pornography

[answerbag]

Is pornography any less sinful if the actors are married to each other? Is pornography any less sinful if created for the spouses' private use? Why or why not?

[Androcles]

What's up? Won't they buy the polaroids of you and the OH?

[Mr Veritas]

I think Pornography is Pornography,no matter what the definitions of it are (as you state).

[joggerjayne]

You can't start a discussion based on the premise

that pornography is inherently sinful.

Whichever way we answer this question, there would have to be a tacit acceptance of the basic premise.

Personally, the sort of things that I regard as sinful are

cruelty to people or animals

wasting resources

supporting Crystal Palace

... things like that.

Not pornography.



Love,
Seagull
x

[rojash]

^^^ Wot she said

(except, I know nothing of football, so can't comment on supporting Crystal Palace).

[joggerjayne]

Proper Brightonians support Brighton ... obviously.

In the days when Crystal Palace were a bit more successful

(dim and distant past)

disloyal Brightonians chose to support Palace, instead.

So, amongst proper Brightonians ...

... supporting Palace is a No No.



Love,
JJ
Loyal Seagulls fan
Brighton

[Whickerman]

Porno, so long as it's between consenting adults, is no more or less sinful than sex.

If you consider sex as a private matter and you are religious, the concept of sin creeps in (or rather kicks the door down and takes control). If not, it's not and is seen as what it should be - a natural bodily function. (And not just for procreation either - if it were just for making babies, women wouldn't orgasm)

Personally, I have no issue with either.