(David) One of the joys of internet correspondence is developing friendships with those you wouldn't otherwise encounter. Tim and I have known Kamilla Ludwig since the late 90s when we considered her a worthy opponent on the CBMW email list (which I moderated for several years before turning over to Bill Rivilian). It was thus a delight for Tim and me to renew our acquaintance with Kamilla on this blog several years ago. Her wise additions to this blog routinely brighten our days. As an example of her wisdom, consider this letter recently sent to the directors of the Evangelical Theological and Philosophical Societies:
I am not currently a member of ETS, though I will likely renew my membership next year, I won't be doing so this year. I am not a philosophy professor and my primary reason for joining is to attend the annual meeting - which depends upon my interest in the conference theme and seeing the host city.
Though I was looking forward to the San Diego meeting later this year, I will not be attending. My reason for not attending this year is that I have recently become aware of what seems to be a growing movement around the country. It is something I hadn't really considered before, nor would I be surprised if your meeting planners had never considered it either. The issue is simply one of making pornographic movies easily available to (primarily) men who are usually traveling alone, without their families. Some hotels and chains do not provide in-room pay-per-view "adult" movies. The Town and Country in Sand Diego is not one of them.
I realize there are many considerations when planning a joint meeting the size of your annual meeting with ETS. However, this seems such a simple and profitable matter to consider for your members's benefit. What kind of witness is it to the hotel staff when they see these items on the bill of a Christian philosopher or theologian? National chains such as the Omni Hotels and the website www.cleanhotels.com provide porn-free lodging which might assist in planning future meeetings.
I thank you for your consideration of this matter.
Those of us who plan meetings and conferences must bear this issue in mind. In the meantime, we can arrange our personal travel to reward firms that have turned their backs on the sale of pornography while denying our custom to chains engaged in the sale of such idolatry.
David,
Thank you for posting this, and for your kind words (I am sure I don't deserve your accolade about my days as an opponent on what is now the CCC-Forum!). I heartily agree with you about the blessing of internet acquaintances. That you, Tim and I have been able to forge a friendship has been a great blessing to me.
I want to add just one little plug. I first learned of this by catching a few minutes of an interview with radio host, Laura Ingraham. I'd encourage your readers to consider buying her new book, "Power to the People", in which she mentions the hotel search website.
SDG,
Kamilla
Posted by: Kamilla | Wednesday, 26 September 2007 at 08:38 PM
There is so much to be said about the topic of pornography and its temptation (primarily) to Christian men. For men, it's not a question of will I be tempted, but when!, and how will I respond.
David, Tim, and Kamilla, thanks for your bringing attention to it, both here, and in the letter ETS. It's an ongoing concern for the men in my Church Community, where I promote having accountability partners to help in living holy lives before our God who calls us to holiness because He is Holy.
Blessing,
Ralph
Posted by: Ralph | Thursday, 27 September 2007 at 10:58 PM
Yes, there is much to be said on this topic.
Dr. Phil Ryken posted this yesterday on the Reformation 21 blog at the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals:
_________________________________________________
Bad Porn
9/27/2007
Phil Ryken
Last month's post on Naomi Wolf's essay "The Porn Myth" provokes many useful lines of practical and theological reflection. Wolf's basic argument is that, contrary to feminist expectations, easy access to pornography has not been liberating for women, but makes men (especially) more selfish and therefore less able to enjoy real relationships, including sexual ones. Wolf even goes so far as to commend a biblical approach to sexuality.
One of Wolf's comments is especially arresting: "For most of human history, erotic images have been reflections of, or celebrations of, or substitutes for, real naked women. For the first time in human history, the images' power and allure have supplanted that of real naked women. Today, real naked women are just bad porn."
This comment grieved me, because as a pastor I know that it is true, and that women (and men) in the church are suffering as a result. The body of a man's wife ought to be a source of mystery and delight to him (see Song of Songs). But when he drinks water out of stolen cisterns, to use the biblical imagery, her beauty is degraded. Then rather than fueling their romantic passion with mutually satisfying pleasure, their sexual relationship becomes something to use and throw away.
