Quantcast
Opinion

In our opinion: Fighting against pornography

Comments

Return To Article
  • Mainly Me Werribee, 00
    July 7, 2013 3:20 a.m.

    For those who think porn is a victimless crime, you need to get your head out of the sand and face reality. FBI stats show that porn is used by 81% of rapists. In another study conducted in Canada, 100% of child molesters in the study used porn. I know all about those who say there is no causal relationship, but again, you don't know what you're talking about. In Australia, when porn was made more easily available in NSW. Rapes increased by 25% while they stayed the same in states where nothing was changed.

    Porn is a major cause of divorce in the church. 1 in 3 referrals to counseling are for porn problems. 50% of men are addicted and 90% have looked at it. The average age a porn addict first started is 12.

    Destroys and irrevocably changes lives. I know. I was raped by a 16 y/o porn addict.

  • Irony Guy Bountiful, Utah
    July 7, 2013 3:42 a.m.

    The problem arises when people try to define pornography. According to BYU, a masterwork by Rodin is porn. Would that "standard" also apply to Michelangelo's David or Botticelli's Venus? What would the DNews propose to do? Shut down the internet? Censor books and movies? Cut off cable TV at the state line? Put drapes on Rodin's statuary? It's easy to point with alarm, but what do you do about it?

  • BarkforSark PROVO, UT
    July 7, 2013 4:59 a.m.

    Sadly, pornography is one of those things that a lot of people have to experience the negative effects of first-hand before they can actually understand how damaging it is. It's real easy to say, "Oh, just let people look at what they want. It's their life." They wouldn't be saying that if they watched their spouse change in front of their very eyes over the course of their marriage to the point where a divorce was necessary. And what happens if they have kids? How does all that affect them? What problems will those children face later in life because of one addiction? It's all very tragic.

  • fowersjl Farmington, Utah
    July 7, 2013 5:15 a.m.

    Amen and amen!

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    July 7, 2013 6:55 a.m.

    Haven't we bigger fish to fry than to go through a series of articles designed to keep people riled up about porn?

  • Midvaliean MIDVALE, UT
    July 7, 2013 7:10 a.m.

    A couple of things here. The broken windows theory is a strange one to pull out, especially in light of its complete failure in the war on drugs.
    There is currently enough pornography created that to try and "ban" it now wouldn't work. You would not need to film another pornographic movie ever, enough have been made.
    The writer has either had a very bad experience with porn or refuses to see that the people who visit a porn website once a month are NOT addicted to porn. If you drank once a month, or even 2 or 3 times are you an alcoholic? No probably not. So what are they doing? Answer: What comes naturally to the human body.
    I'll grant there are those who are harmed by these images. There are those who are not. Its just like everything else.

  • jimmypage Meridian, ID
    July 7, 2013 7:54 a.m.

    I applaud the D News for shedding light on this destructive, pervasive issue.

    "For the sake of innocent victims and a nation losing touch with the value of committed relationships, marriage and families, it's time to turn prosecution efforts toward ending adult pornography at all levels."

    As much as I would love to see this happen, I find it hard to be hopeful. Gordon B. Hinckley said something to the effect "I am generally optimistic... but in this case, I'm a realist." I share that sentiment. This problem is going to get worse before it gets better.

  • Shane333 Cedar Hills, UT
    July 7, 2013 8:26 a.m.

    An important topic to address, especially with the increasing prevalence of pornography. There is a legal challenge for curtailing porn. It is highlighted by the article quote, "While incidents of rape or other sexual assaults may not be on the rise..."

    If a definitive link between porn and crime, or porn and the destruction of marriage (outside of religious standards and influences) cannot be proven, it will be difficult to legally justify imposing more government regulation on the industry.

    I do not say this to justify porn. I mention it only to explain that objective proof of problems linked to porn will be needed to justify any government intervention. Otherwise the burden of regulation will fall by default to the individual or parents.

  • Tekakaromatagi Dammam, Saudi Arabia
    July 7, 2013 8:34 a.m.

