to think of homosexuality as being somehow worse than, say, their own teenagers having premarital sex, I'm not one of them. I can't argue with that. Thanks for the clarification. I didn't. I made a concerted effort not to distinguish the two. Heterosexual pedophilias is the same as homosexual pedophilia if you ask me. In other words, sleeze, not sexual preference. I would say that suppression if not channeled through a healthy avenue can have these effects, but I wouldn't hesitate to clarify that pornography is 99.8% the culprit. And having said that, that doesn't automatically mean that people that look at porn are going to become sexual deviants. What it does mean is that pornography is the stepping stone for virtually all the cases of this.

---

"There is not in all America a more dangerous trait than the deification of mere smartness unaccompanied by any sense of moral responsibility." -Theodore Roosevelt

Sexual desire is normal and it is healthy. I don't contend with that in the least. However, when a natural desire and those legitimate emotions are replaced with cheap substitutes, I think it has a detrimental effect on the psyche. This isn't a belief only shared in religious communities. There are secular fields who feel ther same way. Its a catalyst. An interesting parallel between rapists and serial killers is their penchant for pornography. Every one of them got their start here. But the acts become increasingly more bizarre and the introduction of these bizarre acts moves further into depravity into some unnatural uses for the body. We may start with a healthy inquisition by looking at our dad's Playboy, or what have you, which could be viewed as harmless enough. But unless its checked and expressed in a healthy way, those natural inclinations can take on some dark aberrations. Nobody wants to keep anyone away from sex. Far from it. The only thing that these people want protected is the sacredness of sex and love. When it loses its sacredness, it turns into a cheap substitute that often leaves the person still wanting. Perhaps that shame is natures way of warning us mentally just as nerve endings serve to warn us physically. Do you find it mystifying that porn shops have blacked out windows, or the man trolling for sex lies about his whereabouts? Is that societally induced from a repressive religiosity? I doubt you could say that when visiting native american tribes or pacific islanders or tribes in the amazon who don't understand these religious views, and yet, maintain an understanding of sacredness in chastity. Don't you find that coincidental?

---

"There is not in all America a more dangerous trait than the deification of mere smartness unaccompanied by any sense of moral responsibility." -Theodore Roosevelt

Pornography maybe a harmless and inquisitive endeavor at first, and certainly there is bueaty in the naked human form. Pornography, though, doesn't enhance this qualitative bueaty, it eradicates it and turns into something reprehensible. Those that lightly browse through it find themselves and their time devoted to ever-increasing bouts with it. Pornography, like cocaine or methamphetamines, is like a stimulant and considered by its honest adherents as highly addictive. It creates a strong physiological response in the viewer that almost certainly will become dulled from subsequent viewings. From the diminishment of "feeling" it could lead people into darker forms of pornography. And further down the path the individual is lead into depravity.I also find it interesting that some obvious societal markers are not being recognized by my critics. Isn't it interesting that virtually all employers, secular or otherwise, can and will fire their employers if pornographic images have been downloaded on company computers. Any other download might give you a warning to get back to work at most. Pornography is different and everybody knows it. That's why pornshop windows are blacked out, that's why its taboo. It has less to do with what any religious person feels and more to do that, even though they wish is wasn't true, society frowns upon it.But to be sure, what do you suppose Percy who is of a more liberal ilk than some would think if I posted pornographic images on the web? What would happen to me? I'd be banned. Hmmmmmm, interesting. And yet, there is nothing inherently wrong with it. How do you reconcile that dichotomy?But let me be certain to share that puritanical homes that turn sexuality into some evil compulsion have an ostensibly negative effect on teenagers, especially when coupled with clandestine viewing of pornography. The polarization between purity and non-purity can often produce the worst offenders. It doesn't mitigate the effects it exacerbates the frequency and turns sexuality into paraphiliac aberrations. There are numerous reports that marry pornography to a host of problems from psychosomatic to pyschophysiological.

---

"There is not in all America a more dangerous trait than the deification of mere smartness unaccompanied by any sense of moral responsibility." -Theodore Roosevelt

quote:

---

I doubt you could say that when visiting native american tribes or pacific islanders or tribes in the amazon who don't understand these religious views, and yet, maintain an understanding of sacredness in chastity.

