Ensign Article--Yet ANOTHER Anti-Male Pornography Push

[JohnnyL]

Anyway, still looking forward to that day when things get better in church about this and more...

[Fiannan]

This is an interesting aspect to the issue that examines religion and porn from a cultural context:

http://www.jewishquarterly.org/issuearc ... ticleid=38

As the article suggests, Jewish involvement in porn may, in part, be a way of rebelling against conservative norms. Could the same be true for Mormons? Could Mormons who look at porn be doing so, at least in part, as a means of saying, on the individual level, that nobody is going to tell them what to do? A sort of private rebellion that may be a devout man or woman's way of expressing a form of individuality. Similar to the bishop's daughter who is secretly on birth control for obvious reasons, or the vice cop who occasionally pockets a bit of cocaine after a major bust, this may be a factor in why people use it. The trouble is, that means the more harsh the condemnations against it, the more it pushes people to visit the dark side.

[JohnnyL]

This is an interesting aspect to the issue that examines religion and porn from a cultural context:

http://www.jewishquarterly.org/issuearc ... ticleid=38

As the article suggests, Jewish involvement in porn may, in part, be a way of rebelling against conservative norms. Could the same be true for Mormons? Could Mormons who look at porn be doing so, at least in part, as a means of saying, on the individual level, that nobody is going to tell them what to do? A sort of private rebellion that may be a devout man or woman's way of expressing a form of individuality. Similar to the bishop's daughter who is secretly on birth control for obvious reasons, or the vice cop who occasionally pockets a bit of cocaine after a major bust, this may be a factor in why people use it. The trouble is, that means the more harsh the condemnations against it, the more it pushes people to visit the dark side.

It could be, but I'd say more for children than adults.

It's amazing what some understanding and honesty can do sometimes...

[Spaced_Out]

This is an interesting aspect to the issue that examines religion and porn from a cultural context:

http://www.jewishquarterly.org/issuearc ... ticleid=38

As the article suggests, Jewish involvement in porn may, in part, be a way of rebelling against conservative norms. Could the same be true for Mormons? Could Mormons who look at porn be doing so, at least in part, as a means of saying, on the individual level, that nobody is going to tell them what to do? A sort of private rebellion that may be a devout man or woman's way of expressing a form of individuality. Similar to the bishop's daughter who is secretly on birth control for obvious reasons, or the vice cop who occasionally pockets a bit of cocaine after a major bust, this may be a factor in why people use it. The trouble is, that means the more harsh the condemnations against it, the more it pushes people to visit the dark side.

It is wickedness and rebellion, I don't know of any who partake and say it is good for their spirituality. The war in heaven was fought over free agency, because you see the war continuing on earth - some how people justify that the church has failed - NOT. Same old same old.

[Fiannan]

This is an interesting aspect to the issue that examines religion and porn from a cultural context:

http://www.jewishquarterly.org/issuearc ... ticleid=38

As the article suggests, Jewish involvement in porn may, in part, be a way of rebelling against conservative norms. Could the same be true for Mormons? Could Mormons who look at porn be doing so, at least in part, as a means of saying, on the individual level, that nobody is going to tell them what to do? A sort of private rebellion that may be a devout man or woman's way of expressing a form of individuality. Similar to the bishop's daughter who is secretly on birth control for obvious reasons, or the vice cop who occasionally pockets a bit of cocaine after a major bust, this may be a factor in why people use it. The trouble is, that means the more harsh the condemnations against it, the more it pushes people to visit the dark side.

It is wickedness and rebellion, I don't know of any who partake and say it is good for their spirituality. The war in heaven was fought over free agency, because you see the war continuing on earth - some how people justify that the church has failed - NOT. Same old same old.

Agreed. however, the article notes rebellion as one reason for Jews being involved in the porn industry, at the production and staring level. At production I cannot speculate for LDS people because I have only heard of one LDS woman who went from staring in movies to producing them. One other Mormon woman I read about felt alienated in college because all her LDS friends did not like her always discussing sexual topics and she eventually went from modeling into porn. Again the article I linked to is extremely well written and insightful and I would encourage people to read it. I really do believe there are lessons that can be extrapolated from the Jewish experience to the LDS.