    I agree with the Deseret News editorial board. I recently saw an youtube presentation about a pornography study done at a university. A professor wanted to compare the effect of pornography on young men's brains. The problem is he could not find a control group of young men who weren't viewing pornography. The presenter talked about the effects of viewing pornography in terms of shorter attention spans and wasted time. We are going to have a generation of young men who cannot care for themselves, who cannot care for their future families.

    To the extent this is true, it seems that pornography isn't just degrading to women it is also degrading to men.

  • Linus Bountiful, UT
    July 7, 2013 8:38 a.m.

    Pornography erodes marriage, so what can you expect from an administration that refuses to protect and defend marriage?

  • Tyler Ray Taylorsville, UT
    July 7, 2013 8:40 a.m.

    Right before he was to be executed for raping and murdering over 30 women, Ted Bunde admitted where he went wrong. He lived in a great home with loving parents, but he had a terrible addiction to pornography. He says that's what led him to his gross crimes. He also said every man he knew in prison who was in for a violent crime. EVERY SINGLE ONE had an addiction to pornography. Amazing that people justify pornography like it's harmless.

  • FreedomFighter41 Orem, UT
    July 7, 2013 8:44 a.m.

    I agree, it gives a skewed view on what love really is. Porn is bad.

    However, I believe that comprehensive Sex Education would do wonders to combat porn. It helps to eliminate the curiosity about sex. It also helps students understand the consequences. Too many here in our state have no clue what sex is. The parents don't want to talk about it, the Eagle Forum doesn't want the schools to teach about it, so students go to locker rooms, MTV, and the Internet to learn about it.

  • KJB1 Eugene, OR
    July 7, 2013 9:08 a.m.

    Time for a four part series of shaky statistics, leaps of logic, and guilt-driven moralizing. So much for consenting adults having freedom to do as they see fit...

  • The Rock Federal Way, WA
    July 7, 2013 9:20 a.m.

    Your suggestion is correct. Pornography is a serious crime and even seemingly small offenses should be aggressively prosecuted.

    I fail to understand why those who perform in hard core porn movies are not prosecuted for prostitution. They are engaging in acts for pay.

    I fail to understand why those who hire them are not prosecuted for pimping. They arrange for people to engage in these acts for profit.

    The biggest difference between what a prostitute does and what a porn actress or actor does is; a prostitute seduces on person at a time. A movie seduces every person that watches is. One hides behind the first amendment. The other cannot.

    Let's get some consistency here.

  • Mariner ALPINE, UT
    July 7, 2013 9:23 a.m.

    The complacency among politicians and insurance companies
    In recognizing and treating this real mind changing disease is
    proof of the power of profits in this deplorable business and possible denial of their
    own addictions.
    The only way at this point that we can fight this addiction
    If the classy women in this country need to say "Enough!"
    And stand up against being objectified.

  • MapleDon Springville, UT
    July 7, 2013 9:33 a.m.

    That's fine for you to take a stand against pornography.

    Unfortunately, it's your behavior that speaks much more loudly than your words.

    I suggest you clean your own house first before telling the rest of us to. And that means for the Deseret News to stop advertising films that contain pornography. Certainly there's a price to be paid by not having that additional revenue. But your words will fall on deaf ears as long as you tell people to stay away from the stuff you peddle.

    And while we're at this topic, don't you think it would be wise to also counsel those involved in the distribution of pornography, such as hotel chains (Marriott, etc.), to also recognize that no good comes from this? Again, the price to be paid is the loss of revenue. But if, as you put it, the welfare of our society is at stake, then responsible action should be taken by everyone, and principle should trump profit. Right?

  • 10CC Bountiful, UT
    July 7, 2013 9:34 a.m.

    Certainly the same thing applies to modeling, beauty pagents, young women wearing immodest clothing, and if you're honest about the topic, it includes young women wearing makeup in public.

