A war is being raged in our country, one which receives only scant coverage because the fatalities and wounds are not so obvious, and yet the combat wreaks as much destruction as any war in which our nation has been involved. The very foundations of our civilization are under assault by those forces which manufacture, distribute, and promote pornography. No area of our civic life has remained untouched by this blight and every responsible effort possible on our part to overcome the disease must be employed. In light of the growing concern expressed by sociologists, lawyers, medical doctors, educators and religious leaders with regard to the harmful effects of pornography, what should our response be as Christian citizens? The purpose of this report is to summarize recent studies made on the effect of pornography and then to recommend a course of action for us as Christian citizens. Under pressure from a number of his ardent supporters, President Reagan finally presumed upon Attorney General Edwin Meese to appoint a Commission to study the effects of pornography in America. A nine-member panel was secured, with study begun in 1985. The last government study conducted on this subject was begun in the term of President Lyndon Johnson in 1967 and completed during the first term of President Richard Nixon in 1970. The conclusions reached by that Commission were roundly disputed. Immediately after its publication, few serious researchers agreed with any of the conclusions of the "Nixon Commission" Report. However, this divergence of opinion was rarely reported in the press, and instead the conclusions reached by the "Nixon Commission" were taken as the standard upon which legal rulings were based, as well as social and cultural tolerances formed. In large part, the Nixon Commission reported no conclusive evidence linking pornography with commission of sexual crimes, nor did it discover any relation between the proliferation of pornography and resulting moral decline. That these findings were suspect from the beginning should surprise no one. Therefore, the appointment of a new Commission to re-examine this subject was not only justified, but essential if our nation were to develop a national consensus on dealing with pornographic material. Unlike the Nixon Commission. those chosen for the Meese Commission represented a broad spectrum of political, social and moral backgrounds and came from various occupations and professions (contrary to accusations in the various media). The Commission was by no means a homogenous unit, but represented a diversity of moral, social, political and religious perspectives. However, at the end of its period of study, a reasonable harmony did prevail as is evident from the Commission Report. A brief summary of the Commission's findings are as follows: Summary 1. Pornography since 1970 has been increasingly more violent and more degrading. 2. A correlation does exist between the availability and consumption of pornographic materials and an increase in reported sex offenses. 3. Cross-national data from areas as disparate as England, Australia, Singapore and South Africa found that rape reports have increased where porn laws have been liberalized while the same steep rise is not in evidence where restrictions exist. 4. Rapists are fifteen times as likely as non-offenders to have had exposure to "hard-core" pornography "during childhood or between six to ten years old. They also tended to report an earlier age of peak experience with pornography." 6. Even non-violent, soft-core pornography may "legitimate rape." The eight major 108 MINUTES OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY 1987 men's magazines (Chick, Club, Gallery, Genesis, Hustler, Oui, Playboy, and Penthouse) have sales that are five times higher per capita in Alaska and Nevada than in other states, such as North Dakota. And rape rates are six times higher per capita in Alaska and Nevada than North Dakota. 6. Sexually violent films affect "normal" people es well as criminals. What may he surprising is that the most dangerous material is not X-rated movies of fornication, but R-rated slasher" films like the "Toolbox Murders." After secing one such film per day for five days, college males "were asked to participate in what was presented as a different study-n pretest of a law school documentary" of a rape trial. Another group saw X-rated non-violent films and were asked the same questions about the rape victim. “Those massively exposed to sexual violence ju ged the victim of the assault to be significantly less injured and evaluated her as less worthy than did the control group." 7. A commercial network exists which distributes child pornography, produced abroad by which flows virtually untouched through the US Postal Service. 8. Ex sting obscenity laws on the local, state and federal levels go largely unenforce J. 9. Organized crime controls between 85-90% of the production and distribution of pornography. 