[Spaced_Out]

One other Mormon woman I read about felt alienated in college because all her LDS friends did not like her always discussing sexual topics and she eventually went from modeling into porn. ul and I would encourage people to read it. I

The most pathetic excuse ever.... I remember teachign a guy on mission who was a model, believed the BoM wanted to get baptised but could not give up the law of Chasity as it is part of the scene and live style of being a model.

Why are people not talking about it an issue.

[Fiannan]

One other Mormon woman I read about felt alienated in college because all her LDS friends did not like her always discussing sexual topics and she eventually went from modeling into porn. ul and I would encourage people to read it. I

The most pathetic excuse ever.... I remember teachign a guy on mission who was a model, believed the BoM wanted to get baptised but could not give up the law of Chasity as it is part of the scene and live style of being a model.

Why are people not talking about it an issue.

Perhaps. I once met a woman who had been a fashion model but gave up because she was Christian and was tired of getting hit on by...now get this, female photographers and female leaders in the industry. I think we know why a woman is rarely hit on by male leaders in that industry.

However, in the case of the LDs person I read about, I got the impression that she was a devout LDS member but was getting judged and ostracized by her LDS social circle. I have seen this on other aspects of our culture. I have seen several young women who were hyper-analytical and a bit on the hippie side that were mocked and shunned by the people they grew up with so they quit the Church in college. And seeing how some people even on this forum go bonkers when you actually agree with them, but for reasons they don't connect to, and thus will see you as a heretic, I can see how people might become alienated with the LDS culture and then make themselves vulnerable to other influences.

[freedomforall]

Is nudity considered as pornography?

Did Eve cover herself every time Father came onto the scene?

Did not God see Eve's nudity with each visit for who knows how long before Adam and Eve fell?

Did Eve think to cover herself having eaten the forbidden fruit, or did Satan tell her to cover up?

My point being: just what constitutes being pornographic?

Another point to be made is this: if spirits, good and bad, walk the earth, don't they see humans in their most intimate situations? To the good spirits who are waiting to be resurrected, is the acts of mortals pornography to them?

We are told to bridle our passions and carnal desires. Will we do any better as spirits in the after life here on earth?

[Finrock]

Is nudity considered as pornography?

Did Eve cover herself every time Father came onto the scene?

Did not God see Eve's nudity with each visit for who knows how long before Adam and Eve fell?

Did Eve think to cover herself having eaten the forbidden fruit, or did Satan tell her to cover up?

My point being: just what constitutes being pornographic?

Another point to be made is this: if spirits, good and bad, walk the earth, don't they see humans in their most intimate situations? To the good spirits who are waiting to be resurrected, is the acts of mortals pornography to them?

We are told to bridle our passions and carnal desires. Will we do any better as spirits in the after life here on earth?

These are good questions. God sees us all naked all of the time and I imagine so do other good spirits. Nudity, in and of itself, is not evil/bad/wrong. It is the lusting part that causes the issues. Lusting is something that happens in the hearts and minds of men (and women), irrespective of how another is dressed or undressed.

-Finrock

[Fiannan]

In the 1920s nudity was far more acceptable in the US culture. Look at the gothic statues of the era, look at the art, etc. Even movies like Tarzan had nudity. It is ironic that as nudity became less socially acceptable that the pornographers crept in. In the 1960s there was a re-birth of nudity but not within middle class culture. As the government sabotaged the hippie movement with drugs (such as LSD) the back-to-earth movement died and, ironically, pornography began to flourish.

[brianj]

Is nudity considered as pornography?

Did Eve cover herself every time Father came onto the scene?

Did not God see Eve's nudity with each visit for who knows how long before Adam and Eve fell?

Did Eve think to cover herself having eaten the forbidden fruit, or did Satan tell her to cover up?

My point being: just what constitutes being pornographic?

Another point to be made is this: if spirits, good and bad, walk the earth, don't they see humans in their most intimate situations? To the good spirits who are waiting to be resurrected, is the acts of mortals pornography to them?

We are told to bridle our passions and carnal desires. Will we do any better as spirits in the after life here on earth?

These are good questions. God sees us all naked all of the time and I imagine so do other good spirits. Nudity, in and of itself, is not evil/bad/wrong. It is the lusting part that causes the issues. Lusting is something that happens in the hearts and minds of men (and women), irrespective of how another is dressed or undressed.

