Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Al Franken

2009-07-31T02:50:06Z

Georgearnold: Removed fake picture

{{Officeholder
|name=Al Franken
|image=Frank en Minnesota.jpg
|party=[[Democrat]]
|spouse=Franni Bryson Franken
|religion=Judaism
|offices=
{{Officeholder/senator
|state=Minnesota
|terms=July 7, 2009 – Present
|preceded=[[Norm Coleman]]
|former=n
|succeeded=
}}
}}

'''Al Franken''' (born May 21, 1951) is a [[liberal]] [[Democrat]], an erstwhile satirist and comedian, known for his extreme obnoxiousness and [[hatred]] for [[Republican]]s and [[Conservatives]], is the new U.S. Senator from [[Minnesota]]; he was declared the winner after the Minnesota Supreme Court rejected the last legal challenges from his opponent [[Norm Coleman]], who decided to put state above personal ambitions in not pursuing a further appeal to a federal court. Franken was born in [[New York City]], and spent several years while growing up in St Louis Park, a suburb of [[Minneapolis]]. Until he decided to run for the Senate, he lived exclusively in [[California]] and [[New York]] all of his adult life. <ref>[http://www.owenfranken.com/bio.html Owen Franken, Biography, statement about where Al Franken resided]</ref> His opponent, incumbent [[Republican]] Senator [[Norm Coleman]], conceded eight months after the election, which was won by 300 votes out of 2.9 million. The governor of Minnesota, [[Tim Pawlenty]], signed the certificate of election for Franken on June 30, 2009. Franken will take office July 6, 2009, for a six year term. Franken's win gives Democrats a 58-40 margin in the Senate, enough to shut off filibusters if the 58, along with two Independents who caucus with the Democrats, hang together.
==Policies==
Franken has been deliberately vague about his position on all major policy issues--except on Iraq, where he reversed himself 180 degrees under intense pressure from the left in Minnesota.
===Iraq===
In the 2008 campaign Franken emphasized his strong opposition to President Bush's policies in Iraq. However he is a relatively recent convert to the conviction that the U.S. should immediately pull out of Iraq. Back in 2003 when the country debated the war, Franken supported intervention. He repeatedly visited Iraq to entertain troops, and came to admire them. By 2006 he argued Bush's handling of the war was incompetent, but as late as June 2006 agreed with Bush in opposing a timeline for withdrawal. Pushed by the anti-war left in Minnesota, Franken in late 2006 finally declared his opposition. <ref>[http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/senate/11761151.html Patricia Lopez; Minneapolis Star Tribune, Nov. 30, 2007]</ref>

==Vulgar satire==
His career was as a rather vulgar satirist, comedian, and former radio host for the [[Air America]] network. Franken has worked as a comedy writer and performer on the television program ''[[Saturday Night Live]]'' and was the star and screenwriter of the motion picture ''Stuart Saves His Family''.
Franken has also written for Playboy magazine, a pornographic publication, although his supporters and the [[media]] often skip over that when they talk about him.

==Style==
Franken is known for his anti-conservative hate speak (he has called them "nasty, hateful people" <ref>[http://www.randomhouse.com/doubleday/doasisay/quiz.pdf Random House.com]</ref>) and his coarse humor. He once quipped to the Harvard Crimson, "I dislike homosexuals. I was glad when that [Harvard] homosexual got killed." <ref>[http://www.gaypatriot.net/2007/01/18/al-frankens-anti-gay-past/]</ref> <ref>[http://lloydletta.blogspot.com/2007/01/al-franken-jokes-about-murder-of-gay.html]</ref> <ref>[http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=112149]</ref> In his book ''Lying Liars'', Franken wrote that a "Methodist minister had had his head up his %#@" in a dispute about the Bible "Do you know what God’s punishment is for liars?" [the minister] asked me ... "God’s punishment for liars is that they believe their own lies." The minister was referring to 2 Thess 2:10-12 which says substantially that. Franken acknowledged his mistake in the paperback version.

At one point his radio show was going to be called "The Liberal Show". <ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/21/magazine/21FRANKEN.html?pagewanted=8&ei=5007&en=5c47bbc5c11b11f2&ex=1395205200&partner=USERLAND Al Franken, Seriously]</ref> but upon debut, it was known as "The O'Franken Factor," a name Franken chose to parody [[Bill O'Reilly]] and taunt him into a lawsuit, getting his show free publicity.<ref>[http://www.kgw.com/business/stories/kgw_033004_biz_progressive_radio.d7edf1d8.html Al Franken's liberal radio network comes to Portland]</ref> When the lawsuit failed to materialize, the show was renamed "The Al Franken Show."

