|
Thirty-six
years ago, police arrested storeowner Sam Ginsberg for
selling pornography to a sixteen-year- old boy. Ginsburg
claimed that anti-pornography laws violated his First
Amendment rights. The Supreme Court disagreed, and its
decision reveals why, when it comes to fighting filth,
we need to sharpen our worldview weapons.
In
a ruling that sounds almost quaint today, Justice William
Brennan said that parents are entitled to the law's help
in protecting the well being of their children. Moreover,
he added, the state had its own interest in safeguarding
children from abuses that might prevent their growth into
well-developed citizens.
Today,
as Princeton philosopher Robert George observes, a great
many people would disagree with Brennan's conclusion.
Instead, they embrace the dissenting view of Justice William
Douglas, who ridiculed porn foes as people who are "propelled
by their own neuroses."
Tragically,
as George writes in his splendid new book, The Clash of
Orthodoxies, many judges agree with Douglas. Yes, porn
shocks and offends, they acknowledge. But they claim that
"putting up with being shocked and offended is the
price we must pay for the great blessing of freedom of
expression."
George
reminds us that pornography's harm is not its capacity
to shock and offend, but, rather, its tendency to corrupt
and deprave. Laws regulating pornography are, and always
have been, about preventing moral corruption, not preventing
an offense.
Of
course, this view challenges a key tenet of the liberal
secular worldview in that it presupposes that pornography
is a source of moral corruption.
For
liberal secularism, it's an article of faith that within
the sexual realm, anything consenting adults agree to
is morally acceptable. But Christianity teaches that God
intended sexual relations to serve both a unitive and
procreative function within the bonds of marriage. Pornography
corrupts because it undermines our capacity to understand
sexual relations as anything other than self-gratification.
It teaches us to regard our own bodies and the bodies
of others as mere instruments of sexual pleasure -- that
is, sex objects. Ultimately, pornography leads to sexuality
that is impulsive, selfish, out of control. In the name
of freedom, it enslaves people to their own basest desires.
Intellectually
honest defenders of an alleged "right" to pornography
admit that porn damages the interests of non-users and
harms the community. Liberal philosopher Ronald Dworkin
writes that access to porn "sharply limits the ability
of parents to bring about a cultural structure . . . in
which sexual experience generally has dignity and beauty."
Even worse, pornographic fantasies lead to real-world
horrors: the abuse and exploitation of women and children.
This
is why we need to work for laws to combat pornography.
We shouldn't let the multi-billion dollar porn industry
get away with claiming that
we're simply prudes or neurotics. We must make the argument
that pornography corrupts our children and degrades our
entire culture, dangerous to the common good.
And
closer to home, we must warn our kids that consuming pornography
makes it harder for them to become good husbands, wives,
and parents. Reading Robert George's The Clash of Orthodoxies
will help you make these arguments -- arguments that can
be, both at home and in the public square, worthy weapons
in the war of worldviews. Robert George, The Clash of
Orthodoxies (Intercollegiate Studies Inst., 2001). http://www.pfmonline.net/products.taf?_function=deta
Visit
our website at http://www.breakpoint.org
Copyright
(c) 2001 Prison Fellowship Ministries. Reprinted with
permission.
"BreakPoint with Chuck Colson" is a radio ministry
of Prison Fellowship Ministries.
|