    And while we're at it, let's talk about the female version of pornography, raunchy romance novels, which paint a completely unrealistic portrait of men and what they can do for women in a relationship. It wrongly suggests that "trophy" men are rich, sexy, drive a Ferrari, and act like bad boys.

    If the "broken windows" theory is valid, it certainly applies to these elements, as well.

  • Betcha Waltham, MA
    July 7, 2013 9:51 a.m.

    I don't think the broken windows theory broke down, I think the problem comes when so very many people do it, you can't stop every body, and since our society has become so very morally bankrupt, it is no surprise that this and other addictions are out of control. I believe the very core of our society is broken, we can't ,discipline children because we may hurt their self esteem. Parents are abdicating their responsibility of parenting because they want to be a friend. Schools can't take away a phone or any other devise that is distracting because it is a child's RIGHT to have it, So anything at all that people want to do now day's they can get away with, And because people have called everything "Natural" we have opened the door to justification. When is it going to be "Natural " for an older man to have what he calls a relationship with a young 10 year old girl? Do you call that 'Natural as well?' With the decline of morals, anything is alright!... We are in BIG TROUBLE!!

  • heavenonearth Grantsville, UT
    July 7, 2013 10:18 a.m.

    When a person has not connected to their own divine self and felt the all-consuming love of God, then is it any wonder why external sources are sought? To find and connect to God/Christ is the longing of the soul to return to this ultimate source of love. It's interesting to me that two of Utah's big cities are in the top 10 porn users in the country.

  • Walt Nicholes Orem, UT
    July 7, 2013 10:20 a.m.

    Society has so many ills. King Benjamin said: "And finally, I cannot tell you all the things whereby ye may commit sin; for there are divers ways and means, even so many that I cannot number them."

    Who decided that pornography was the worst? When I was young marriages were failing because husbands drank too much. Later on they were failing because one spouse or the other took a lover. A marriage I am close to is failing because of a spouse who is toying with drugs. There are many which fail because of gambling or overspending. If this is about saving marriages, then it is too narrow. If this is about fighting only one sin among many then it is too narrow.

    What is needed is a general return to righteous behavior, and that cannot be legislated or enforced - only taught.

    Bring on your articles - they may do some good, but they will not end the problem.

  • Mariner ALPINE, UT
    July 7, 2013 10:29 a.m.

    To Midvalian Hutterite

    Denial. Show your wives and daughters your response
    And see if they agree.

    To DN.
    Please don't let comments like we need to define it first or
    Don't we have bigger fish to fry from stopping this important
    Issue from being addressed.

  • merich39 Salt Lake City, UT
    July 7, 2013 10:43 a.m.

    Almost every consumable product, if used to excess, can be self-destructive to an individual and damaging to society. For example, icecream, fast food, video games and reality TV, if consumed to excess, can be damaging to a person and their relationships / marriage. There are plenty of people addicted to each of those consumable products, yet most conservatives would balk at regulating the consumption of any of those. The solution, most conservatives would say, is education rather than regulation.

    Pornography is treated differently because of moral objections rather than logical objections. Because a group of people morally object to pornography, they feel is is acceptable to implement legal policy based on those moral objections. The damage to individuals and society from pornography isn't necessarily worse than the damage from poor eating. Pornography is just, to some, more morally objectionable.

    Most here won't want to see or admit it, but pornography can provide a benefit to married couples who use pornography responsibly and in moderation. There are plenty of couples who use pornography together as a means of spicing up their love lives. It can be and is done. Not everyone who partakes of pornography becomes addicted to it.

  • Larry Chandler CEDAR CITY, UT
    July 7, 2013 11:00 a.m.

    Society is too interconnected to ban porn. It probably cannot even be reduced. Porn is available worldwide. And even if there was an attempt to shut down porn sites, others will spring up, and could be hidden behind seemingly innocuous sites.

    We couldn't even ban physical products (alcohol and drugs) that cannot be reproduced digitally. It may be possible to reduce people's dependency on viewing porn. Not sure how that could work, but banning it will be as ineffectual as prohibition and the war on drugs.