==2008 election==
Franken opposed incumbent Republican [[Norm Coleman]] for the Senate seat in the 2008 election. Franken's rudeness, vulgarity, and coarse style led critics to ask about whether he alienated himself from the important undecided swing voters<ref>http://www.startribune.com/587/story/1083904.html Star Tribune retrieved 6 April, 2007</ref><ref>[http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/06/06/frankens-senate-race-haunted-by-1995-rape-joke-on-snl-set/ Franken’s Senate Race Haunted by 1995 Rape Joke on ‘SNL’ Set]</ref>. Franken was under fire for an interview he did in Playboy magazine that was considered by many to be unbecoming for a senatorial candidate<ref>[http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/franken_playboy/2008/05/29/100040.html?s=al&promo_code=635B-1] and [http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/Washington_Post_franken/2008/06/18/105702.html]</ref>

The election was very close, with multiple recounts and appeals. On January 5, 2009, the Minnesota election board declared Franken the winner by a razor-thin 225 votes. Coleman filed a lawsuit, which by state law had to be resolved before Franken can be seated. <ref>http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090105/ap_on_el_se/minnesota_senate</ref> He was seated July 7th, 2009. For which the Wall Street Journal proclaimed that "Mr. Franken now goes to the Senate having effectively stolen an election." <ref>[http://spectator.org/archives/2009/07/02/al-frankens-blue-ball Al Franken's Blue Ball; American Spectator, July 2, 2009]</ref> <ref>[http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jromano/2009/05/07/perkins-coie/ When Dems Don’t Have the Votes, Perkins Coie Finds Them - Big Hollywood, May 7, 2009]</ref>

==Controversial Statements==
On Franken's website there is the admonition ''"Anybody who deliberately propagandizes with lies should be held up to scorn and ridicule"''<ref>http://lyingliar.com/index.htm</ref>. Throughout his books he has held himself to "impossibly high standards" to tell the truth about those he has written about. Author Alan Skorski researched two of Franken's books (''Rush Limbaugh is a Big Fat Idiot'' and ''Lies and the Lying Liars who Tell Them'') and found an extensive pattern of lies, misstatements, factual inaccuracies, among them:

*Accusing Ann Coulter of "lying with footnotes" by "citing a source and misrepresenting what it says"; throughout his book Skorski states that Franken has done exactly that on numerous occasions (Skorski, pg. xiii)

*Accusing President George W. Bush of treason

*The collision between Bush foreign policy advisor Richard Armitage and news reporter Helen Thomas, which Franken had claimed broke both her hip and jaw (''Lying Liars'', pg 218), but which Thomas herself said never happened (Skorski, pg 208). After this came to light, Franken later added a footnote in the paperback version of the book saying, "The Helen Thomas thing is a joke."<ref>Franken, ''Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them'', page 227 of the paperback</ref>

*Franken stated he is "often compared to Rush Limbaugh" when on the air, despite the fact that by the time he left his Air America show to run for the U.S. Senate, his radio network was reduced to just over 40 market stations as a result of severely-low ratings and ultimately bankruptcy. Limbaugh, by comparison, plays on more than 600 stations with an average daily listening audience of 22 million (Skorski, pg 303).

*Franken claimed on his radio show (June 1, 2005) that Rush Limbaugh made up a quotation supposedly said by Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, which claimed Ginsburg said "replacing 'Mother's Day' and 'Father's Day' with a 'Parent's Day' should be considered...". Skorski did a Google check on Ginsburg and discovered a May 20, 2005 column from the ''National Review'' titled "Bench Warmers, Putting Judicial Nominees in Perspective, Part III"; this column cited a September, 1974 article written by Ginsburg which advocated for the creation of a "Parent's Day" to replace both Mother's and Father's Days.

*Franken claimed John Murphy of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce was lying when he took a pro-CAFTA (Central American Free Trade Agreement) position on PBS's ''Lehrer Report'' (July 27, 2005) stating "we've seen unemployment fall to 5.0 percent today, which is lower than it's been in decades." <ref>http://www.bls.gov/cps/prev_yrs.htm</ref>. Skorski demonstrated that Franken took the unemployment figures under the Clinton Administration by the month (rather than by the year as the Bureau of Labor Statistics does) and willfully distorted them to make it appear that it was Murphy who was lying (Skorski, pg. 77-78).

== Quotes ==

*Republicans are shameless d**ks. No, that's not fair. Republican politicians are shameless d**ks. <ref>The Truth (With Jokes) p. 58</ref>

*"Nobody likes getting an abortion. Except perhaps, rape victims." <ref>The Truth (With Jokes) p. 124</ref>

*Of how big an a-s [[Brit Hume]] is, and how shamless, how f*cking shamless these people are, these people are so f*cking shamless." <ref>Howard Dean fundrasier, 2003</ref>

*"Ever tempted to run for office yourself?" Franken replied, "Oh, no! First of all, if I took one vote away from a serious candidate, it would be a sin." <ref>Time Magazine, 09/01/03</ref>

*"If I put myself on the ballot and even 50 people voted for me, it would be a travesty." <ref>The Oregonian, 02/22/99</ref>

*"It's not preppies, cause I'm a preppie myself. I just don't like homosexuals. If you ask me, they're all homosexuals in the Pudding. Hey, I was glad when that Pudding homosexual got killed in Philadelphia." <ref>The Harvard Crimson, 4/16/76</ref>

*"The shocking thing about crack is how fast the addiction runs its course. It's not unusual for alcoholics to take 20 or 30 years to hit bottom. Cocaine addicts take maybe a couple of years. Crack, a form of cocaine, usually is a matter of months. The Reagan Administration has been the crack of our nation's debt addiction. And [[Ronald Reagan]], the crack dealer." <ref>"Addictions and Mr. Reagan" by Al Franken, The New York Times, 7/19/88</ref>