-Finrock

There is more to it than lust. A medical professional can probably see nudity all day long without having the least bit of lust enter their mind. But pornography is nudity intended to provoke lust.
I've seen displays of nudity in many locations. Heck, you can even find nudity in the Salt Lake temple! But if I am looking at a statue in the temple, or statues or paintings in a museum, there is nothing about the artistic use of nudity that provokes lust. On the other hand, it's difficult to turn on the TV or walk through a mall without seeing pictures of people who aren't nude but that definitely are intended to provoke lust.

[Finrock]

Is nudity considered as pornography?

Did Eve cover herself every time Father came onto the scene?

Did not God see Eve's nudity with each visit for who knows how long before Adam and Eve fell?

Did Eve think to cover herself having eaten the forbidden fruit, or did Satan tell her to cover up?

My point being: just what constitutes being pornographic?

Another point to be made is this: if spirits, good and bad, walk the earth, don't they see humans in their most intimate situations? To the good spirits who are waiting to be resurrected, is the acts of mortals pornography to them?

We are told to bridle our passions and carnal desires. Will we do any better as spirits in the after life here on earth?

These are good questions. God sees us all naked all of the time and I imagine so do other good spirits. Nudity, in and of itself, is not evil/bad/wrong. It is the lusting part that causes the issues. Lusting is something that happens in the hearts and minds of men (and women), irrespective of how another is dressed or undressed.

-Finrock

There is more to it than lust. A medical professional can probably see nudity all day long without having the least bit of lust enter their mind. But pornography is nudity intended to provoke lust.
I've seen displays of nudity in many locations. Heck, you can even find nudity in the Salt Lake temple! But if I am looking at a statue in the temple, or statues or paintings in a museum, there is nothing about the artistic use of nudity that provokes lust. On the other hand, it's difficult to turn on the TV or walk through a mall without seeing pictures of people who aren't nude but that definitely are intended to provoke lust.

What is the "more to it" that you are talking about? From you post I'm not sure if you are agreeing with me or disagreeing with me. Your first sentence seems to say you don't agree, but then the rest of your post seems to be you agreeing that it is about lust.

Can you clarify, please?

-Finrock

[brianj]

Is nudity considered as pornography?

Did Eve cover herself every time Father came onto the scene?

Did not God see Eve's nudity with each visit for who knows how long before Adam and Eve fell?

Did Eve think to cover herself having eaten the forbidden fruit, or did Satan tell her to cover up?

My point being: just what constitutes being pornographic?

Another point to be made is this: if spirits, good and bad, walk the earth, don't they see humans in their most intimate situations? To the good spirits who are waiting to be resurrected, is the acts of mortals pornography to them?

We are told to bridle our passions and carnal desires. Will we do any better as spirits in the after life here on earth?

These are good questions. God sees us all naked all of the time and I imagine so do other good spirits. Nudity, in and of itself, is not evil/bad/wrong. It is the lusting part that causes the issues. Lusting is something that happens in the hearts and minds of men (and women), irrespective of how another is dressed or undressed.

-Finrock

There is more to it than lust. A medical professional can probably see nudity all day long without having the least bit of lust enter their mind. But pornography is nudity intended to provoke lust.
I've seen displays of nudity in many locations. Heck, you can even find nudity in the Salt Lake temple! But if I am looking at a statue in the temple, or statues or paintings in a museum, there is nothing about the artistic use of nudity that provokes lust. On the other hand, it's difficult to turn on the TV or walk through a mall without seeing pictures of people who aren't nude but that definitely are intended to provoke lust.

What is the "more to it" that you are talking about? From you post I'm not sure if you are agreeing with me or disagreeing with me. Your first sentence seems to say you don't agree, but then the rest of your post seems to be you agreeing that it is about lust.

Can you clarify, please?

-Finrock

The more to it is provoking lust. Some people are so full of lust that they get aroused by seeing something as innocent as an advertisement for ankle chains that shows bare feet, but that lust doesn't make those images pornographic or inappropriate. Pornographic images, whether the person(s) in the images are dressed or not, are specifically intended to provoke lust.

I think that if somebody looks at Klimt's Adam and Eve and gets turned on, they have problems. I also think that if somebody looks at hardcore porn images and doesn't get turned on, they have different problems.