  • merich39 Salt Lake City, UT
    July 7, 2013 11:01 a.m.

    Having said what I did in my previous post, I do believe it is incredibly important to keep pornography from children. To that end, my wife and I purchased and installed NetNanny and found it to be a very effective tool for restricting internet access to pornography. We don't subscribe to any TV channels that provide anything near pornographic.

    My kids are now all young adults and my wife and I feel we have been successful in restricting their access to pornography while also instilling in them a healthy understanding and appreciation of human sexuality. We feel there is a balance to be maintained in all aspects of a person's life and relationships, including sexuality. Too much emphasis on sexuality is unhealthy as is too little emphasis on sexuality.

  • Laozi Stanford, CA
    July 7, 2013 12:07 p.m.

    I hope the Deseret News will be consistent in its anti-pornography campaign, going after the powerful profiteers as well as the bit players.

    Will you call for a boycott of the Marriott Corporation, which has long rented pornographic movies in its hotels? A few years ago an industry report put Marriott profits from in-room adult entertainment at over $200 million per annum. The company says that it will now phase out its smut business because its customers are using the internet to get their fixes, but that hardly excuses Marriott's past and present practices.

    Perhaps the LDS church should also announce a policy preventing men like Bill Marriott from serving as General Authorities if they run businesses involved in the sale of pornography--and maybe even denounce corporate directors like Mitt Romney who are paid in part from the proceeds of such activities. There would probably be no more effective way of demonstrating zero tolerance for smut, since getting big business out of the porn business would make it much less profitable for those who actually make the films.

    Challenging such men would be politically difficult, but it would be morally consistent.

  • Midvaliean MIDVALE, UT
    July 7, 2013 12:18 p.m.

    @Mariner
    My wife completely agrees with my opinion. It would be absolutely inappropriate to discuss that with your daughter in that fashion, when my daughter is an adult, and she brings it up, perhaps we will talk.
    We keep wide open lines of communication at my home.

  • Twin Lights Louisville, KY
    July 7, 2013 3:14 p.m.

    merich39,

    I heartily agree that sexuality is an important part of our lives and should be part of the balance. Also, that no addictive product (and pornography is an addictive product) is addictive to all users. That does not mean it is not problematic, just that some can escape the problems.

    That said, pornography is quite different from nearly all other consumable products. Unlike most other products, the people who make ice cream, fast food, etc. are not degraded and even put in harm’s way as they make the product.

    Would you recommend that your daughter or other loved one enter the porn industry? Most of us would not because we think that their involvement in making porn would damage them. Most us would not think the same of a career in fast food, ice cream, etc.

    So, the moral objections are not just based on perceived damage by the product’s consumption but by its damage to its participants.

  • mtgrantlass Camden Wyoming, DE
    July 7, 2013 7:13 p.m.

    Morality in Media (MIM) has been working tirelessly for decades fighting pornography, mostly to inform and encourage people to contact state and fed AG's to ENFORCE what is on the books. Look them up, read their research, donate.

  • mtgrantlass Camden Wyoming, DE
    July 7, 2013 7:20 p.m.

    @Hutterite "Haven't we bigger fish to fry than to go through a series of articles designed to keep people riled up about porn?" No, I don't think there's bigger fish. This is about exploitation (and worse) of innocent children and women; broken hearts, homes and marriages; ruination of lives.

  • The Real Maverick Orem, UT
    July 7, 2013 11:21 p.m.

    So repubs want more nanny government in our lives?

    Why not merely let the free market decide on porn?

    Haven't we learned from the gun debate that new laws and regulation doesn't do anything?

    Let people decide whether they want porn or not. Not nanny government. When will repubs get this big government vision off our backs? Get nanny government out of my life now!

  • george of the jungle goshen, UT
    July 8, 2013 7:31 a.m.

    There are a lot of choices, But the old man's been down the road. How about hearing and learning from someone who's been there done that. No one wants lung, pancreas, liver or mental disorders. No one thinks it can happen to them. That's the problem, no one thinks.