*"In an odd way, I blame Linda Tripp and Ann Coulter for Sept. 11, because if they hadn't dug this stuff up, it may not have happened," Franken on-air comment following separate interviews about 'wagging the dog,' a reference to conservative accusations that Clinton diverted attention from the Monica Lewinsky scandal by launching attacks on terrorists. <ref>Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 4/7/04</ref>

*"I think, for example, under god probably shouldn't be in the pledge of allegiance, it wasn't put in there since, like the 50's, but it's not that big a deal to me. In god we trust probably shouldn't be on the coin. I don't care." <ref>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Rmm5ioINl4</ref>

== Playboy Article ==

In 2000, Al Franken's comments appeared in a ''Playboy'' article titled "Porn-O-Rama!" He was quoted as saying that the Internet is a great tool for learning and that his 12 year old son was able to do a report on bestiality for a sixth-grade assignment.

== Tax Issues ==

During his 2008 campaign, it was discovered that Franken had not paid state taxes in 17 states he earned money over the last four years. Franken blamed it on his accountant saying "This all really comes from one mistake, which is him not understanding that I was supposed to pay state taxes in these other states." Franken says he will pay those states now, plus interest and penalties for a total of $70,000. <ref>[http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2008/05/01/accountants/ Accountants: Franken's tax problems should have been caught] Minnesota Public Radio, May 2, 2008</ref> As of March, 2009, Franken had failed to supply proof that the arrears in taxes had been paid.

==United States Senate==

Franken was sworn in to the Senate on July 7, 2009, and is currently ranked 100th in seniority.

== Books by Franken ==
*''I'm Good Enough, I'm Smart Enough, and Doggone It, People Like Me!'' (Dell Books, 1992) (in character as Stuart Smalley)
*''Rush Limbaugh is a Big Fat Idiot'' (Delacorte Press, 1996) (a satirical book of personal attacks on [[Rush Limbaugh]] as well as other conservatives.)
*''Why Not Me?'' (Delacorte Press, 1999) (a parody-journal kept through the fictional "Franken for President" campaign)
*''Oh, the Things I know! A Guide to Success, or Failing That, Happiness'' (Plume Books, 2003)
*''[[Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them|Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them: A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right]]'' (Dutton Books, 2003) (targets conservative commentators and the media, particularly [[Ann Coulter]], [[Bill O'Reilly]], [[Sean Hannity]] as well as Fox News)
*''The Truth (with jokes)'' (Dutton Books, 2005) (Franken's view on how [[George W. Bush]] beat [[John Kerry]] in the 2004 Election with what Al Franken calls the "Fears, Smears, and Queers strategy")

==Further reading==
*''[http://www.newsmax.com/headlines/acorn_minnesota_franken/2009/07/06/232551.html Did [[ACORN]] Elect Al Franken?]'', David A. Patten, Newsmax.com, July 6 2009.

==References==
*Skorski, Alan. ''Pants On Fire: How Al Franken Lies, Smears, and Deceives,'' Cumberland House Publishing, Nashville, Tennessee (2005)
*[http://www.frankenlies.com/ Website devoted to exposing Franken's lies from his two books, ''The Truth'' and ''Lies and the Lying Liars'']
{{reflist}}

==Links==
*[http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0291253/ Al Franken] at the Internet Movie Database
*[http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=1142525 Al Franken] at National Public Radio
*[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHg5SJYRHA0] Al Franken engaging in highly unbecoming behavior

{{Liberalism}}
{{DEFAULTSORT: Franken, Al}}
[[Category:Democratic Party]]
[[Category:Abortion Advocates]]
[[Category:Authors]]
[[category:Broadcasters]]
[[Category:Liberal Activists]]
[[Category:United States Senators]]

Beach Boys

2009-07-04T03:02:58Z

Georgearnold: Merged with The Beach Boys

The Beach Boys

2009-07-04T03:02:57Z

Georgearnold: Add the information from beach boys to it

[[Image:Beachboys-surfergirl.jpg|thumb|right|Album cover, Surfer Girl - the Beach Boys]]

[[Image:Beachboys-petsounds.jpg|thumb|right|Album cover, Pet Sounds - the Beach Boys]]

'''The Beach Boys''' are an American [[rock and roll]] band from [[Hawthorn]], [[California]], formed in 1961 by Brian Wilson, his brothers, Carl and Dennis, their cousin Mike Love, and friend Al Jardine. In 1964 Glen Campbell replaced Brian Wilson when he withdrew from touring to give his full attention to songwriting and record producing. When Glen moved on to devote more attention
to his own career, he was replaced by Bruce Johnston.

In 1983 Dennis Wilson died as a result of an accidental drowning and Carl Wilson died of [[lung cancer]] in 1998. In 2006 the surviving Beach Boys, Brian Wilson, Mike Love, Al Jardine and Bruce Johnston gathered to mark the 40th anniversary of the album “Pet Sounds” and the double-platinum certification of their greatest hits album, “Sounds of Summer: The Very Best of the Beach Boys.”

The band wore white plants and candy-stripped shirts on stage, their early hits focused on the youthful California lifestyle with harmonizing that made them world wide pop music stars throughoutan era when most [[American]] artist gave way to what was known as the [[British invasion]].

