“The Ballad of East and West,” is a poem that was written by the English journalist, novelist, and poet, Rudyard Kipling. It begins with the familiar line: “Oh, East is East, and West is West, and never the twain shall meet.” Although the poem is not about physical directions on a magnetic compass, if compared with right and wrong which are opposite directions on a moral compass, the statement holds true -- never the twain shall meet.
Applying this good-versus-evil scale to the subject here, it is my opinion that pornography is wrong. It has been equated with free speech by those who produce and distribute it. It is excused as being “victimless” by those who use it. Those rationalizations have resulted in damaging America’s soul; a soul over which there seems to be a battle, sacred and secular, in progress.
It was reported that last month, in an Atlanta area school board meeting, the school superintendent pledged to protect students from pornographic material. Opponents characterized his actions to remove pornography in the guise of instructional materials from the district schools as a “book ban.” Also, a parent who is an ordained minister had his microphone cut off and was escorted by police from a school board meeting in Asheville, North Carolina. He received this treatment because he dared read from and exhibit illustrations in a book he protested as being inappropriate for its pictorial and verbal depictions of various sexual acts.
In the same week, it was also reported that during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on censorship of children’s and adolescent books, one of the committee members read from sexually graphic portions of two volumes found in public school libraries of multiple states. The Louisiana Senator asked the testifying proponent why only teachers and librarians should be allowed to decide what is appropriate on school library shelves and what purpose there is in blocking the input of parents who have legitimate concerns for their children’s well-being including protection from pornography. No legitimate explanation was given.
The adverse effect of exposing children to pornography is only part of the story. Statistics document the significant impact of pornography on adults and marriages. It follows that conflict resolutions that result in divorce have an impact on children.
This information is no revelation. Warnings can be found in the Old Testament and New Testament of the Bible and in the writings of the Quran.
But libertarian proponents of pornography do not accept the authority of religion or ancient wisdom. This fits with the trend of religious belief in America. Projections show Christians of all ages shrinking from 64% to just above one-third (35%) of all Americans by 2070. Over that same period, those with no set religious beliefs (“nones”) could rise from the current 30% up to 52% of the U.S. population.
There are many studies that show the dangers of this phenomenon especially for children. Yet the industry has grown since 2005 when it was estimated that 11,000 pornographic films were being made annually, compared with Hollywood’s yearly production of 400. (Eberstadt, at p.13 (citation omitted).) And access and use have expanded since 2008 when approximately 28,000 internet users were viewing pornography every second of the day. More troubling, every day twenty years ago there were an estimated 116,000 online searches for child pornography. Ask yourself what are those figures today?
Before its appearance in schools, it was already recognized that “the prevalence of pornography in the lives of many children and adolescents is far more significant than most adults realize, that pornography is deforming the healthy sexual development of these young viewers, and that it is used to exploit children and adolescents. Pornography is not a private, harmless predilection but a real significant danger” to the emotional and spiritual well-being and development of children. And its adverse cultural effect also concerns marriages and families.
There are U.S. Supreme Court cases interpreting the Constitutional issues involving pornography. I am not as familiar with them as are other more accomplished contributors to this newspaper. Those writers can address the legal aspects concerning pornography in American jurisprudence.
However, in the above-referenced news stories it seems that the criticisms of and challenges to those who would restrict school-age children’s access and exposure to books and other inappropriate sources (most significant being those on the internet) in public schools and general public libraries are based on First Amendment rights under the US Constitution. Thus, the accusations of book banning made in the Atlanta school superintendent story.
In my opinion, parents are right to be concerned. Pornography is not victimless. And because it has become socially acceptable does not mean it is morally acceptable; especially not where the physical, mental, and moral wellbeing of children is involved. A legal right can be a moral wrong. Consider the subject of which we are still mindful today after its abolition 160 years ago - - slavery.
In my opinion the concern and, therefore, the question should be addressed on the priority basis of what is good for children, marriages, families, and, ultimately, the culture of the nation itself. Like the Supreme Court Justice famously said about pornography years ago, “I know it when I see it.” Well, so do I. And I believe that its production and distribution should be prohibited by the Congress and, like slavery, recognized by the Supreme Court for what it is: a false right and an evil that is tearing apart the social and moral fabric of our country. Until then, every legal measure should be taken to protect children from pornography, including legislation that recognizes parental rights surpass any state’s rights in matters of moral teaching.
Chip Williams is a Northsider.