---

You criticize me for making bare assertions only to present an unsubstantiated claim of your own?Among other books,Margaret Mead wrote "Coming of Age in Samoa. According to Mead, American children were subjected to "Puritan self-accusations" that crimped their libido's and left burdened by "guilt" and "maladjustment." (Very similar, if not identical, to what you espouse). Her life read like a Flapper-era pilot for Sex in the City with the sultry innuendos of her writings. Mead claimed that on Samoa sexual fulfillment was pinnacle to their lifestyle and that celibacy was a meaningless term, homosexuality was common, masturbation was universal, illigitimate births were no big deal, prostitution was harmless, and marriage and divorce were informal. It was hailed as a scientific classic the world over boasting some impressive sales that extended past her death 1973.An New Zealand anthropologist by the name of Derek Freeman was entranced by her writings and resolved to visit Samoa for himself. Freeman admits that he greatly desired this lifestyle as a carefree society, free to frolick in ones own desires was appealing. But after years of research, he hesitantly concludes that "it had become apparent to me, after prolonged inquiry, that Mead's descriptions of Samoa were gravely defective in numerous ways that her account of the sexual mores of Samoans was in outright error." This coming from his book, "The Making and Unmasking of an Anthropological Myth," and his 1999 book, "The Fateful Hoaxing of Margaret Mead."This is the type of yarn that is spun by the likes of Mead, Havelock Ellis, Alfred Kinsey, Margret Sanger, and host of others. Its a lie. Its an attempt to create their own society like that of ancient Greece and Rome where Vomitoriums expressed an gluttonous indulgence. All the churches that I've ever been to read from the Bible and give an exegesis on its extrapolations and meainings, not talk about specific members of modern society. So you lost that wager.

quote:

---

An interesting parallel between rapists and serial killers is their penchant for pornography.

---

Why doesn't normal "Christian sex", (whatever that is), increase Dopamine? As far as their insanity is concerned, certainly childhood abuse factors into that greatly. But it seems so obvious that just as you could easily place part of the blame on abuse, particularly sexual abuse, you could easily parallel pornography. You can't see that? Playboy turns into Penthouse, Penthouse turns into Hustler, and down, down, down, into the most shockingly depraved acts that actually refer to as, "sexual," still don't satisfy. All of a sudden we have the most squalid practices like defecating/urinating on people and violent sex somehow creating a sense of enjoyment. Its unhealthy to stiffle sexual emotions and pretend they don't exist. These extreme puritanical principles do nothing to abate the problem. It enhances it. I certainly would agree with you. No one says we have to live like that, so I find it utterly irrelevant that you bring it up as some sort of inflammatory accusation to further your case that pornography should be encouraged. You are now talking about two different things. Empowering? I find it ironic that in one instance people speak disparigingly about biblical principles as being misogynistic when it is unequivocally shown that pornography celibrates the degredation of the woman. And evidently we see that in two forms of Feminism, one branch viewing the porn industry as a facet of women's liberation, and the other branch viewing it as men abusing women's sexuality for their own cause, Aw, come on, don't be so hard on yourself. You're not as crazy liberal. You're just a liberal.

---

"There is not in all America a more dangerous trait than the deification of mere smartness unaccompanied by any sense of moral responsibility." -Theodore Roosevelt

Uh-huh, and the people going thru back entrance? The men that hide it from their wives? The women that hide from their husbands? The company and EvC policy of no pornography is all because it doesn't illicit some level of shame or embarassment?

---

"There is not in all America a more dangerous trait than the deification of mere smartness unaccompanied by any sense of moral responsibility." -Theodore Roosevelt

The question is why its an offense to begin with. If sex is natural, shouldn't pornography? Obviously there is a reason for it, right? Bringing up gambling to derail my premise doesn't work because porn is outlawed on gov't and most companies for a reason. So why do you suppose that it? No, my contention is that all serial killers had/have a serious problem with porn. No, it seems to be a unhealthy mix of both. Some of those men and women were subjected to a puritanical upbringing and when pornography was introduced, it created this polarity within them. Ed Gein, for instance, wore provocative clothing and engaged in sexual acts in front of her son, all while espousing puritan rules for him. Its no wonder how he arrived at his disposition.

---

"There is not in all America a more dangerous trait than the deification of mere smartness unaccompanied by any sense of moral responsibility." -Theodore Roosevelt

So place a disclaimer like any other website does. If it isn't wrong then it shouldn't be a problem. You won't get fired for surfing the net at most companies. At most, you'll get a stern warning not to be unproductive on their bill. But most companies will fire you on the spot for pornography. So why do you think that is? I would be more inclined to say that its because their significant other will hurt by it. The thought is the pre-cursor to the action. My wife had a hysterctomy so no more condoms for me. But when I did buy them I didn't feel any shame for that either... Maybe its because buying condoms has nothing to do with pornography. That's because you're around like-minded people. Big surprise that you wouldn't feel it then. Go with your grandmother and then tell me if you feel the same way. Neither am I, because there is nothing wrong with sex in and of itself. They are ashamed of their bodies not for their biological urges but because television and movies place standards on their outward appearance and make unrealistic requests that gives young girls stigmas if they don't look like the airbrushed bueaty in the magazines.

---

"There is not in all America a more dangerous trait than the deification of mere smartness unaccompanied by any sense of moral responsibility." -Theodore Roosevelt

You never provided a reason in your post. What is the reason why people can't view porn at their work? Eating food helps you survive, watching porn or even having sex won't determine whether or not you live or die. Serial killers have a problem with porn. Perhaps you don't want to make the connection because you are an advocate of porn. Its not a jab at anyone that watches porn. Everyone understands the lure of pornography. It isn't like anyone is weird for enjoying pornography. I'm just saying that pornography has some consequences attached to it and its promoters should understand that. During an interview with prolific serial killer, he was asked the following question:"Do you really feel that hardcore pornography and the doorway to it, softcore pornography, is doing untold damage to other people and causing other women to be abused and killed the way you did?"To which he replied:"Listen, I'm no social scientist, and I haven't done a survey. I don't pretend that I know what John Q. Citizen thinks about this. But I've lived in prison for a long time now. And I've met a lot of men who were motivated to commit violence just like me. And without exception, without question, every one of them was deeply involved in pornography." -Ted Bundy The FBI, among other premiere law enforment agencies, show unequivocially what Bundy said in plain English. Just about any profiler will tell you the same thing. There is a science to this. It isn't wishful thinking.

