First, they came for the porn addicts,
then they came for you...

Blazing Reader,

In episode 843 of Just Right, host Bob Metz explains — more or less — my views on the role of government: to protect people's individual rights from other individuals, groups or the government itself.

So when it comes to moral topics like whether people should have access to things that would only hurt themselves, I think the government has no business interfering. Because once they start, they can't stop.

For example, many Christians would like to see porn outlawed. While I share their distaste for its presence in society, I don't see how raiding people's homes and stealing their hard drives is going to solve anything. As long as they don't force other people to watch their collection, we have no right to steal their property or restrict their choices.

On that episode of Just Right, Bob Metz makes many arguments to support how pornography might be a healthy or, at least, an acceptable part of people's lives — even alluding to happily married couples using it to pique their interest.

For me, this sounds a little too much like when people try to convince you that red wine is good for your heart because it contains certain nutrients. There's enough research on the detrimental physical and psychological effects of pornography to show that the net effect is negative. Yes, wine comes from grapes and porn derives from natural sexual activity; but they are hardly the same thing.

Of course, most Christians condemn porn but drink wine — after all, Jesus is said to have drank it himself (just before he get himself killed...).

One man's virtue is another man's sin.

And you know the old saying: first they came for the porn addicts; then they came for you.

Ayn Rand in her book Philosophy: Who Needs It warns:

"I want to state, for the record, my own view of what is called 'hard-core' pornography. I regard it as unspeakably disgusting. I have not read any of the books or seen any of the current movies belonging to that category, and I do not intend ever to read or see them. The descriptions provided in legal cases, as well as the 'modern' touches in 'soft-core' productions, are sufficient grounds on which to form an opinion. The reason of my opinion is the opposite of the usual one: I do not regard sex as evil — I regard it as good, as one of the most important aspects of human life, too important to be made the subject of public anatomical display. But the issue here is not one’s view of sex. The issue is freedom of speech and of the press — i.e., the right to hold any view and to express it.

"It is not very inspiring to fight for the freedom of the purveyors of pornography or their customers. But in the transition to statism, every infringement of human rights has begun with the suppression of a given right’s least attractive practitioners. In this case, the disgusting nature of the offenders makes it a good test of one’s loyalty to a principle."

Those wise words are from the last book Ayn Rand was working on before her death in 1982. You can buy yourself a copy before your own death at this link: https://blazingpinecone.com/shop/philosophy-who-needs-it

— John C. A. Manley

John C. A. Manley is the author of Much Ado About Corona: A Dystopian Love Story, the forthcoming All The Humans Are Sleeping and other works of speculative fiction. Get free samples of his stories by becoming a Blazing Pine Cone email subscriber at: https://blazingpinecone.com/subscribe/