Was reading Digg today, and found a link to an article about decency. Or more specifically, an interview of a person who wrote a book about decency in America.
The upshot of it all seems to be that there is a war going on in America. A Decency War (C). This war is taking place between the religious right (a crusade against sex and nudity and such) and people who want boobs on TV.
One of the basic premises of the book seems to be that this war has been increasing in intensity over the past 30 years or so. The author seems to think that, while the issue has been around for a while, people haven't cared about it much before now.
Now, sex has been around for a while. And for as long as it has been around, sex has been described in whatever medium men had at hand. I also think that there have always been people who cared about whether or not their children had access to this media.
The change that's happened over the last 30 years isn't with the issue, or with people's opinions on it. I think that the difference we've seen over recent decades is one towards reliance on our government.
To quote the author of the book in question, "the breast-baring accidents of Hollywood actors such as Faye Emerson and Jayne Mansfield did not result in any mass campaigns for 'family values.'" This is true, but not because people didn't care.
If people have a problem with what is on TV, they should turn off the TV. Media is not forced upon us. If popular media has become too objectionable – (and, for the record, I think that popular media reflects popular culture – not the other way around) – then we should disconnect ourselves from the popular media.
But Americans today (even the radical right-wing religious folks) have become too dependent on their government. They don't have the balls to remove themselves from the popular media – they want big brother to do it for them.
#1 by Motherpearl on 2006-10-11 - 22:11
So, do you disconnect yourself from the popular media? Where do you stand in all this??
#2 by Anonymous on 2006-10-11 - 22:36
The issue wasn't whether or not I find something objectionable, it was whether or not the government should be deciding what is objectionable!
#3 by frazzledsister on 2006-12-16 - 20:51
12/16/06 Well, I just read this again – trying to decide if it's too embarrassing to include in the family Christmas letter.
I think it's okay to have the government keep a high moral standard – it will be better for our country. For example, pornography is not allowable in the freedom of speech right because of indecency and the violence it perpetuates. Just as murder is not a freedom that is allowed because it infringes on the rights of others. The difficulty is deciding on where the line is.
Granted it would be wonderful if we had revival in the country and people would just turn off immorality from the screen, but it's also allowable for the government to set standards on what is legal and not. There use to be strict standards on what was shown on prime time TV – no skin, no swearing, etc. Maybe those standards were set by the industry and society though. Uncle Eric says I am a liberal in morality because I believe there are standards that the government can enforce – no abortion, murder, pornography, etc. But I am a conservative in economics because I want freedom from government intrusion in that area of life.
If there is freedom to degenerate, then it will be one step in the process of the ruination of our country.
Mom, not Emi
#4 by Conscience on 2011-02-11 - 10:33
Just briefed some of the stuff from ISoft, as someone was pointing out something to me today, and a few button clicks later . . . here I am.
You give an intelligent perspective . . . I wish more people could present their thoughts as clearly.
I’m not a Biblical Law Scholar but if one reads the entire Bible there is no way around reading The Laws and id hope coming to some understanding The Laws impact upon ourselves- that we are sinners.
My guess is that, nudity was not intended to be a sin; else even Adam and Eve would have been created clothed.
One only has to grow up near live stock to understand that Gods Creatures have the same biological happenings; defecation, urination, procreation . . . It wouldn't even surprise me to find out that a-sexual organisms have these same functions; but I’m not a biologist.
The sin we are confident about in your examples is our own lust, not someone else’s behavior we happen to witness. Some people are offended because they believe they can protect others from their own weakness of engaging in sin and the curse that goes along with sin.
If I go horseback riding and the horse ahead of mine defecates or urinates and I see it (yuck), I don't fear Gods wrath. Same thing if two sheep in the barn are at work in breading (again yuck).
I’m not suggesting we should seek out these sights -believe me. But when they appear; in the acts of people, before us, in media we can be mindful of our own failings and, like you say ‘ . . . don't be afraid to unplug.'
The thing we might want to re-consider is; can we really protect others or even ourselves against sin? If one of your readers believes so, if anyone believes so, they are more then arrogant, and they need at least one more read through The Bible. Our only hope is to set up methods to direct and re-direct attention, even our own, back to how we receive The Gift of Atonement.
I would be interested, however, if you or someone you know could document, using The Bible, that nudity itself is a sin.