Their first hit, "Surfin' USA", was responsible for exposing [[surf music]], at the time a local phenomenon originated by [[Dick Dale]], to a much wider national and international audience.

The early albums of The Beach Boys are fairly standard rock and roll featuring surf- and drag-themed tunes and various rock and roll standards, played with the typical surf reverb guitar and extensive and surprisingly complex vocal harmonies. With time, Brian, the primary songwriter, became more experimental culminating in the band's acknowledged masterpiece, ''Pet Sounds''.

Their songs were by turns poignant, thoughtful, sensitive and funny, but always realistic and kind-hearted.
*"Wouldn't It Be Nice" - a young man looks forward to married life with his fiancee
*"Surfin' Safari" - the guys are ready to hit the beach
*"Surfin' U.S.A." - same as above
*"409" - boasting about a [[hot rod]]
*"Little Deuce Coupe" - same as above
*"Surfer Girl" - wanting to go steady
*"In My Room" - about [[prayer]]
*"Be True To Your School" - loyalty to a higher purpose than oneself
*"Fun, Fun, Fun" - what happens to girl who lies to her dad
*Don't Worry Baby - reassurance
*"I Get Around" - group loyalty in the community
*"Wendy"
*"When I Grow Up (To Be A Man)" - probably their best song, about [[maturity]] and becoming a responsible husband and family man
*"California Girls"
*"Help Me, Rhonda"
*"Barbara Ann" (45 Version)
*"Sloop John B" - Caribbean folk song
*"God Only Knows"
*"Good Vibrations" (45 Version)
*"Our Prayer" (Previously Unreleased)
*"Kokomo"

{{DEFAULTSORT:Beach Boys, The}}

[[Category:Rock Bands]]

Talk:Pornography

2009-07-04T01:42:46Z

Georgearnold: /* This page needs to be locked. */ new section

* There is a draft of a proposed new version [[/draft|here]].

==Should there be an article on pornography==
It would, I’ve no doubt, take a lot of patrolling to keep this article site appropriate – it may be a real target for vandalism—but that being said, pornography and how it should be dealt with is one of the major political issues of our times (less now than 20 years ago, admittedly) and if we are going to provide an alternative to Wikipedia this is a very important place to do so (especially as Wikipedia’s page on this subject prominently features an image that is clearly not appropriate for children.). I’d like to see this page unblocked so we can take a stab a writing a good article for it—I’d take a stab at one (I know enough about anti-pornography feminism to start and could look into 1st amendment law) if the sysops think that it is worth trying to write an article appropriate to Conservipedia on this subject.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 14:23, 25 March 2007 (EDT)

:Drop me a note at my talk page when you're ready to post your first draft. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 18:40, 25 March 2007 (EDT)

::Will do! --[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 18:40, 25 March 2007 (EDT)

==First Draft==
I never say your note, so I just went ahead and wrote my own diatribe. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 09:28, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

:"the fact is that in the history of erotic literature it is virtually impossible to find any depiction of normal marital relations." That's just a flat out lie and misrepresentation. You seem to be forgetting books like the Kama Sutra, Joy of Sex and videos that are created for couples to use. And the 2nd paragraph is a POV. [[User:Jrssr5|Jrssr5]] 13:24, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

::Not much about marriage in either one - the assumption is that you can go ahead and snuggle whenever and with whomever. I read Alex Comfort's book, a pernicious piece of polymorphous perversion.

::Let's look at Reginod's draft: [[/draft]]. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 14:36, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

:::I like Reginod's draft save one bit. I think the intro should read "what is widely regarded as an intimate act" and not just "an intimate act." [[User:ColinR|ColinR]][[User_talk:ColinR|talk]] 14:44, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

Jrssr5--you forgot the Book of Solomon. And seeing how he had 50 wives, one assumed he knew a bit about marriage. --[[User:PassingThru|PassingThru]] 14:51, 18 April 2007 (EDT)
:I don't think there is a "Book of Solomon", and the Bible tells us he had seven hundred wives. Perhaps there is something faulty in your research methodology you should examine before making such obviously flawed assertions. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 15:12, 18 April 2007 (EDT)

::Might that comment be intended to refer to the Song of Solomon? - [[User:Suricou|Suricou]]

Now that I am back, I would like to implement the draft I proposed along with the changes that Ed Poor has made (thanks for those, by the way).
The only objection I’ve seen to the draft is that we don’t need an article on pornography at all on this site. I’ve explained above that pornography and how society ought to treat it is one of the more contentious social issues we face today (and it gets tangled up with a number of other ones). I’m open to hearing other concerns before I implement it, but I’m not going to wait to terribly long as anything that needs changing can be fixed once it is in the article as easily as it can be fixed in the draft.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 21:23, 19 April 2007 (EDT)

Please add something about the word derivation, like: '''Pornography,''' from the Greek ''porne'' meaning "prostitute,'' ... [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 21:32, 19 April 2007 (EDT)

:I had no idea. Thank you for making that addition.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 21:41, 19 April 2007 (EDT)

Reginod - you're welcome to use any of the following that's of any use to you. Shouldn’t an article on pornography at least have its definition correct?

