I remember signing up for Columbia House's irresistable 12 CDs for a penny offer several times before I turned twenty-five. Like most people, I would place my order, purchase the bare minimum and cancel my membership.
I guarantee that will never happen again for myself and many others. Why not?
Columbia House is entering the pornography business. The objectifier of women and the destroyer of men's souls, Pornography has a foothold in western civilization like I have never before seen. EVERYTHING is about sex, sex, sex. And many men can't get enough of it, according to the statistics surrounding this $12 Billion/year industry.
Columbia House is keeping awfully quiet about this, and I suspect they will make out like bandits in the long term. Hopefully there will be some sort of backlash in the short term. Shame on you, Columbia House.
It's Del.icio.us!
Furl It!
January 10, 2005 11:50 AM
Thanks for the "heads up" regarding Columbia's new venture Mr. Mayor. Here we go again proving the validity of the old maxim, "anything for a buck". Also, the porn explanation page was excellent! IMHO
January 10, 2005 03:22 PM
I just got a few minutes to check this page and decided to post something about this issue. It is a shame that so many places are buying into the profit made from porn, and it would be nice to see a society less bombarded with interest in only s@x for s@x's sake. I agree wholeheartedly that so many people are taken in buy the idea of s@x for power, money, and things such as good looks is something that is destroying many lives. However, after reading the "definitions" of porn that are listed here, I must disagree. It is true that so many people become addicted to distorted views of s@xuality and take this to the extreme in cases of pedophilia and r#pe, but a lot of this is because of a lack of proper education about the real problems of s@xuality as well as a focus in media and pop culture of s@x without love. I think a lot of this is a backlash to the consistent TABOO of s@xuality in our culture that was brought about by religion and a refusal to talk about s@x in a realistic way so that people understand it and can use it in a proper fashion. This "definitions" page is an example of this type of thinking. It is NOT education, but another attempt to make s@x TABOO and lead to more confusion. It says basically that all porn is completely bad, has no value,and is basically a sin. Why do you think many people turn to porn and other misguided views on s@x as a tool to learn from? Because all they have heard all their lives is that s@x out of marriage is a sin and they are horrible people for having "thoughts of the flesh". They have rebelled against those teachings to the other extreme. What we need in this culture is REAL education about s@x and not just some other thing telling that s@x is a horrible sin. Just because some people view porn does not make them horrible and unloving. Those who use s@x as a tool to objectify women and instill power are wrong. A culture that only believes in s@x without any feeling and money is wrong. But porn in and of itself can actually sometimes be a "tool" for enhancing someone's s@x life. Let's focus on education here instead of condemnation.
January 10, 2005 09:38 PM
Robert,
Sex is a beautiful thing. God created it and not only approves of it, but condones it.. in its proper context... which is marriage. Outside of marriage, it IS a sin.
The Songs of Songs in the Old Testament contains a lovely picture of what sex between a man and a woman is supposed to be. Anything less then this is settling for less than God's best.
Those who have come against sex in the name of "religion" are not being Biblical. They are merely people attempting to be self-righteous. There is a huge difference between what God says and what people say that God says. Too often the two are in direct opposition. When that is the case, I will always believe God instead of man.
Joel
January 10, 2005 09:56 PM
Fair enough. I am glad that you at least try to understand where some people are coming from in their confusion about s@x and not one who condemns it entirely. Our best chance at making a better future for those who come after us is education. But one question - how many people have you known that did get married, waited until marriage to have s@x, and tried as hard as they could to make the relationship work, until it finally failed and they got divorced. The divorce rate in this country is something like 70 percent now. Did waiting for s@x in marriage really help them? They found out years later that they were not compatible. Why would it be a sin for those same people to have s@x out of marriage then? I think the Bible falls quite short at understanding the human situation and human feelings in situations such as these. I feel that the most important thing about s@x is LOVE, but you don't have to have marriage to have love. In many ways, marriage is a failing insitution in this country, but real love is something that can endure forever. S@x is an expression of that love. People that have s@x out of marriage but for love, even if it is a love that does not last, are NOT sinners and not wrong. They are only trying to find their path in life through trial and error.
January 11, 2005 01:00 AM
Excellent questions, Robert!
For one, statistics show that couples who have sex before marriage are less likely to stay married. Those who save themselves for marriage have a higher committment to each other.
But of course it isn't all about sex. The reason the divorce rate is so high is complex. But may I suggest that people don't truly take their vows seriously? When it comes down to it, people like to marry for better, not worse. The desire health, not sickness. The expect richer, not poorer. And the concept of "till death do we part" is lip service much of the time.
I suggest that many people are just quitters. Once you put aside the abusive relationships, where a separation is called for, and a divorce in circumstances where there is no change, the majority of divorces take place because reality strikes. People's expectations are shattered. They believe the grass will be greener elsewhere.
But the fact is that marriage is HARD WORK. It takes an incredible amount of committment and labor to make it work. Add kids to the equation and it gets exponentially more difficult.
Marriage isn't to be taken lightly. It isn't for cowards.
That said, I propose that sexual compatibility is not about sex. It is about the relationship between a man and his wife.
One thing you, and most in society, do not understand is the meaning of true love.
Love is NOT a feeling. It is not a noun. It is a verb. When the Bible speaks of love, it uses three different greek words. Eros, which is sexual love. Phileo, which is a friendship-like love. And Agape, which is real love. Agape love means seeking another person's highest good NO MATTER WHAT. This is the kind of love that successful marriages are built upon. Sexual love is really lust, more often than not. It is concerned with what "I" can get from the sexual relationship, rather than the needs of the partner.
REAL love is founded on the principle that if I love you, I will do whatever is in YOUR best interest. It is laying down your life for the one you love. It is not selfish.
In order to truly LOVE the person you are going to have sex with, a committment is required. If you are unable to commit to a person, are you REALLY able to love them? I think not.
The Bible makes way more sense and speaks to the human condition with wisdom far beyond that of humans. When people begin to pay attention, they will find that God's way really is the BEST way. :-)
June 19, 2005 12:41 PM
A-A-0A-001A-002A-003A-004A-0_programming_languageA-1A-10A-101A-102A-103A-104A-105A-10_ThunderboltA-10_Thunderbolt_II
November 7, 2006 02:03 PM
Hey idiots lighten up, your all too uptight and obviously don't enjoy yourselves enough!