  • Craig Clark Boulder, CO
    July 8, 2013 9:19 a.m.

    "....the Department of Justice hasn't filed a single adult obscenity case since 2010. That is appalling...."
    ______________________________

    Is it really? For a conservative newspaper to sound a call to arms imploring the Federal Government to vigorously prosecute statutory obscenity toward the goal of “ending adult pornography at all levels” seems to clash with conservatism’s core ideas of limited government, especially at the Federal level.

  • Contrarius mid-state, TN
    July 8, 2013 11:24 p.m.

    @MainlyMe --

    "FBI stats show that porn is used by 81% of rapists. In another study conducted in Canada, 100% of child molesters in the study used porn."

    You are probably confusing cause and effect here. It is extremely likely that these people used porn BECAUSE they had sexually violent tendencies -- rather than porn CAUSING those tendencies.

    The fact is that the incidence of rape in this country has NOT increased over the last 30 years -- even though that is the very same time frame in which porn has become more popular. In fact, rapes have DECREASED a bit over the years.

    Here's the numbers from the US Census Bureau -- Rate of rapes, per 100,000 people:

    1980 -- 36.8
    1985 -- 36.8
    1990 -- 41.1
    1995 -- 37.1
    2000 -- 32.0
    2005 -- 31.8
    2009 -- 28.7

    Porn does have several different bad effects on society. But raising the crime rate isn't one of them.

    Incidentally, as discussed in one of the other porn threads -- The biggest consumers of online adult entertainment are in Utah, according to a 2009 study by a Harvard economics professor. ;-)

  • CHARLIEBROWN2292 ,
    July 9, 2013 5:38 a.m.

    There was a time when smoking was considered a harmless activity... until medical research proved that smoking kills! Recent medical findings show that viewing pornography has the same destructive effect on the brain as the consumption of hard drugs. This should be evidence for Legislators to deal with pornography in the way they deal with drugs.

  • BKB Chantilly/USA, 00
    July 9, 2013 10:32 a.m.

    I'm not sure that increasing prosecutions will help reduce the pervasiveness of pornography. As we've watched the various wars on drugs over the decades, anyone who really wants drugs can still get them. Pornography will likely be the same. Let's keep fighting but let's also try to focus on the end user: help the porn viewer overcome his or her addiction and let's help kids from starting.

    Remember the "your brain on drugs" commercials. Your brain on porn is just as bad. It's time we started letting people know how serious the consequences are and letting them know that there are solutions.

  • GL L.A, CA
    July 11, 2013 10:19 a.m.

    Hello, thank you for the story. Many wish to ignore the harm pornography causes on the human condition and society. I am a professional addiction therapist, however before entering the field, I had to overcome my own addiction. Neuroscience research of brain function has proven the addictive and harmful nature of pornography, however I also have my own anecdotal information as to the harm of pornography. I had the unique experience of dating an infamous pornography performer, being a writer I chronicled our experiences and her debilitation, you see pornography destroys.If you care to read start here.
    GL

  • Fiannan Eugene, Oregon
    July 12, 2013 1:31 a.m.

    Why do people bring up Ted Bundy in regards to porn? Yes, I know about his final interviews, trying to project the blame for his horrid love of serial killing onto something other than his own twisted mind, but please...that is what psychopaths do!
    Did Countess Bathory, who murdered over 300 young women, have a porn addiction? Did Jeffrey Dahmer?
    As for his being raised by a loving family please...check a little deeper into how Bundy was raised.
    As for porn's effects on society I have seen no evidence of it causing men to be violent to women. However it has affected female viewers big time. Now it is often women who initiate conversations about threesomes or bondage as well as young women experimenting with same-sex encounters; not to mention how most under-30s remove all body hair now. I do not like porn from a moral point of view but there is a danger in trying to make this a "bad males and innocent females" thing as any research on porn today demonstrates it is growing in popularity with younger women big-time.