The word "pornography" is about two hundred years old. It originated after the discovery of erotic drawings and sculptures uncovered in the archaeological excavation of the ruins of Pompeii. They included a sculpture of the god Pan having sex with a goat, and drawings of p.enises that were found painted on the walls of houses. The Victorians collected everything they found offensive and put it in a museum in Naples, which was called The Secret Museum. Only men were allowed in, and they were not allowed to laugh or make jokes. From 1849 to 1860 the Secret Museum was bricked up altogether.[http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/bmcr/2003/2003-07-38.html] Even today you need a permit and a guide to see the collection.

The word pornography derives from the Greek word ''porn'', meaning prostitution, and ''graphier'', meaning to write, and so it means to write of prostitution. The word was at first used to refer specifically to the Secret Museum, but began to take on a more general meaning by the middle of the 19th century.

Drawings and writings that were erotic were commonplace in earlier times, although they were not called pornography. In Samuel Pepys’ diary he writes about buying a French book called ''Escholle de Filles''. The book is a conversation between Francine and Susanne about sex, the older one telling the younger one all about it. Pepys saw the book in a shop, thought it was lewd and disgusting and did not buy it. However, he went back three weeks later and bought "the idle roguish book, L'escholle de filles; which I have bought in plain binding… because I resolve, as soon as I have read it, to burn it." He drank lots of wine, locked himself away, read it then burnt it. He said it was an idle and lewd book but it a good read for a sober man such as himself to read so as to learn about the villainy of the world.

Before the fall of the Berlin Wall, Bibles and pornography were the two items most likely to be confiscated by the Soviet Customs on entering the USSR. The common question from border guards/customs officers was always: "Are you carrying Bibles or pornography?"

Women respond to pornography in a way that is more similar to the way men respond than was previously thought. Erotic imagery elicits a faster and stronger electrical response in a woman’s brain than any other kind of image, recent research reported in the journal ''Brain Research'' reveals. [http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,199474,00.html] The researchers expected lower levels of response, since previous research had indicated men that are more aroused by erotic images than women, but found that women’s responses were as strong.--[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 21:51, 19 April 2007 (EDT)

:I’m not sure where exactly in the draft you want to place all that information, but go ahead and add it on in. (I’ve added a few more sections to help place the information—I’d put the Museum part in the Modern History section, and the female response information in the effects on individuals section) think the draft is (at the moment) in good enough shape to replace the current article, and since the article is (I just noticed) locked (and for good reason I’ve no doubt) I encourage you to just add to the draft, just like it was a real article, until a sysop can be found to implement it. But, as I’ve said, it is a rough draft—I wouldn’t turn it in to a professor in the state it is currently in, but the wiki process is a collaborative one so I’m more than willing to put my work out there as a base for others to build on.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 22:10, 19 April 2007 (EDT)

::I would gladly do that, but I don't know where the draft is!--[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 22:45, 19 April 2007 (EDT)

:::Try here [[Talk:Pornography/draft]] --[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 08:37, 20 April 2007 (EDT)

==Pornography and erotica==
Thanks, Reginod & Britinme. Good draft, coming along nicely. I'll just make one quibble:

*Erotica uses sexually charged imagery for artistic purposes,

This isn't actually true. Not unless you think that "art" is entirely separate from politics, etc. Or unless you're trying to say that [[art]] is a category of [[free speech]], which gets into the "P*** Christ" and "D*** Mary" controversies.

In everyday use, [[erotica]] is [[pornography]]. If I'm wrong, please correct me. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] 11:08, 20 April 2007 (EDT)

:Pornography is something that has degradation as its intent; it does not necessarily even have to contain sexual content. Erotica is material connected with love rather than sex, (though the love depicted is often of a sexual nature). So that although there is a large overlap between erotica and pronography, something can be one and not the other. For example the biblical book [[Song of Solomon]] might be readily categorised as erotica on the basis of its content, but few would call it pornography. --[[User:Jeremiah4-22|Jeremiah4-22]] 11:16, 20 April 2007 (EDT)

::As a literary genre, pornography is writing that has sexual arousal as its primary objective. Erotica is such material with artistic pretensions. Thus, the descriptive term pornography implies a statement about intentionality and instrumentality without reference to merit, whereas the term erotica is evaluative and laudatory. In Flesh and the Word, John Preston more baldly says, "The only difference is that erotica is the stuff bought by rich people." [http://www.glbtq.com/literature/erotica_pornography.html ]

:::Certainly some pornography with artistic pretensions ''calls itself'' erotica, often to avoid legal prohibitions on the distribution of obscene material, for example. But this is in no way the same thing as ''being'' erotica. (That's a rather dodgy source you're using there, btw.) --[[User:Jeremiah4-22|Jeremiah4-22]] 11:34, 20 April 2007 (EDT)

:I’m inclined to agree with you that erotica is pornography. I’d say that it makes up a subset of pornography – I’d be hard pressed to find a clear distinction. I think, in common usage, erotica=socially acceptable pornography, and pornography=socially unacceptable pornography.
:Both erotica and pornography are intended to arouse sexual interest. Erotica, perhaps, more subtly than other pornography, but in the end it is about eros – love mingled with sexual desire. --[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 13:09, 20 April 2007 (EDT)