---

"There is not in all America a more dangerous trait than the deification of mere smartness unaccompanied by any sense of moral responsibility." -Theodore Roosevelt

Not necessarily. There are different levels of porn. Soft and hardore porn, to name two levels. But nobody goes straight into extreme bondage if you know what I mean. That level of depravity grows over time. That's like asking what constitutes eating? Is mastication eating? Is the salivation glands eating? Or is it a conglomeration of things. Two terms often used in parlance for sexually explicit material is obscene and indecent. That can be a bit ambiguous, so specific meanings have to be coined out of jurisprudence.The FCC defines "Obscenity" as, "that category of sexual material that the courts have deemed to be outside full protection of the First Amendment and subject to regulation by the state. Obscene material is defined as that which appeals to the prurient interest in sex, depicts sexual conduct in a patently offensive manner, and lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value ( Miller v. California, 1973)."It further defines "Indecency" as, "a term from broadcasting (radio and over-the-air television) that defines an even broader category that can be regulated -- language or material that, in context, depicts or describes, in terms patently offensive as measured by contemporary community broadcast standards for the broadcast medium, sexual or excretory organs or activities." Pornography is protected, in most cases, by the First Amendment. It does not appear that this will be overturned at any given time. However, if it were outlawed instead of simply regulated, I would say the most logical way to handle is like drug offenders. You rehabilitate the offenders and go after the purveyors, the one's making a fortune of other peoples emotions. But I'm not making a legal stance, I'm making a moral one. Any one of you is protected by law and I recognize that. I'm just giving you my personal opinion on the matter. I never mentioned censorship. Again, I'm making the point that pornography is not the no-fault answer its made out to be and that porn is often a gateway into depravity. Maybe you can answer me this one question so I can gauge your allegiance to it. How would you feel if your wife and/or daughter were in porn? Its just a job, right? Its 'just' sex, right? And if it would bother you, ask yourself why that is, especially in light if it 'just' being a normal biological urge. I think any honest person here recognizes that there is an unmistakable psychological factor associated with porn in the negative.

---

"There is not in all America a more dangerous trait than the deification of mere smartness unaccompanied by any sense of moral responsibility." -Theodore Roosevelt

So, are you offended that I would find myself in disagreement with porn because you like it? LOL! I can't argue with that. It isn't the action of porn, its what happens to the psyche that matters. First of all, a "prude" is somebody that is excessively modest, in which case, how have you determined that its in excess for me in one direction, but not excessive for you in the other? Secondly, I've mentioned several times that there is nothing, absolutely nothing wrong with sex, whatsoever. But there are parameters just like anything else in life. Assuming that is like assuming cars were invented for drag racing, other than their for their intent, which is for transportation. Its when something is abused for ill-gotten purposes that somnething good can be manipulated into something bad. So, please, with sugar-on-top, stop trying to derail my argument by distorting what I've been saying. Um, minors go to porn sites without their parents permission. Its called a 'disclaimer.' And cars, cameras, zebras, or telephones aren't the 'focus' of EvC either, but you don't see the Admin's fussing about that. So, again, if pornography is really no big deal, why outlaw it from this site, why ban it from children's eyes, why is it taboo at all across the globe, irrespective of culture of religious affiliations? Could it be that there really is an innate sense, perhaps instituted by God, perhaps not, that its 'wrong' to abuse one's own sexuality? Porn is just one avenue of the larger problem. Sexual immorality is really what's at heart. And that has been with us since the beginning. I already wrote about him. His mother had sex in front of him all the while hypocritically teaching him about purticanical rules and regulations. The boy obviously had a fractured psyche. As a result of this splintering effect, he developed a deep hatred for women as he projected his hatred for his mother on to them all. Yeah, that's it....... Everything! Its just what I've been saying. People that watch porn run the risk of growing calloused to it and so go from soft material to hard material. Eventually, it synthesizes into bizarre fetishes that should never be sexual to begin with-- unless of course you find it sexually appealing to be defecated on. Pshhh. Ah yes... Just give a confused teenager some porn and that'll straighten him out. Forget sports or outdoor activities, just stimulate them sexually so they won't hurt people. Fascinating thesis. No it doesn't, it says that violent and non-violent pornography have no disparity when it comes to rape. What does reflect is that rapists are into porn. Make the connection.

---

"There is not in all America a more dangerous trait than the deification of mere smartness unaccompanied by any sense of moral responsibility." -Theodore Roosevelt