Politics, Pornography and the Law

Another attempt at paraphrasing a chapter from the book “law and Liberty , By RJ Rushdoony. I felt this book so compelling I didn’t know how else to share it. The credit once again should be given to the author.


Ever wonder if the whole idea of pornography is based on the advancement of some kind of “agenda,” political gain or is it really just a business, a product of our free market economy?

Is or should pornography be considered obscene? It has been said that obscenity is a “cleansing process” but pornography tends to “add to the murk,” that pornography is “dirt for dirt’s sake” and obscenity is the destruction of law and moral order, pornography is more explorative and obscenity does have rather a “revolutionary purpose.”

Pornography abandons law and favors rebellion against it, fanning the flames against law,
hates morality and views it as man’s bondage to restriction. It sees morality boring, tedious and restrictive and views these restrictions as evil.

Supporters of Pornography state that morality is “death due to the confinement of marriage, family, law and religious faith.” These supporters believe that morality is “old school” and the destiny of man as he “evolves” should be free of such restrictions for man’s greatest enemies are religion, morality and law.

How is it that these supporters feel that they can make such a statement, like“old school” of "evolution" when such a statement insinuates the adherence to a natural consistent order of events, that includes restrictions based on fact that is absent in their worldview? If man is also free from restrictions are they not free to do and think as they please, and in no position to say what “should” and “shouldn’t be?” It appears it would be a bit contrary in its position?

Socialist scholars (a contradiction in terms?) call for the destruction of the monogamic bourgeois family as we know it. They call for complete “sexual freedom.” These scholars view religion and morality as slavery and view Marxist socialist as freedom specifically quoted as “Moral anarchism is the tool for totalitarianism, socialism and dictatorship!” Does this mean that the socialist government would now welcome the breaking of laws to prove the people are free? Or that the more restrictions they face, the more they violate laws making them more free or quite the opposite? Or is this a way for the government to return people to bondage under the auspices of “freedom?”

While Christianity gives man logic, reason, consistency, it also gives him is individualism, faith and character of self government, Humanism (Marxism) espouses inconsistency and chaos of a ransom nature, it abandons the individual, denies faith in God and suggests faith in man instead, denies individual character and the importance and value of the individual, suggesting “collectivism” as its alternative, that results in a totalitarian government that then determines rights.

Isn’t it interesting that Marxists are opposed to legislation against pornography,” in the name of freedom,” but say nothing about the increased restrictions due to the contant and growing involvement of government in the personal lives of the people whom they govern and the moral anarchy they welcome?

Just the idea that those who support pornography can deny God, law and order in support of their position that they are a random chemical reaction, that all things are a result of chance and say that people are entitled to be free then suggest that people should think and act a certain way is completely contradictory to their worldview. If this were true they would have no adherence to anything requiring logic or consistency or have the right to tell anyone what they can and cannot do due the fact that they were a result of a random chemical reaction, a freak of nature.

Shall we promote “sexual freedom”, including prostitution, pedophilia, adultery, incest, rape and sodomy but call for the abolition of the death penalty, theft and murder, or shall we state all acts now have equal standing in the law? This arbitrary and inconsistent nature is the problem with man’s law that does not exist in God’s law and why God’s law is crucial in the proper function of society.

The politics of pornography is the “politics of Marxist revolution.” It is the reorganization of life, laws, thought and a society in the hope to fulfill the unrealistic, unobtainable “wishful thinking” utopian ideology of a “free world,” free from the restrictions of religion, morality and law, which in reality are absurd, illogical, irrational and unbelievable!

Today, the supreme court and many Americans believe that what were once moral violations of Biblical proportions (Sodomy, homosexuality, adultery etc) are now socially redeemable justified activities and that such laws are capable of evolving over time, and will if we continue our present course.

If two hundred years ago, in this country, pornography and other “sexual freedoms” were considered unlawful and now have become accepted, in fifty years, as we supposedly “evolve” shall we accept bestiality and things that are not yet socially justified today?

Substituting God’s law for man’s law makes anything possible, anything legal, and anything acceptable, it would only be a matter of time.

What is the result of replacing your trust in God for your trust in man, as Marxist promote? As history dictates people have been conditioned by their government to believe that they do things in the best interest of the people, always resulting in anarchy or some form of totalitarianism.

The question is, is your government really trying to protect your freedom or is it using the promotion of an agenda “in the name of freedom” to return you back to bondage?

With our country now adamantly promoting “the separation of church and state,” that God has no right in government, the governments agenda should be clear, this is not about freedom, it’s about control.