::Erotica is pornography for those who have some inteligence. It requires a high level of literacy, and artistic appreciation. It takes skill to make, while plain pornography needs nothing more than a camera. But underneath, it is still pornography. It strives to be respectable, and to some extent suceeeds. But porn is porn, and thats all it will ever be. Just because its a well-written story, or a painting that takes incredible skill to paint, does not turn it magically acceptable. Erotica is a subset of porn, not something completly different. - BornAgainBrit

: I'm not convinced by this. I wonder if we can make the distinction that pornography is solely concerned with sexual arousal and gratification through the graphic depiction of sexual acts, and that works of literary and artistic merit can contain passages of explicit sexuality that function as an integral part of the total work but are not intended purely for purposes of sexual gratification. The famous example of this in English law was, of course, the 1963 trial involving Penguin books and the [[D.H.Lawrence]] novel ''Lady Chatterley's Lover''. I have read that, and it's true to say that the passages objected to in 1963 are fairly graphic (though perhaps less so by today's standards). However, they are not the central point of the book, and their purpose is not arousal but a deepening of understanding of the themes of the nove. IMHO they add a great deal to the overall merit of the work. Personally, I found a book like ''American Psycho'' a great deal more distressing in that it explicitly ties sexuality to graphic violence. It seems invidious to me to single out the depiction of erotica as pornography while ignoring the graphic depictions of violence that seem to pass unnoticed. --[[User:Britinme|Britinme]] 14:18, 23 April 2007 (EDT)

==Needed fixes==
Since the article is locked can someone make the following changes, marked in '''bold'''?

"Due to a series of liberal decisions beginning with the Warren Court, pornography is aggressive'''ly''' sold and distributed in the United States without meaningful law enforcement'''<nowiki>{{fact}}</nowiki>'''. It is a $12 billion industry that affects and harms 40 million Americans'''(POV)'''. Pornography destroys relationships and exploits young people.[2]'''maybe include the article that claims this POV'''

Is there really such a large public concern about an alledged connection between pornography and porn? Check the link I provided in the debate about this subject for some statistics on the percentage of people who've ever seen porn or watch it on a regular basis, it might shock you to find that that multi-billion dollar industry only survives because it has many millions of consumers, not just the random perv, but lawyers, doctors, fathers and husbands.

I would also like to see a paragraph about erotica in ancient Rome, Greece, India, Egypt and the stone age, how it's related to human nature and that it does in some cases provide an outlet for potential rapists.
Just to make the article more balanced (and more serious).

http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_1343839.html

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=913013

[[User:Middle Man|Middle Man]]

:[[User:Middle Man|Middle Man]] I think if you look at [[Talk:Pornography/draft]] you’ll find a draft of an article that addresses some (but not all) of your concerns. Please add any relevant information to the draft. We are trying to get it into good enough shape that it can replace the current article.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 13:35, 23 April 2007 (EDT)

It still lacks a paragraph about the psychology/sociology behind pornography, but, it's definitely a lot better than the current version.

[[User:Middle Man|Middle Man]]

:I have no idea where to start on that paragraph as it stands the draft is touching the far edges of what I feel comfortable writing on (any more and I worry a bad source could steer me wrong). But if you point me to a good source I’ll work on it, or you could add it yourself – feel free to treat the draft like the article, improve it as you can.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 18:41, 23 April 2007 (EDT)

shuld be in the Sexual sins catagory--[[User:Bloodsliver|duo]] 23:06, 22 March 2008 (EDT)

== Needs Citations ==

to be in line with commandment 5. This page states much opinion and needs to be fixed by one of the people with the power to do it. [[User:Flippin|Flippin]] 17:27, 23 April 2007 (EDT)

But speaking of citations... why are we linking to an ''islamic'' site? I'm sure the intention was good, but this is a ''christian'' encyclopedia... we shouldn't link to a site that promotes a false religion like that without a very good reason. [[User:NewCrusader|NewCrusader]] 18:52, 22 September 2008 (EDT)

== Needs deletion ==

Simply put: terrible. --[[User:Hacker|Hacker]]<code>([[User talk:Hacker|Write some code]] • Conservapedia:Requests for adminship#Support|Support my RfA)</code> 18:10, 23 April 2007 (EDT)
:A draft (which I think is much better) is being worked on. See somewhere above for a link to said draft. [[User:ColinR|ColinR]][[User_talk:ColinR|talk]] 18:11, 23 April 2007 (EDT)

I came to this page to try to add a UK context but see that it uneditable. This is the sort of thing I was going to add.

"In the UK pornography continues to be used by the mass circulation tabloids to bolster sales. Since the 1970's the UK 'red-top' tabloids, in particular the News International Corp owned 'Sun' and the 'Daily Star' have used images of naked or semi-naked women to attract a readership of B2,C,D males. They then fill other pages in the paper with biased articles pushing their political viewpoint in an attempt to control clearly influencible minds. The Sun in particular influenced the result of the 1992 General election with their pornography-ridden viewpoint that they claimed to have won the election.

Other tabloids such as the 'Daily Sport' and the 'Daily Express' are owned by David Sullivan and Richard Desmond, both of whom made their fortunes in pornography before moving into newspapers."