10. I ornography, largely unregulated by the government, generates between $8-9 billion dollars in profits annually. A second study convened by Surgeon General C. Everett Koop and composed of a number of the leading social scientists actively investigating the effects of pornography was released in August, 1986. The conclusions reached in this study compare favorably with the Commission's findings: 1. Children and adolescents who participate in the production of pornography experience adverse and enduring effects. 2. Prolonged use of pornography increases the belief that less common sexual practices are common. 3. Pornography that portrays sexual aggression as pleasurable for the victim increases the acceptance of the use of coercion in sexual relations. 4. Acceptance of coercive sexuality appears to be related to sexual aggression. 5. In laboratory settings, measuring short term effects, exposure to violent pornography increases punitive behavior towards women. The manner in which the Meese Commission conducted its work virtually insured that its findings would contrast sharply with the report of the Nixor Commission. Hour upon hour was spent hearing testimony from victims of pernos raphy, former actors and actresses involved in the manufacture of pornography as well as interested citizens, both opponents of obscene material as well as civil libertaria is. At no point wre individuals pressured into testifying or harrassed for offering their testimony. However, members of the Commission were subject to repeated harri ssments during the hearings themselves as well as in the media generally. Photographers for various pornographic magazines were present at each public session, attempting to capture Commission members in embarrassing or otherwise awkward roments. Despite this const int badgering, the virtual neglect of coverage by the major news media, the Cominission conducted its work in an open, fair manner, well-servir g our nation. II One conclusion arises immediately upon considering the recommendations of the Meese Commission report: namely, that our greatest ally, as Jerry Kirk has pointed out, is the United States Constitution.' Far from protecting obscenity from prosecution, the First Amendment provides no shelter for the pornographers and smut peddlers. The Supreme Court ruling Miller vs. California, which established the "local standards" principle, clearly excludes obscenity from consideration as "free speech." The Supreme Court has ruled that each community has the authority to establish its own standards with regard to what constitutes obscenity. Thus eny appeal to the right to produce and distribute obscene materials based on the First Amendment is fallacious in the extreme. The genius of the Supreme Court ruling with regards to "local standards" lies in the fact that each community is entrusten with the responsibility for determining the difference between obscene material and pornography. When that distinction has been made, then each local law enforcement agency is responsible 1987 CUMBERLAND PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH 109 for certifying that such materials are not available. Were local prosecutors and law enforcement agencies to enforce existing laws, most communities could effectively stamp our pornography within 18 months. Any number of major metropolitan areas have begun to enforce local standards in the prosecution of distributors of obscene literature. Atlanta and (incinnati have made great strides in eliminating this plague from their municipalities. What is all the more remarkable is that such measures were possible in both cases wi: hout any significant new legislation. What made the difference was a combination of three factors: aggressive prosecution by the District Attorney's Office, thorough investigation by law enforcement agencies, and the united public outcry of the citizenry. As in any military skirmish, so in this moral warfare, the battie lines are constantly shifting. Whereas pornography began largely in the print mediuin, it quick y spread to the film medium. Change has occurred rapidly in this area as well, what with the introduction of VCR's into American homes, this has created a new difficulty in bringing a halt to the proliferation of pornography. Whereas in the past anyone wishing to view X-rated films had to undergo the unnerving experience entering an X-rated movie house, now individuals are free to rent such films in their neighborhood video store and view them in the privacy of their homes. Without a doubt, any video cassette found in a local video store in the "adult" section would be judged obscene in virtually every court in the land. The producers and distributors of poriography have found a new means of circumventing the law by capitalizing on the rapid opening of video stores making detection of illegal tapes so much more difficult. The fact remains, however, that such material is just as illegal when