Lust can just happen. Back when the Sears catalog was published people joked about teen boys looking over the lingerie section of that catalog. Such lust is a problem but isn't being generated by the pictures. If boys really did that, they were opening the catalog because of lust already in their hearts. But provoking lust is a different, much more significant issue. Certain clothing manufacturers and retailers advertise their wares in pictures and video intended to fill men with lust, and intended to fill women with a hope that their men will lust after them like they do the models if they wear those articles of clothing. Hardcore porn, on the other hand, is intended to fill people with lust and keep them focused on the object of that lust.

I'm not sure if we agree or disagree, but nudity in certain situations is not wrong. Nudity in other situations, particularly portrayals of the human body intended to provoke lust, are very wrong.

[Finrock]

These are good questions. God sees us all naked all of the time and I imagine so do other good spirits. Nudity, in and of itself, is not evil/bad/wrong. It is the lusting part that causes the issues. Lusting is something that happens in the hearts and minds of men (and women), irrespective of how another is dressed or undressed.

-Finrock

There is more to it than lust. A medical professional can probably see nudity all day long without having the least bit of lust enter their mind. But pornography is nudity intended to provoke lust.
I've seen displays of nudity in many locations. Heck, you can even find nudity in the Salt Lake temple! But if I am looking at a statue in the temple, or statues or paintings in a museum, there is nothing about the artistic use of nudity that provokes lust. On the other hand, it's difficult to turn on the TV or walk through a mall without seeing pictures of people who aren't nude but that definitely are intended to provoke lust.

What is the "more to it" that you are talking about? From you post I'm not sure if you are agreeing with me or disagreeing with me. Your first sentence seems to say you don't agree, but then the rest of your post seems to be you agreeing that it is about lust.

Can you clarify, please?

-Finrock

The more to it is provoking lust. Some people are so full of lust that they get aroused by seeing something as innocent as an advertisement for ankle chains that shows bare feet, but that lust doesn't make those images pornographic or inappropriate. Pornographic images, whether the person(s) in the images are dressed or not, are specifically intended to provoke lust.

I think that if somebody looks at Klimt's Adam and Eve and gets turned on, they have problems. I also think that if somebody looks at hardcore porn images and doesn't get turned on, they have different problems.

Lust can just happen. Back when the Sears catalog was published people joked about teen boys looking over the lingerie section of that catalog. Such lust is a problem but isn't being generated by the pictures. If boys really did that, they were opening the catalog because of lust already in their hearts. But provoking lust is a different, much more significant issue. Certain clothing manufacturers and retailers advertise their wares in pictures and video intended to fill men with lust, and intended to fill women with a hope that their men will lust after them like they do the models if they wear those articles of clothing. Hardcore porn, on the other hand, is intended to fill people with lust and keep them focused on the object of that lust.

I'm not sure if we agree or disagree, but nudity in certain situations is not wrong. Nudity in other situations, particularly portrayals of the human body intended to provoke lust, are very wrong.

I said that nudity in and of itself is not bad. I said it comes down to lust. Whether its provoking lust or lusting, it's about lust.

It sounds like you are trying to say that if someone provokes you to lust, then the person provoking is guilty, but the person lusting is not because they are being provoked.

You can look at porn and not list and it is normal and okay. Law enforcement do it all of the time. Others have overcome lust.

We don't have to lust even if provoked. But lusting is the issue, not nudity in and of itself.

-Finrock

[JohnnyL]

For some reason, I doubt spirits are watching us nude.

[brianj]

I said that nudity in and of itself is not bad. I said it comes down to lust. Whether its provoking lust or lusting, it's about lust.

It sounds like you are trying to say that if someone provokes you to lust, then the person provoking is guilty, but the person lusting is not because they are being provoked.

You can look at porn and not list and it is normal and okay. Law enforcement do it all of the time. Others have overcome lust.

We don't have to lust even if provoked. But lusting is the issue, not nudity in and of itself.

-Finrock

Not exactly. The person with a foot fetish who gets off looking at pictures of sandals in a flyer from Payless is sinning, and the person who turns to porn for the arousal is also sinning. A person who is unintentionally exposed to porn will have their lust provoked, and what they do at that moment determines if they are sinning or not. Do they continue to look at porn or get away from it and try to focus on something else to get the lust out of their mind? And, of course, the people producing porn are guilty of a variety of sins.