Can this be added please. --[[User:Commandment9|Commandment9]] 17:47, 11 May 2007 (EDT)

:Please add it to the draft at [[Talk:Pornography/draft]] . The draft is editable and the better it is the more likely we are to get it to replace the current article.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 17:51, 11 May 2007 (EDT)

Thanks for the advice. I've done that now. --[[User:Commandment9|Commandment9]] 18:10, 11 May 2007 (EDT)
: What does "B2,C,D" mean? --[[User:Jtl|Jtl]] 18:25, 11 May 2007 (EDT)

It a form a categorization of people by social position and available income. A's are higher earner or those with wealth, B's not quite so much, B2,C & D are the classifications for either unskilled manual labour, the unemployed or the underclass. In the US this equates to blue collar etc. These were the groups considered most easily influenced by pornography and propaganda. Without their media-led political bias in the 1980's the political landscape of Britain would have been very different. That's why I added my bit in the Social Effects of Pornography section in the new draft. --[[User:Commandment9|Commandment9]] 18:41, 11 May 2007 (EDT)

== Addiction ==

Pornography can be addictive, according to some source, especially ones involving violence. This fact should be added onto the article. [[User:Wooyi|Wooyi]] 22:32, 29 May 2007 (EDT)

== Liberal wants to help! ==

Okay, I am liberal. I admit it. I accept that conservatives and/or Christians do not like pornography, etc. and I respect your decisions. My ex-boyfriend is a Christian and didn't view porn and was waiting until marriage, etc. so I understand how people like you guys think (we're still friends). As much as I'd love to edit articles like this one, the abortion one, and the cannabis one for content, I understand that this is a conservative website and I would gladly respect that and maintain your right-winged perspectives. I am mainly on this site because I want to broaden my horizons and see what the other side of the arguments are. I'm curious about the right-winged perspective, and even though I don't agree, I respect it and want to understand it.

Now, here's my problem with conservapedia. It's not that this is conservative. You guys have every right to post this conservatively biased stuff because you're up front about it and say you're conservative and don't try to hide it. You display it proudly. More power to you. My problem is that a lot of these entries use vague words like "very bad" or, in the case of this porn article, you say that porn "has an effect." That is quite vague. How is it bad? What are the effects? What is "very" bad? Furthermore, many sentences in this site are just poorly written, grammatically speaking, and it is difficult to read. If you want respect from the liberal world, at least take the time to sound intelligent, back up everything with lots and lots of sources, use good grammar and strong vocabulary. "Very bad" is not a strong choice of words. "Harmful" might be. Then again, once you say "harmful," you'll have to say WHY it's harmful. In the sentence "everything is a perversion of one sort of another" ... well, "of" should be "or." I recognize this is a common typo, but I would love to edit it and make this site better! There's hundreds of entries where it is just poorly written and I'd love to edit it JUST FOR FLUIDITY. In other words, so it's more readable, free from typos and other errors, etc. Also, there are some things which are obviously biased, but I don't think has anything to do with being conservative or liberal, such as the use of "he" in this article. Anyone, male or female, can be desensitized to sex via porn, and as a female who happens to enjoy porn, I think that this article should recognize that people of both genders view porn, and that sex is not as stereotypically male as many people would like you to believe. After all, it takes two...

I've worked with a number of newspapers and I study linguistics. I've won numerous awards for my writing and read countless books on how to persuade people with words and make the most use out of every word. I regularly edit my peer's essays and I do not change their opinions, but make their opinions come across as stronger through a better method of writing. I would love to do this for this website, but unfortunately I am blocked from editing most articles because they are controversial and have been locked. I could probably find other examples of unclear sentences, but I can't remember which articles I have looked at.

Keep up your beliefs. It takes all kinds to make up this world, and we need both conservative and liberal viewpoints. I'd love to help you guys, but you consistently block me. Oh well. Your loss.

Peace.

-Neko1337

:I don't think the number of locked articles are as bad as you seem to think. Surely there are ''some'' that you'd be interested in editing that are not locked. And once the administrators see that you are doing a good job, they might even be willing to unlock articles for you to tidy up.
:I suspect that the original author(s) use male pronouns in a generic way, not specifically indicating males.
:I improved the article a little bit in line with your comments (but I agree it could do with more).
:[[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 10:54, 5 July 2007 (EDT)

:: Pornography consumers are overwhelmingly male (by a nearly 3:1 margin), so the only substantive point made by "Neko" above is not persuasive.[http://internet-filter-review.toptenreviews.com/internet-pornography-statistics.html]--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 11:15, 5 July 2007 (EDT)

::: I didn't know the actual figures, but yes, I had meant to mention something along those lines also. Nevertheless, I gather (it's just an impression) that pornography use by females is on the increase. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 11:26, 5 July 2007 (EDT)

I read somewhere (I actually think it was a claim by Pat Robertson, so take it with a grain of salt) that women tend more to read erotic literature.