sold in a video store and viewed at home as it is when shown in a grimy theater in the inner city; yet, because of its accessibility and the virtual seclusion of its consumers such pornography poses the gravest threat of all. What most commentators and consumers fail to realize is that crime committed privately and out of the reach of detection still remains criminal. As this battle progresses, it remains to be seen what role the church will play. Some individuals show great reluctance even to consider such a topic, while of ners express concern over tampering with the First Amendment. However, in fulfilling our calling to be a witness to the love of God for all people, we dare not turn our back on this issue at this critical juncture. Two reasons call for our involvement in this struggle. On the one hand, as citizens, we ought to manifest a concern for the safety and security of our citizens, particularly women and children who are usually the victims of sexual crimes. Study after study has demonstrated that sexual offenders are prompted and in sume sense motivated by pornography, often times just prior to committing a crime. In one study, almost every sexual offender in jail admitted that he began his career by consuming obscene literature. In another study, an investigation of the dwelling place of captured sexual o fenders almost inevitably revealed large amounts of pornography in the offender's possession. On this basis alone, we ought to cemand of our public officials that they control the production and distribution of pornography as a matter of safeguarding our communities. On the other hand, as Christians we accept the belief that God does indeed love all persons and desires for all persons to come to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ. That belief places a high premium on the life and welfare of each individual. Any attempt to devalue persons, then, l'ecomes an exercise in sinfulness. Porno Taphy clearly degrades not only the subjects portrayed, but also consumers and their victims. After all, pornography represents nothing more than pictorial prostitution. As such, it debases human nature, showing human beings both depraved and devoid of the love that God intends to accompany sexual relations. We are unfaithful to our calling as Christians if we neglect to raise a cry of protest to this despicable industry. How may we best attack this enemy? There are several strategies which are open to us, all of which have produced results in diverse situations. In the first instance, we in the church occupy a special place in the community, whereby others look to us for moral guidance and instruction. We have the privilege of making our communities aware of this dangerous cancer which promises such pleasure but produces such despair. By educating our membership and then our communities, we can begin to stern the tide which has flowed so freely for almost 20 years. Secondly, a: the congregational level and also through our presbyteries, we can 110 MINUTES OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY 1987 become affiliated with those organizations already actively involved in opposing the spread of pornography. The National Federation of Decency, the National Coalition Against Pornography and the newly formed Religious Alliance Against Pornography will provide any interested individual or group with information on how to become active in the struggle. Boycotts have always been an effective tool of protest in American History and in this case are no less useful. While it is incumbent upon each of us to exercise good judgment in approaching persons who distribute these materials, we also must be firm in our appeal. Letter-writing campaigns to elected officials demonstrate to thein that the general populace neither endorses nor accepts the widespread availability of illegal, obscene materials. By whatever moral means, we in the church must exercise our full influence in keeping this dangerous subject before the public and our legislative and judicial representatives. In conclusion, we have the opportunity in this hour to act decisively in putting an end to the unregulated flow of pornography. May this General Assembly go on record as pledging our support to this urgent cause. Therefore, we recommend: Recommendation 1: That the General Assembly instruct its Stated Clerk to communicate through written letter to the President of the United States and the Attorney General of the United States that this body endorses the Attorney General's Commission on Pornography's Report and applauds the administration's efforts to implement the recommendations of that Commission, particularly the establishment of a special division within the Justice Department to deal solely with the enforcement of existing lawa through prosecution of producers and distributors of pornography. Recommendation 2: That the General Assembly urge the presbyteries to assign this matter for consideration to their Committees on Christian Social Relations or other appropriate agencies, in order that this issue shall be kept before our attention and that any progress in the struggle be reported to such presbyterial agencies. Recommendation 3: That the General Assembly urge ench congregation to involve itself on the local level in the fight to end pornography, and thus witness to the Christian doctrine of human worth. 