The point I was trying unsuccessfully to make is that, as you said, nudity in and of itself isn't necessarily bad. Lust is a temptation and I believe entertaining inappropriate lust is sinful. But pornography isn't about nudity, it is about provoking lust. I suspect the purveyors of porn will be held accountable for the acts that occurred as the porn is created and for provoking lust in the people who view the porn. The viewers will be held accountable for their own immoral action as well as giving their support to purveyors of porn so they can financially benefit from their sinful creations.

[freedomforall]

For some reason, I doubt spirits are watching us nude.

I would think that every person that dies, they are as naked as the day they were born. Don't spirits of the dead see them? Maybe they are given invisible clothing so we can't see the spirits, huh? We're told that our spirit hangs around until the body is put to rest. Anyone heard the opposite?

Many times I have gotten on my knees and prayed while nude and have felt no shame whatsoever. I guess nudity is not a sin, but how we react to it in the wrong way is.

We are born in a state of acting or being acted upon. We determine which one to choose every day for multiple reasons. We choose to lust or to have virtue garnish our thoughts.
Having said this, however, what about art classes where a nude model is present hour after hour every day? Is that type of setting wrong. Is it lust promoting?

How about a complete stranger helping a baby come into the world on the sidewalk bench or in a cab, etc. A woman may or may not have an immediate ride to a hospital depending on where they are when labor begins. Also, there are women that deliver in a matter of minutes and some take days.

Some form of nudity occurs every day, so it depends on the actions and reactions of the persons involved, right?

[Finrock]

For some reason, I doubt spirits are watching us nude.

I would think that every person that dies, they are as naked as the day they were born. Don't spirits of the dead see them? Maybe they are given invisible clothing so we can't see the spirits, huh? We're told that our spirit hangs around until the body is put to rest. Anyone heard the opposite?

Many times I have gotten on my knees and prayed while nude and have felt no shame whatsoever. I guess nudity is not a sin, but how we react to it in the wrong way is.

We are born in a state of acting or being acted upon. We determine which one to choose every day for multiple reasons. We choose to lust or to have virtue garnish our thoughts.
Having said this, however, what about art classes where a nude model is present hour after hour every day? Is that type of setting wrong. Is it lust promoting?

How about a complete stranger helping a baby come into the world on the sidewalk bench or in a cab, etc. A woman may or may not have an immediate ride to a hospital depending on where they are when labor begins. Also, there are women that deliver in a matter of minutes and some take days.

Some form of nudity occurs every day, so it depends on the actions and reactions of the persons involved, right?

I agree with you. Like I said, it comes down to lust or in other words, intent. There is no shame in nudity and God sees all that we do and sees us in every situation. He's seen and knows perfectly every porn movie that has ever been made. He has witnessed every perversion, yet, clearly God does not lust and is not committing sin.

Clearly we are going to have to overcome our lust and not be afraid of nudity if we are going to be like God.

-Finrock

[Finrock]

I said that nudity in and of itself is not bad. I said it comes down to lust. Whether its provoking lust or lusting, it's about lust.

It sounds like you are trying to say that if someone provokes you to lust, then the person provoking is guilty, but the person lusting is not because they are being provoked.

You can look at porn and not list and it is normal and okay. Law enforcement do it all of the time. Others have overcome lust.

We don't have to lust even if provoked. But lusting is the issue, not nudity in and of itself.

-Finrock

I suspect the purveyors of porn will be held accountable for the acts that occurred as the porn is created and for provoking lust in the people who view the porn. The viewers will be held accountable for their own immoral action as well as giving their support to purveyors of porn so they can financially benefit from their sinful creations.

I agree.

-Finrock

[freedomforall]

For some reason, I doubt spirits are watching us nude.

I would think that every person that dies, they are as naked as the day they were born. Don't spirits of the dead see them? Maybe they are given invisible clothing so we can't see the spirits, huh? We're told that our spirit hangs around until the body is put to rest. Anyone heard the opposite?

Many times I have gotten on my knees and prayed while nude and have felt no shame whatsoever. I guess nudity is not a sin, but how we react to it in the wrong way is.

