Arrg! Christian Radio: So Close And Yet So Far

[Nomadic techno-gypsy]

I'm currently staying in the Kansas City area, and let me tell you. . .I though Texas was bad!

 

So I've been surfing the radio lately, and as I prefer talk radio to music, I inevitably end up listening to some Christian radio.

Most of it is the usual Christian neo-con crap, but there were two things today that really got to me for their ignorance and stupidity.

 

One was a commercial by an organization that seeks to eliminate pornography. It cites a statistic that x% of child predators not only use child pornography, but regular "adult" pornography as well. Hence, they state, pornography is not an individual's problem that only affects them, but is a serious societal issue, leading inextricably to child molestation.

 

Why then do they not use the same measure and say since x% of child predators are MINISTERS that we need to eradicate the clergy? Do they not understand the difference betwee correlation and causation?!?

 

 

The other was what I subtitle "So close, and yet so far" I listened to a couple of segments of the Bible Answer Man with Hank Hannegraf. One of his callers asked the question about the "apocalyptic imagery" in the gospel account of the ressurection with the veil being torn in the temple, the rocks split asunder, and the dead walking the earth.

 

Hank's response was that such an event would have been noted by contemporary sources, and as a result, is probably symbolic in its nature not inherantly literal physical events. Come on Hank! You can do it! Your logic is sound, now APPLY THAT TO THE RESSURECTION/ASCENSION AND ALL OTHER LUDICROUS CLAIMS ABOUT JESUS!

 

So close, and yet so far.

 

I'm gonna stop listening to the radio for a while. . .too depressing. I think I'll read "Brave New World" to cheer me up

[ShackledNoMore]

No, they don't understand the difference between correlation and causation. They're not in the habit of actually thinking. But beyond that, I doubt that they or their target audience put any thought whatsoever into validating their statistic. It sounds pretty hard to reliably arrive at a figure of what percentage of child predators would actually use "regular adult pornography." I would also venture to to guess that the percentage of regular, non child molesting adults (especially males) who use "regular adult pornography" is extremely high. How does the rate of use of this type of pornography by child molesters and non child molesters compare? It doesn't matter, they're on a mission from god to purge the world from the evil of pornography and it makes no difference what kind of statistic they'll have to make up to do it.

 

I listen to talk radio some while commuting. It's a habit I took up nearly 20 years ago when I wanted to use otherwise dead time to keep up on the news. I used to listen a lot more, but I've driven in silence more and more in recent years. Sure, I like to keep tabs on what's being said, but I've had my fill of all the neocon garbage that's permeated the air waves.

 

Well, at least "Brave New World" is an outstanding book.

[GraphicsGuy]

I really don't see how getting rid of adult pornography would reduce the number of child predators at all. Child pornography IS illegal and the predators still get ahold of it and/or make their own.

 

I'm not making light of it, because it's horrible, but how is eliminating one form of porn going to fix anything? It would just send the adult biz underground as well. And foreign countries wouldn't listen to US law...bah, it's just stupid for them to even try.

 

Protect the kids by making kiddie porn illegal and make any bastards who are caught with stuff suffer for it.