Chandler, Joey…Porn is not Funny!

Oct 14, 2006 | Pop Culture/Politics, Spiritual | 4 comments

In the midst of the laughter I was always sickened when FRIENDS would make a porn joke. “Porn Joke.” It’s an oximoron.

Today it has come to my attention that yet another marriage has been ruined (in part) by the perversion of porn.
These days we don’t watch FRIENDS- we watch Dancing with the Stars and this morning we were saddened to hear that the supposedly happy marriage of Sara Evans is coming to an end. “They” say she will be dropping off of Dancing with the Stars to focus on picking of the horrible broken pieces and I am sure to comfort her children who have been subjected to the smut that her husband brought into their house. The details are even too much for the Parisienne Farmhouse.

Porn needs to be outlawed. Bottom line. Yes, that’s what I said,


“But what about “art”?
Can’t you hear it now how people (the A.C.L.U.) would freak out if someone tried to ban porn. People having sex with each other (and Lord knows who, and what else) is NOT art.

Hey, those who know me, know that I am no prude. I, quite frankly find “tasteful” photographs of women, beautiful and appreciate them but I would be willing to sacrifice a scantily clad photograph of Heidi Klum on the walls of Victoria’s Secret if it meant that the men in my life, the boys in my life, the men in your life, the boys in your life could be spared from the addictive handiwork of the Devil that is: porn.


The availability of porn is unreal. As mothers and wives we must fight to keep this garbage out of our homes. Cancel HBO, (if you think you can’t live without the Sopranos then download the episodes), Refuse to watch crap like Nip/Tuck. Block MTV from your kids. If you think your husband in any way could be tempted (and don’t be nieve) put concrete filters on those computers, keep them in the living room. Don’t be fooled and think it couldn’t happen to you and your family. Sweet, “Republican” Christian, Sara Evans I am sure would agree with me with her whole heart.

The devil is a roaming lion, the Bible says, seeking whom he may devour.

We have a generation of men being consumed, devoured by Porn.

Surely the Father is weeping.


  1. Amanda

    Amen to that! It’s critical to protect your heart from this crap!

  2. Platonicus Booknutticus

    For the sake of argument, what do you say to the ACLU lawyer who asks you how you distinguish between porn and art?

    For instance (ala Larry Flynt) when you’re asked if you’ve ever paid an admission price to a museum where there were nude paintings by one of the masters?

    If you have done so (and you have), then you’ve paid money to see nudity.

    How then will you level your argument?

    In your blog you made the ‘tasteful/not-tasteful distinction’, but of course that won’t carry you past the next question from the ACLU lawyer, which is “who are you to impose YOUR standards of taste on others”?


    Further, suppose our litigator then asked you about the Sopranos, and whether or not this too was an instance of you paying for entertainment where nudity was involved? If you don’t steal cable or steal downloaded movies, then the answer is yes. If you do steal cable or downloaded moves, then you have a lot of nerve moralizing when you’re, in fact, a thief.

    These are important considerations.
    How do you respond?

  3. Parisienne Farmgirl

    Only a minute so I’ll go fast—

    First, I heard Ravi present this question and I waited with baited breath for the answer –
    of “course taste/not tasteful” is in a great way personal and I should begin by saying that on second thought I would not be willing to give up a picture of Giselle peaking over a bare shoulder on the walls of Victoria’s Secret.

    I suppose that would then have to mean that I remove by Venus de Milo statue from my coffee table and Botecellis Venus from my TV cabinet.

    Perhaps a short blog on porn does not do the arguement justice and my case had many cracks. But, “standards of taste” be damned, I think *people having actually having sex with each other, the same sex and heaven knows what/who else is clearly porn. Perhaps for the sake of society and the undeinable attack on masqulinity these days a line could be drawn there* since it seems highly unlikely that NUDITY would ever be outlawed.

    Our society functions in so many gray areas already (by that I mean they are content to refuse to identify things as black and white…IE some mind altering drugs are legal some are illegal, killing a pregnant women is a double homicide but abortion is legal…) why should they have such a problem with picking a line (tasteful/not tasteful) and going with it?

    Money. Huge companies that we all use every day would loose money. As usual, the health of our society be damned.

    “At least” the Sopranos is marketing to their own demographic. Hundreds of thousands of porn sights of created every day to literally ensnare children – the simple mis-spelling of a word like “Disney” can lead you to a porn sight on the internet. They create them with names that they KNOW children will stumble upon.

    Next year porn is going to be available on CELL PHONES! That is JUST what we need. Twelve year olds texting porn flicks back and forth to each other.

    And the ACLU – they are sick. They actually FOUGHT to keep internet filters out of public libraries! Can you imagine what a playground for child molester to sit there viewing that crap and preying on the next child that walks into the bathroom alone. Nothing like FREE porn.

    OK- now babes is pulling on my leg and I am just spouting off things that seem so wrong I can’t stand it. I do think there has to be a line. I do think SOME thing needs to be outlawed.

    And if it takes a sinless person to point out something that is immoral then let’s just shut the courts down and any institutions of moral instruction, including the church and call it a day.

    While we have no justification for downloading movies or songs that are not ours these “considerations” seem to pale in comparison to generation after generation being completely and utterly ruined from an addiction to porn leading them to lives of rape, child abuse, ruined marriages and a continual lust for more.

    I appreciate the “
    devils advocate” argument.

  4. Platonicus Booknutticus

    Yeah, Ravi’s intuition is really interesting on this. He doesn’t say it explicitly, but I got the impression that he was challenging us to consider if there even is a reasonable and consistent argument we could even supply the ‘grandmasters’ with.

    Again, he doesn’t say overtly, but his relation of the anecdote about Michaelangelo (?) and his teacher is interesting.

    I want to see them as God sees them.

    But you’re not God.

    If, in our position, we found that we had to propose the same about nude sculpture, painting, (etc.) if we are to remain consistent in our principle… that’s a tough sell. Cause I know that that stuff just doesn’t strike us as ’embodying’ the problem.

    And I think maybe the reason it doesn’t is a clue towards a proper reply. It seems to be bound up in the ‘intent’ of the one creating the image/sculpture/painting (etc.).

    This ‘intentional’ aspect of the relationship seems to be the source of whatever quality it is that the product ends up having that we find ‘pornographic’.

    However, this may be of no help, for now we’ve thrown ourselves into a “judging intentions” situation.

    That’s a precarious place to be.

    It’s hard to get around in this particular discussion. What is “wrong” seems so intuitively obvious, and difficult to lay a precise, logical finger on.

    I’m reminded of the passage that commands us not to “Cause our brother’s to stumble” though, and clearly this has to be considered for a place in the argument as well.


Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published.

Search Posts

Blog Categories

Archives by Date