Thanks, you're signed up!


Thanks for registering for the 30 Day Challenge!

We will be sending you an email shortly.

Please make sure you do these two things so you get your emails:

1. Add [email protected] to your address book
2. Mark your email from us as NOT SPAM


PS. If you don't get your email in the next few hours check your spam folder.
Find out how you can make sure our emails get to your inbox here. ×

30 DAY PORN FREE CHALLENGE

30 DAYS OF ADVICE TO HELP YOU STAY PORN FREE

user avatar

Video Blog: ABC News’s “Porn Before Puberty” Segment

by Shellie R. Warren on October 28th, 2012 in Women

“It was this one Black guy, this one Hispanic guy and this one very blonde woman and they were like ferociously banging each other. It was very…hmm. I mean, I came home I was bawling my eyes out. I’ll never forget it.”—Danielle speaking on the first time she saw porn at the age of 11.

If you didn’t catch this on ABC News, I wanted to share it. A child being introduced to sex via watching a “ferocious three way” and admitting that it disturbed her so much that it made her cry is *so* not how God intended for sex to be introduced *to anyone*. Check this out below (it’s roughly six minutes) and let me know what y’all think:

Sound off…

Thanks, you're signed up!


We will be sending your first email shortly.

Please make sure you do these two things so you get your emails:

1. Add [email protected] to your address book
2. Mark your 1st email from us as NOT SPAM


PS. If you don't get your 1st email in the next 5 minutes check your spam folder.
Find out how you can make sure our emails get to your inbox here. ×

Live Inspired. Weekly Emails to Keep you Healthy.

Back

Resources

  • Ben Dover

    Thanks for the leg and hiney shot. Kids shouldn’t see porn. Most people agree on that.

    • ShellieRW

      Interesting on the “leg shot” comment. She’s a child so it didn’t even register to me that it was…anything more than a child.

      Anyway, if we all agree that kids shouldn’t see porn and *we are children of the Lord*, what does that ultimately mean?

      • Precocious

        Being children of the Lord or the bride of Christ are metaphors describing our relationship to God; the first is one describes the source of our spiritual life and influence; the second describes our attitude of submission and place of security. Actual children aren’t capable of interpreting sexual material, esp. hardcore stuff. Adults who have sexual experience are able to filter out and categorize that which is normal, relatively normal or just plain nasty.

        If we have conviction that it is shameful to be seen naked or having sex, then it would be logical that we feel it’s wrong to see someone in those situations. If we believe that it’s wrong to have sex outside of marriage, then we would believe its wrong to portray such scenes in writing or images. If we believe that it’s wrong to engage in sexual arousal/fulfillment outside of marriage, then we would believe porn is wrong, because that is the purpose of porn.

        • elizabeth

          Should we dig through the trash to categorize normal trash from nasty trash? Do you feel that it’s right or okay to look at nudity and sex acts? Doesn’t the Bible speak against fornication and uncleanness, or do you not believe in the Bible?

          • birdy

            Words like those are often the subject of much debate over translation. They may have many meanings, and even if translated literally they may express ideas very diffenent today than how they existed in the culture of the time.

          • me

            One man’s trash is another man or woman’s treasure. Most people find the healthy human form and sexuality beautiful not trashy, like Song of Solomon where sexual beauty and pleasure is depicted for public enjoyment. “Unto the pure all things are pure”. Fornication as birdy hinted didn’t mean premarital sex in the Bible and uncleanness seems to refer to anal sex.

        • ShellieRW

          I hear where you’re coming from; however, a part of being children of the Most High (Psalm 82:6) is about *submitting to him as our Father* and therefore, living a lifestyle that is sexually pure and free of lust: “But put on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make no provision for the flesh, to fulfill its lusts.” (Romans 13:14) What I find to be both sad and unfortunate is that adults actually think that they can handle porn. There are far too many statistics, broken marriages and sexual dysfunction as the result of adults watching porn that supports that they can’t; that they should *respect their Father* when he says that sex is for married people and married people alone (Hebrews 13:4).

          • me

            “Pure” and “free of lust” is by Bible standards not Church standards… two different things. “Lust”, in it’s bad sense, means to desire something evil or forbidden by the Lord, things that the sinful nature (the flesh) wants, which includes envy, witchcraft, strife, hatred, drunkenness, as well as sexual sin. So, Romans 13:14 would only apply to desires for sexual connections which God has forbidden. See Lev.18.

            Married people should not have a secret porn habit, and certainly should not be addicted to porn, the two of which usually go together and end in tragedy.