In any event, I think it's very interesting to present this from both a Christian and an Islamic perspective, as Ed has done here. [[User:DanH|DanH]] 11:58, 13 July 2007 (EDT)

== Why porn is actually bad ==
Should we sight more sources for why pornography is bad...maybe we should offer counterpoints to why pornography is bad, then shown arguements against those to make our case stronger. {{unsigned|Kaji132007}}

==Him Vs Her and Person==
Why are all the references to males?
"Porn says that happiness is found by having the same experience over and over again with lots of different '''women'''''(my girl isn't interested in women)''; true eros says that happiness is found by having different experiences over and over again with the same person"

"Viewing or reading pornography day in and day out has an effect. It desensitizes a person, makes '''him''' more withdrawn, and makes '''him''' view '''others''' ''(and other males?)'' like objects rather than the people they are."

I wanted my girlfriend to look at this page because she does use porn quite regularly much to my disappointment. Its something we are trying to deal with and work through, but the inherit bias toward males in the article has turned her attention to topics of feminism and such and the original point of asking her to read this as been lost on her. --[[User:DjWizard|DjWizard]] 20:51, 5 October 2007 (EDT)

:I don't get your point - or if I do, I disagree with it. We assume a porn user is a man, the same way we assume a nurse is a woman. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 21:02, 7 October 2007 (EDT)
::And both assumptions would be invalid some of the time. My general answer is that "male" terms are actually generic terms (as "man" is a reference to a member of "mankind"), although some specific instances might bear being reworded. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 23:42, 7 October 2007 (EDT)

I don't see oyur problem with you Girlfriend looking at porn, I mean, is it causing any actual relationship problems? {{unsigned|Kaji132007}}
:You don't see a problem with portraying someone in a degrading manner? [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 23:42, 7 October 2007 (EDT)

==Religious perspectives==

Perhaps it's time to re-visit this issue. Much as it is a touchy subject, it does need to be addressed. A well-balanced and scholarly article would explain why it's bad, and not (as "Neko" suggested) merely make general assertions. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] [[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]] 21:09, 7 October 2007 (EDT)

== Pornography actually lowers rape rate ==

I was looking at statistics for rape rate in Japan, and It would seem that pornography and rape are inversely related. As porn sales go up, rape rates go down. Should we include this in the article? {{unsigned|Bias}}

: "It would seem"—seems rather uncertain to me. Is the source on-line? If so, post it here (on this talk page) and we can look into it further.

No, sorry, it's not online. If you would like, look in to it. [[User:Bias|Bias]] 22:19, 31 January 2008 (EST)

I do remember seeing an article that pointed out that pornography has become much more widely available in recent years, because of the Internet, and in that same time, the rate for rapes in the U.S. has gone down, although the article pointed out that law enforcement procedures had improved over that time too. Unfortunately, I don't remember the name of the article or where I saw it, but it's an aspect of the issue that's worth investigating.--[[User:Frey|Frey]] 15:50, 3 March 2008 (EST)

http://www.hawaii.edu/PCSS/online_artcls/pornography/prngrphy_rape_jp.html [[User:Walkie|Walkie]] 16:26, 26 June 2008 (EDT)

==Useful external link==

Despite its misleading introduction, the following is not a porn site:
[http://www.xxxchurch.com The #1 Christian Porn site] - includes accountability software, forums for couples, men, women, and teens... and useful articles. Anti-porn merchandise too! xD [[User:NathanG|Nate]] 12:40, 22 June 2008 (EDT)

:Would these be the xxxchurch forums where debate reigns and the notorious Suricou patrols? They can get quite hostile at times. [[User:NewCrusader|NewCrusader]] 18:52, 22 September 2008 (EDT)

== Unlock? ==

Can this be unlocked? I realize it's a touchy subject, but it needs some work. [[User:HelpJazz|Help]][[User talk:HelpJazz|Jazz]] 23:31, 6 October 2008 (EDT)

==Cite #1==

How can a reference back up an opinion with another opinion? Is there any proof of either of these claims? [[User:NateE|NateE]][[User talk:NateE| Let Us Communicate]] 15:34, 10 October 2008 (EDT)
:Now that I've messed it all up, which ref were you talking about? [[User:HelpJazz|Help]][[User talk:HelpJazz|Jazz]] 20:30, 10 October 2008 (EDT)

== Market forces ==

It should be considered that if there was no market for it then pornography (or erotica or anything else) would not exist. The fact that a very large part of the internet, content of mainstream movies, and "adult" publications , fairly clearly shows that there is a market for such material. Rather than fight to ban such materials (which is somewhat like prohibition , which didnt work very well) more effort in educating peoples to renounce them is needed. Its somewhat interesting that in polls no one admits to buying magazines like Playboy and yet it sells a lot of copies. Certainly those forms which are illegal should be prosecuted or some arrangement made to block access (if originating in another country). In the United States this subject is considered a First Amendment issue , the right of free expession. [[User:Markr|Markr]] 12:31, 18 November 2008 (EST)

:Using your argument for a moment; try replacing "pornography" with "crack cocaine". Doesn't sound like a very good argument then does it? We need to go after all the pornography that is polluting our world just like we go after hard drugs in this country. There is little difference to The Lord between a playboy and a crack pipe. It encourages lustful feelings, which is a sin. Need I say more? [[User:Patriot1505|Patriot1505]] 18:47, 20 June 2009 (EDT)

== This page needs to be locked. ==

This pages seems to get vandalized quite often. Can a mod lock it before some idiot starts adding pictures? - [[Georgearnold]]