We are born in a state of acting or being acted upon. We determine which one to choose every day for multiple reasons. We choose to lust or to have virtue garnish our thoughts.
Having said this, however, what about art classes where a nude model is present hour after hour every day? Is that type of setting wrong. Is it lust promoting?

How about a complete stranger helping a baby come into the world on the sidewalk bench or in a cab, etc. A woman may or may not have an immediate ride to a hospital depending on where they are when labor begins. Also, there are women that deliver in a matter of minutes and some take days.

Some form of nudity occurs every day, so it depends on the actions and reactions of the persons involved, right?

I agree with you. Like I said, it comes down to lust or in other words, intent. There is no shame in nudity and God sees all that we do and sees us in every situation. He's seen and knows perfectly every porn movie that has ever been made. He has witnessed every perversion, yet, clearly God does not lust and is not committing sin.

Clearly we are going to have to overcome our lust and not be afraid of nudity if we are going to be like God.

-Finrock

And I'm not advocating going to a naked body, infested beach. From what I gather, round people aren't that glamorous. Not all nudity is picture perfect. I guess it was a good thing that there were no fast food joints in the days of Adam and Eve while in the garden.

[Thinker]

I read a quote that really hit me, and I think is applicable to this topic... “Shame derives its power from being unspeakable.” -B. Brown
Several points based on that quote:

1) In John & Hebrews, it says something like, "In the beginning was the Word, ... and the Word was God." I used to think that Word (in that context) meant Spirit, and I still do, but I think it means much more - consciousness (I AM THAT I AM) but expressed. There are power in words.
2) We all need to communicate - by putting feelings into words, we can acknowledge, process, manage and heal them.
3) Free speech is imperative to free agency, and essential to expressing who we are in any given moment.
4) I'm grateful the USA still honors free speech, though it is under attack.
5) I'm sad that free speech is not honored in the church. How much shame builds and becomes worse addictions primarily because there is nobody to which they can safely share their burden, so the burden builds and builds.

God created us as fallible human beings with needs like to eat, to have sex, etc. Sex seems to be such a shame-based topic and the shame is the enemy to healing. How can someone heal something without being able to address it and talk about it? I think this is why so many in the church are struggling with porn. I'm not suggesting that people who allow themselves to be addicted to porn are without response-ability, only that many around them are sabotaging their healing and sometimes helping cause a problem that wouldn't be a problem if there was less shame surrounding it.

[Fiannan]

The more you study the trends of the future the more this will be a moot issue. Virtual reality and robots will put pornographers out of business. Of course the advanced technology will merely make conventional porn obsolete.

[Thinker]

The more you study the trends of the future the more this will be a moot issue. Virtual reality and robots will put pornographers out of business. Of course the advanced technology will merely make conventional porn obsolete.

On another forum, which tends to have a lot of Leftists, once again, I gave an unpopular opinion - this time that human beings are better than robots, sexually and in other ways. LOL Maybe I should be crying - how many people were falling for such. Some were justifying it as a population control method. Others were complaining about Feminism and how women hate men anyway - so robots would be easier. I gave these links and explained that we're already seeing how technology is hurting us - badly, when you consider that social connection is the highest indicator of longevity in that study (done at BYU).

https://www.yourmodernfamily.com/scary- ... ting-kids/

https://www.ted.com/talks/susan_pinker_ ... ocial_life

[thisisspartaaa]

The more you study the trends of the future the more this will be a moot issue. Virtual reality and robots will put pornographers out of business. Of course the advanced technology will merely make conventional porn obsolete.

Somebody needs to stop listening to Glenn beck.

[BruceRGilbert]

I read a quote that really hit me, and I think is applicable to this topic... “Shame derives its power from being unspeakable.” -B. Brown
Several points based on that quote:

1) In John & Hebrews, it says something like, "In the beginning was the Word, ... and the Word was God." I used to think that Word (in that context) meant Spirit, and I still do, but I think it means much more - consciousness (I AM THAT I AM) but expressed. There are power in words.
2) We all need to communicate - by putting feelings into words, we can acknowledge, process, manage and heal them.
3) Free speech is imperative to free agency, and essential to expressing who we are in any given moment.
4) I'm grateful the USA still honors free speech, though it is under attack.
5) I'm sad that free speech is not honored in the church. How much shame builds and becomes worse addictions primarily because there is nobody to which they can safely share their burden, so the burden builds and builds.

