Child Porn

If you like to keep your head in the sand then stop reading now.

I was so upset to read an article in today’s Denver Post:
Child-porn sentences too severe, judges say.

It’s about a group of judges who think the sentencing guidelines are too severe for possessing and viewing child-porn. My guess is that the victims and their families would disagree.

From what I read, the judges must not think child-porn is a big deal. It amazes me that these judges with their many degrees and lofty jobs act like idiots. Morality must be a foreign concept to them.

Here are some of the judge’s quotes and my comments:

"We do not see producers (of child porn) or the parents who sell their children or the stepfathers who attack them," Kane told the commission in October. "What we see are the men on dialysis confined to a wheelchair who spends all of his time confined already and no economic analysis of what it would cost to keep this man in prison."
U.S. District Judge John L. Kane

Is this guy for real? Is that really the only type of person who comes before his bench? What a shame that he would act like the child porn viewer is no threat – just sitting at home not hurting anyone.

Kane testified there is no empirical research referenced in the sentencing schemes to indicate whether long prison sentences will stop defendants from re-offending or help them overcome their compulsions by the time they get out of prison.

At least if they are in prison we know children are safe from them. Part of going to prison is punishment. If we can do something to help them “overcome their compulsions” that is great but a nice long prison sentence may help too.

"It is too often the case that a defendant appears to be a social misfit looking at dirty pictures in the privacy of his own home without any real prospect of touching or otherwise acting out as to any person," U.S. District Judge Robin J. Cauthron of Oklahoma City said in her testimony to the commission. "As foul as child pornography is, I am unpersuaded by the suggestion that a direct link has been proven between viewing child porn and molesting children."
U.S. District Judge Robin J. Cauthron

So all they are is “dirty pictures”? She speaks of “the privacy of his own home” in a way that makes me wonder is she thinks it is acceptable behavior. And how does she know that there isn’t “any real prospect of touching or otherwise acting out as to any person”. She must be a mystic as well. She goes on to say that she is “unpersuaded” that there is a link between viewing child-pornography and molesting children. Well I’m sure that not every viewer goes on to molest but has there ever been a molester who wasn’t a viewer first?

There was a sane voice in the article. Here is what Ernie Allen, president and chief executive of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, said:

"There are too many judges who continue to provide token sentences for what we consider to be serious crimes," Allen said. "These are images of prepubescent children, growing numbers of them infants and toddlers, and they trade with each other for purposes of arousal and breaking down the inhibitions of other children."

Allen said educating the judiciary about the impact of child pornography on victims is key.

"We are not in favor of disproportionate sentencing or disparities, but the problem here is too many judges who simply do not recognize how serious these crimes are," he said.

Yes, these judges in their ivory towers don’t recognize how serious child-pornography is and where it leads. I hope God raises up a voice to silence their ignorant ramblings.

Another concern I have is that this liberalized attitude is the same one that preceded the mainstreaming of regular pornography and much of the sex industry.

May God have mercy on our country.

Philip

The Manhattan Declaration

The following is from The Manhattan Declaration. I have read the full document (about 7 pages) and signed it. Take a look for yourself. It is a solid document and worth our support.

Christians, when they have lived up to the highest ideals of their faith, have defended the weak and vulnerable and worked tirelessly to protect and strengthen vital institutions of civil society, beginning with the family.

We are Orthodox, Catholic, and evangelical Christians who have united at this hour to reaffirm fundamental truths about justice and the common good, and to call upon our fellow citizens, believers and non-believers alike, to join us in defending them. These truths are:

   1. the sanctity of human life
   2. the dignity of marriage as the conjugal union of husband and wife
   3. the rights of conscience and religious liberty.

Inasmuch as these truths are foundational to human dignity and the well-being of society, they are inviolable and non-negotiable. Because they are increasingly under assault from powerful forces in our culture, we are compelled today to speak out forcefully in their defense, and to commit ourselves to honoring them fully no matter what pressures are brought upon us and our institutions to abandon or compromise them. We make this commitment not as partisans of any political group but as followers of Jesus Christ, the crucified and risen Lord, who is the Way, the Truth, and the Life.

The Manhattan Declaration

Philip

Health Care Reform?

Funny video about ObamaCare.



Philip

Delight or Destruction

I was thinking about Psalm 1 this morning.

Blessed is the man who walks not in the counsel of the wicked, nor stands in the way of sinners, nor sits in the seat of scoffers; but his delight is in the law of the Lord, and on his law he meditates day and night. He is like a tree planted by streams of water that yields its fruit in its season, and its leaf does not wither. In all that he does, he prospers. The wicked are not so, but are like chaff that the wind drives away. Therefore the wicked will not stand in the judgment, nor sinners in the congregation of the righteous; for the Lord knows the way of the righteous, but the way of the wicked will perish.
Psalms 1:1-6

Where do we walk, where do we stand and where do we sit? Who and what do we hang out with? Where do we find delight? Who do we fellowship with? What do we meditate on?

As I look at the contrast between hanging out with the wicked, the sinners and the scoffers versus delighting in the law of the Lord I think it is either one or the other. If we are delighting in God’s word we will not put ourselves in compromising situations. If we are enjoying the bad company then we won’t be in God’s word.

I know many people say we need to be engaged with unbelievers but I think the problem comes when the relationship switches from evangelism to a peer relationship. Scripture is clear in 1 Corinthians 15:33 that bad company corrupts good morals.

I don’t think is just speaks of people either. Television and movies are a great source of wickedness, sin and scoffing. It is the fool who thinks they can watch the latest and greatest Hollywood has to offer and not be changed for the worse.

An Eskimo fisherman came to town every Saturday afternoon. He always brought his two dogs with him. One was white and the other was black. He had taught them to fight on command. Every Saturday afternoon in the town square the people would gather and these two dogs would fight and the fisherman would take bets. On one Saturday, the black dog would win; another Saturday the white dog would win - but the fisherman always won! His friends began to ask him how he did it. He said, "I starve one and feed the other. The one I feed always wins because he is stronger.
From "The Holy Spirit: Activating God's Power in Your Life," by Billy Graham (1978)

The benefit of hanging out in God’s word is clear. There will be good fruit, endurance and prosperity. The choice should be easy yet the call of the world and its delights is loud and unending. Only one is going to win.

Philip