            God told David that He had given him his many wives and mistresses (2 Sam.12:8 BBE ), and that if he wanted more, God would have given him many more. If God gives men multiple wives, “along with what delights a man—all sorts of mistresses(Eccl.2:8 ISV)”, then I hardly think that He minds a guy looking at pictures of females for some few moments of enjoyment, as God said of Bathsheba bathing, “she was very good to look at.”

            I read Heb.13:4 as a warning to men to honor their nuptials and to not take other men’s wives (adultery). If God was going to command that sex is only lawful when married, it would state that clearly in the beginning of the Bible, not in an obscure passage of the NT. I think the only OT passage that suggests such a rule is regarding a betrothed virgin, who was considered a married woman in that culture. An unbetrothed sexually active woman was not punished and no sin offering was required.

  • Trapper

    I only watched the first part. The interviewer acted so stupidly to not realize that if you give kids esp. males, access to porn, they will watch it and be adversely affected. This is not news. It’s as old as the internet. We have known about it from the beginning. Porn is the catalyst of many advances on the internet. Like Cookie monster says, the Internet is made for Porn. (Google that for the MV)

    Christian, If you use the internet, everyone assumes that you look at porn, at least occasionally, since that is the most common use of it, as well as the reason for such things as broadband connections and why people were willing to pay so much more to have them when they really didn’t need them to just read email or the news. (Some wives are really dumb.) It’s like having a microwave and telling people you don’t use it to make popcorn.

    • birdy

      o/~ The internet is for porn;
      The internet is for porn.
      Why you think the net was born?
      Porn, Porn, Porn! o/~

  • RogerDodger

    How do you interpret this Elizabeth; (speaking to a young man) 1Timothy 5:2 “Treat older women as mothers, and younger women as sisters, with absolute purity”.

    • me

      ‘elizabeth’ was challenging ‘precocious’ to justify porn; she wasn’t saying it was okay. The passage you quote is written to a pastor who would be guilty of sexual harassment if he took advantage of his position in the congregation to act in a sexual manner with the young women. If a man treated a younger woman as his sister consistently, he would never date or get married. That verse has been misapplied.

  • HistoricalTruth

    Humans are sexual beings and have been since the beginning of our species. This is nothing new; study history. It is only religious fundamentalists who have a problem with procreation. I remember reading about an indigenous tribe that had no concept of shame until Catholic missionaries visited and taught them.

    • PG

      There is no “procreation” in pornography. How about reading about Adam and Eve, they were ashamed pretty sure they were around before that tribe. Humans are not “sexual” beings thus the desciption “human beings”.

  • rogerdodger

    Dear me, to state that 1 and 2 Timothy, Titus, Philemon, should only be applicable to young “male pastors”, young male missionarys, and a young male employee, you have sadly missed the ark. (boat). Ask David how it worked for him to look at naked girls outside of covenant marriage. Ask Ted Bundy how “soft porn” worked out for him. Paul talked at great length about marriage, so to assume Paul is confused about looking at young women as sisters only “so they wont date”, is disingenuous, at best, on your part. The Word of God is able to pierce down to the bone and marrow all the way here in 2012. God does not change, He is not “progressive” because we can look at porn on our phones, He has not decided well that would be ok “because, you know, they are “sexual beings”

    • me

      I agree that there are portions of the pastoral epistles that are instructive for the average believer, just as there are portions of Leviticus that speak to NT Gentile believers. The context of the passage you quoted was instruction to a young pastor on how to minister to various people in the congregation. You don’t need this verse to argue for moral purity. But if you want to define moral purity as treating younger women as your sister, that would prohibit marriage. He’s saying the way you treat a younger woman as a pastor, counseling, rebuking or whatever, should be beyond reproach.

      David was never faulted for looking at naked girls outside of covenant marriage. God had no problem with that, rather, He may have encouraged it. David’s sin wasn’t looking at Bathsheba, it was having sex with a married woman and killing her husband.

      Ted Bundy had deep problems prior to porn usage. Using porn doesn’t make people rapists or serial killers.

      I never suggested that Paul was against marriage, just that your incorrect interpretation would lead to that conclusion.

Thanks, you're signed up!


We will be sending your first email shortly.

Please make sure you do these two things so you get your emails:

1. Add [email protected] to your address book
2. Mark your 1st email from us as NOT SPAM


PS. If you don't get your 1st email in the next 5 minutes check your spam folder.
Find out how you can make sure our emails get to your inbox here. ×

Thanks, you're signed up!


Thanks for registering for the 30 Day Challenge!

We will be sending you an email shortly.

Please make sure you do these two things so you get your emails:

1. Add [email protected] to your address book
2. Mark your email from us as NOT SPAM


PS. If you don't get your email in the next few hours check your spam folder.
Find out how you can make sure our emails get to your inbox here. ×
You really want to exit? ×

Latest Blog Posts


×