1. The Mind Polluters, p. 102 2. Religious Alliance Against Pornography "Fact Sheet," 1986(7) RESOURCES Final Report of the Attorney General's Commission on Pornography, Nashville: Rutledge Hill Press, 1986 The Mind Polluters, Jerry R. Kirk. Nashville. Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1985 NFD Journal Tupelo, MS ORGANIZATIONS Citizens for Decency through Law, Inc.-William Swindell, National Director, 2231 West Royal Palm Rd., Phoenix, AZ 85021 Morality in Media, Inc. – Rev. Morton A. Hill. S.J., 476 Riverside Dr.. New York, NY 10116 National Christian Association-Arad Curl. Box 40945, Washington, DC 20016 National Coalition Against Pornography Religious Alliance Against Pornography, 200 Compton Rd., Suite 924a, Cincinnati, OH 45231 Respectfully submitted: Michael Krech, chairperson; George Estes, secretary. Appendix B Religious Alliance Against Pornography "As religious leaders, we believe in the inherent dignity of ach human being. Created in God's image and likeness, the .uman person is the clearest reflection of God's presence among us. Because human life is sacred, we all have a duty to develop the kind of societal environment that protects and fosters its development. This is why we address a broad range of life threatening and life diminishing issues. These assaults on human life and dignity are all distinct, sach requiring its own moral analysis and solution. But they must be confronted as elements of a larger picture. "The purpose of RAAP is to bring into clear focus a major factor in the assault on human dignity and the consequent dehumanization that it promotes: hard core and child pornography. This concern brought us together following the release of the Report of the Attorney General's Commission on Pornography. We are in unanimous agreement that hard core and child pornography, which are not protected by the Constitution, are evils which must be eliminated. motivate. We can and must help people understand the moral dimensions of the problem of hard core and child pornography and what their responsibility is in this regard, while fully respecting freedom of expression guaranteed by the First Amendment. In particular, we wish to make it clear that we do not and will not advocate censorship. Our understanding of censorship implies actions being taken against materials which are protected by the First Amendment. "As teachers, we will do all in our power to proclaim the truth of human dignity and freedom, and to promote the God-given human values needed for the moral health of our society. Given the information and motivation, people will do what is necessary to affect public policy. "The membership of RAAP, representing a broad spectrum of America's religious community, is an indication of the seriousness of the problem and our commitment to addressing it. This represents the beginning of an ongoing process which will facilitate greater cooperation on this vital issue among "As religious leaders, our primary responsibility is to teach and religious bodies. "We hereby subscribe to this communique as responsible individuals BISHOP WILLIAM FREY DR. JOHN R. HOUCK DR. RAY H. HUGHES DR. B. EDGAR JOHNSON DR. WILLIAM A. JONES National Conference of Black Pastors REV. DEAN M. KELLEY National Council of Churches DR. JERRY R. KIRK National Coalition Against DR. EILEEN W. LINDNER BISHOP GEORGE DALLAS MCKINNEY Bishop of Southern California Church of God in Christ REV. JOHN MARACLE Focus on the Family Chief of North Americas DR. BILLY A. MELVIN Executive Director National Association of Evangelicals COMMISSIONER ANDREWS. MILLER MS CANDACE MUELLER The Lutheran Church MR. MATT PARKER Institute for Black Family Development DR. ADRIAN ROGERS Southern Baptist Convention DR. JACK STANTON Southern Baptist Convention DR. EVERETT STENHOUSE DR. PAUL TANNER BISHOP CLYDE E. VAN VALIN of North America MRS. FRAN WOLFLEY Women's Fellowship Commission DR. JOHN H. WHITE National Association of Evangelicals HIS EMINENCE JOSEPH CARDINAL BERNARDIN HIS EMINENCE JOHN CARDINAL KROL Archbishop of Philadelphia HIS EMINENCE BERNARD CARDINAL LAW HIS EMINENCE JOHN CARDINAL O'CONNOR MOST REV. JAMES W. MALONE National Conference of Catholic Bishops BISHOP ROBERT J. BANKS Auxiliary Bishop of Boston BISHOP FRANCIS J. MUGAVERO, D.D. FATHER BRUCE RITTER Covenant House THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER-DAY SAINTS Elder John K. Carmack DR. RICHARD P. LINDSAY United Methodist Church Send to: Religious Alliance Against Pornography, 800 Compton Road, Suite 9248, Cincinnati, Ohio 45231 |