[PLUG-TALK] Porn on the Net...

Michael Robinson plug_1 at robinson-west.com
Wed Oct 28 08:01:11 UTC 2009


Catholicism is not a handicap.

Judaism is not a handicap.

Being a devout peaceful Muslim is not a handicap.

Religious discrimination because people refuse to recognize sex for what
it really is and the accompanying morality that goes along with that is
an ugly thing indeed.

First off, abstinence education works if sex is revealed for what 
it really is in a holistic sense by children's parents who have 
the right and the obligation to teach.

Second off, The religion of 1 and 4 people in America and many more 
world wide is not narrow minded.

Third off, nothing artificial in existence will protect one sufficiently
against the sexual transmission of disease.

Finally, sex without the love to accept a child if God wants to create
one isn't appropriate at any time under any circumstance.

For people who say be sexually liberal and you'll have no problems
whatsoever, study Mary Magdalene.  She was the star of prostitution
until Christ saved her from being stoned to death and healed her.

As far as the argument that banning free porn will make pay for porn
more popular.  It potentially will.  Thing is, it's harder to get pay 
for porn than it is to get free porn.  Children in general don't have
a credit card they can use to get into porn.  If I could effectively
eradicate porn from the Internet, I would be all for that.  Thing is,
the modest step of banning free porn seems good enough to solve a 
lot of the problems associated with it.  If people can't sample porn
without paying for it, they are less likely to buy.  Anything that
reduces prostitution and the dissemination of pornography is 
probably a good thing.  From the set of people who will look at
pornography the subset that includes those who will pay or provide
personal information to look at porn is much smaller.




More information about the PLUG-talk mailing list