So here is another reason for men to avoid any and all contact with any and all pornography: If you use pornography, it will degrade the sexual cement of your marriage and dishonor a woman who deserves better than to be treated like bad pornography.
________________________________________________
It speaks for itself.
Dave Sarafolean
Posted by: Dave Sarafolean | Friday, 28 September 2007 at 08:05 AM
Great points. Two thoughts:
1. A great way to defuse temptation to watch is to remember that someone else is probably going to see your hotel bill, and they know exactly what a pay per view line item most likely means.
2. I don't travel enough to have a really good sample, but my experience suggests that only higher end hotels have the pay per view option. If you let Tom Bodette (sp?) and his ilk "leave the light on for you," you're much less likely to be confronted with this temptation.
Posted by: Robert Perry | Friday, 28 September 2007 at 01:30 PM
"Pay-per-view"? What about the free cable trash?!
--Michael
Posted by: Michael McMillan | Friday, 28 September 2007 at 02:22 PM
As far as I'm concerned, there's porn in PG-13 movies our children go watch with their friends. Those sorts of things desensitize us and leave us wanting more. American movie theaters are in too many cases porn nurseries.
--Michael
Posted by: Michael McMillan | Friday, 28 September 2007 at 02:30 PM
Well, I can't leave out network TV. Us not having cable is no escape. Let's not forget we're being greatly polluted by much more than the hard stuff we have to pay for or use in secret.
Thanks to Kamilla for her stand and her letter.
We mainly use the TV to deter burglars, leaving it on when we are out. We came home the other night and my wife said we needed to make sure it was on PBS, though. (So any would-be burglars weren't scandalized peeking in the windows, I guess.)
--Michael
Posted by: Michael McMillan | Friday, 28 September 2007 at 02:40 PM
Michael, I can't argue with you there, except to say I wish you weren't pointing vulnerable men to the "free junk" or whatever. :^) (but would you argue with me? )
But seriously, I'm with you completely on the idiot box. My last trip, I was really bored, and figured I'd try to be a "good american" and watch some TV. Couldn't take it more than about a minute; dare I suggest that a great inoculation against TV is to not watch it?
(you know those jokes "I could deal with this a lot better if I were drunk"? Well, I've never been drunk, but that was my response to that show...)
By the way, Dr. Judith Reisman has some interesting things out (on www.wnd.com) that appears to demonstrate what Dr. Ryken says and more; that not only does it degrade the sexual cement of a marriage, but it also creates some biological changes in the mind. Nasty stuff.
Posted by: Robert Perry | Friday, 28 September 2007 at 03:00 PM
"Great points. Two thoughts:
1. A great way to defuse temptation to watch is to remember that someone else is probably going to see your hotel bill, and they know exactly what a pay per view line item most likely means."
I remember years ago having returned from a business trip and being called to my bosses office. At the time, I traveled a lot and enjoyed it, but the traveling really interefered with my work out schedule so I tried to fit in a work out anytime I could when I was on the road. I made the mistake of buying (and paying for myself--I didn't expense it) a work out video that I had always wanted to try.
Unfortunately, my hotel bills were usually forwarded to our client, a large law enforcement union and hence my boss scrutinized them before they went out.
I still remember the look on his face as I explained to this devout catholic that the "abs of steel" video on my hotel bill was NOT a pornographic movie. Things would NOT have gone well had I not been able to provide him an acceptable explanation for that video.
Posted by: Kevin Hutcheson | Friday, 28 September 2007 at 05:56 PM
I don’t have a TV. I take my car to the Honda dealer in town for oil changes, etc., and in the waiting room is a TV, usually tuned to CNN news. I am shocked at the commercials.
(However, I have heard, as was mentioned in an earlier comment, that the flickering images of a TV, seen indirectly from the street, are an excellent burglar deterrent. So I have considered getting a TV for only that reason.)
Posted by: Carol Blair | Friday, 28 September 2007 at 11:00 PM