God created us as fallible human beings with needs like to eat, to have sex, etc. Sex seems to be such a shame-based topic and the shame is the enemy to healing. How can someone heal something without being able to address it and talk about it? I think this is why so many in the church are struggling with porn. I'm not suggesting that people who allow themselves to be addicted to porn are without response-ability, only that many around them are sabotaging their healing and sometimes helping cause a problem that wouldn't be a problem if there was less shame surrounding it.

It isn't about what happens "outside" of us as much as what happens "inside" of us. In learning to "school" our thoughts and our feelings, we have been presented with powerful stimuli. I concur with your observation that these things need to be talked about and now, for me, is a good time.

Shame is brought about by "FEAR" and is not of faith. It is the fear of being rejected and arises out of deep concern of what "significant" others may think and judge. In the Garden, Lucifer created the fear of being naked, and, hence, shame. God didn't care before that they were naked, nor do I believe, after. He created skins for them to wear because of the practicality of Him covering them and in preparation for a harsh environment. Of course, a preliminary event that occurred was the witnessing of animal sacrifice, (lambs), to provide the means from which to clothe them. It was in this "sacrifice" that the association was made that God would cover them. It is fitting that such raiment have symbolism and meaning. It was to be used as such so that Adam, Eve and their posterity would learn to control themselves and to not rely on "external" things to bring about "internal" feelings and thoughts.

It is the "internal" paradox of "holes and wholes" involving the progressive nature of "rain, rein, and reign."

I find it very interesting that "Nudists" aren't controlled by their "external" environment. I would suppose that to them it is no big deal to witness nudity. The problem; therefore, has "internal" well springs. It has more to do with not attaining fulfillment in something more than just physical gratification, and I would venture that that has to do with not feeling wanted or needed in the truest of senses. It may have to do with the type of nurturing that is needed, but not obtained. Too, there is this idea of "elastic rebounding." I will share a story to illustrate that point:

I had an opportunity to speak very candidly with a co-worker of mine who "use to be" L.D.S. Knowing that I was real and non-judgmental, he confided in me as to why he had "stepped away." He said that for years and years he had been told not to drink coffee. He stated that after awhile, he became curious as to "why" and what happens to a person when they do. He and a bunch of his friends planned an experiment to find out what all the "hub bub" was about. They "secreted" away the means and the makings, getting together in a "private" setting and executed their plan. He partook. He told me that he waited to see what would happen and what he might feel. He was very disappointed in the realization that it wasn't sudden or dramatic. To him, it was much adieu about nothing. I have to admit, that for him, it probably was. It is a "personal" matter. We don't all have the same weaknesses and dispositions. (I am a convert and I knew all about coffee, tea, alcohol, and the like. I had experienced those things and their prohibition wasn't some great secretive type of mystery.) "Elastic rebounding" is akin to what happens when you place a credit card in your hand and exert pressure on it. It will bend one way in conforming to the stress. If you will, for a moment, push the bend the other direction, it will snap radically the other way in a "rebounding" action - hence, "elastic rebound." So, if you tell certain people "NO" long enough and over-emphasize, they will attempt to find out why.

In society, it is blatantly obvious as to why to avoid premarital sex, fornication and adultery. It leads to a great deal of "dysfunctionality" and unhappiness. I can assure you, that just like the memory of a first kiss, an event of that nature cannot be forgotten. The problem with pornography is that, not only is it the result of "improper nurturing," but, too, is the perpetrator of such. There are always more victims than just that individual who succumbs. For married spouses, it is particularly problematic because one is attempting to gain "being wanted and needed," while the other is loosing that very same quest. Think about it and understand its "cyclic" destructive power.

Thinker, I very much agree with what you have pointed out: "How can someone heal something without being able to address it and talk about it?"It is not a "victimless" problem.

The sin of Sodom and Gomorrah was not what others attempted to establish on this forum:

Jude 1:
7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

8 Likewise also these filthy dreamers defile the flesh, despise dominion, and speak evil of dignities.

Sex can be a great servant, but a poor master.

Galatians 4:
22 For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman.

23 But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise.

24 Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.

25 For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.

26 But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.

27 For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for the desolate hath many more children than she which hath an husband.

28 Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise.

29 But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now.

30 Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.

31 So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free.