AI Idols Will Make Idiots Of Us All — If We Let Them
We're making utter fools of ourselves while claiming to have reached the apex of wisdom.We're making utter fools of ourselves while claiming to have reached the apex of wisdom.Allie Beth Stuckey delivers bold speech on Charlie Kirk’s “5 most controversial truths” at TPUSA LSU stop
On October 27, conservative firebrand and BlazeTV host Allie Beth Stuckey, star of the hit Christian podcast “Relatable,” commanded the stage at Turning Point USA’s Baton Rouge, Louisiana, tour stop, where over 1,500 cheering college students packed the Raising Canes River Center Theatre to capacity.
Allie opened by encouraging the crowd with her favorite Charlie-ism — the phrase he used to encourage her with when the media tried to smear her: “Keep slugging.”
“I want you to think of that phrase every minute of every day. The only thing that you can do with the grace and the power of God is to keep slugging — first for the honor and the glory of Jesus Christ, but also in honor of Charlie Kirk,” she said as students stood to their feet and applauded.
She then launched into an inspiring speech titled “5 of Charlie Kirk’s Most Controversial Truths.”
Truth #1: Feminism has failed women
While the feminist movement claims to be pro-women and pro-equality, it’s actually worked to women’s detriment. Instead of making women equal to men, the feminist movement sought to make women the same as men.
“It has fed us this lie that in order to be respected, that we women have to talk like men, that we have to act like men, that we have to be like men,” Allie said.
But that required forsaking the very things that make us women — primarily being moms and wives, which the feminist industrial complex has demonized by pushing abortion, sexual liberation, and gender abolitionism.
Feminism has “left each and every one of its followers lonelier and more broken,” said Allie, who then reminded the women in the audience the truth about who they are.
“Your value, your worth comes from the God who created you. ... You were made in God’s image, and your equal worth, your inherent worth, comes from that reality. It doesn't come from feminism. ... You can be strong, and you can be courageous, and you can be brilliant, and you can be hardworking, and you do not need to act like a man to do that.”
Truth #2: Porn has weakened men
Pornography, Allie candidly explained, doesn’t just harm men; it harms everyone and everything we ought to hold dear: women, children, marriage, and psychological and physical safety. Porn “objectifies women and children,” “commercializes sex,” “glorifies violence,” “creates addiction and shame,” “destroys marriages,” “ruins your perception of other people,” and has become “the legal loophole for sex trafficking,” she warned.
“Men, we need you, and we need your masculinity, and we need your strength, and we need your boldness, and we need your courage, and we need those things to be harnessed for good,” Allie pleaded.
“We need really strong men, and porn makes you weak.”
Truth #3: Merit always trumps DEI
The fear of oppression based on skin color, gender, or any other trait is a hardship Americans today don’t have to worry about.
“And so, we should not be doling out punishments or doling out rewards based on what people look like, based on their sex, based on how they identify. That is actually called partiality, and the Bible calls it a sin,” Allie declared.
The truth was, is, and will always be that nothing in life is “fair.”
“There are different circumstances surrounding our births, different economic situations, different kinds of parents, different kinds of springboards that we’re given, different kinds of setbacks, a different set of strengths, a different set of weaknesses, different kind of personality, different connections that we all make,” Allie said.
Man’s futile attempt to level the playing field in the name of diversity, equity, and inclusion only creates more of the evils, like racism and sexism, it supposedly aims to eradicate.
Allie, echoing Charlie, clarified that “what matters across the board is excellence. What matters across the board is hard work. None of us is entitled to anything ... so we should only reward that which someone works for through her own talents and efforts.”
Truth #4: America is a Christian nation
Leftists who are threatened by Judeo-Christian principles that challenge every progressive narrative often try to erase America’s deeply religious heritage. They pretend Enlightenment-based ideals, not Christian doctrine, are the bedrock of the nation’s foundation.
But that’s a lie.
While, yes, our founders passionately believed in free speech and expression — core Enlightenment ideas — these values didn’t contradict or eclipse their commitment to God.
“From the Declaration of Independence to all of our founding documents, all of the founders at the very least understood that it was the direction of providence, the Creator of the universe, the giver of all rights, that laid the foundation for this country, is the source of liberty, and the author of morality,” Allie said.
“America makes no sense without Christianity. America makes no sense without the recognition, as we read in the Declaration of Independence, that we were given certain unalienable rights ... given to us by a Creator whose power transcends the government, and therefore, the government cannot arbitrarily take those rights away,” she declared. “That is the foundation on which our country is built.”
Truth #5: Jesus is the only way to Heaven
This particular truth — the central message of the gospel — is the one that got Charlie killed and the one that makes him a martyr, Allie said.
She then shared the good news of salvation through Jesus with those in the crowd who aren’t believers. “By grace through faith, if you believe in that gospel, you won’t die, but you’ll have eternal life,” she encouraged.
“Charlie was first an evangelist, he was first an apologist before he was a political activist or an organizer, and he shared that gospel. He died for that gospel because he believed it to be true. And he wanted you to know that it’s true. And I want you to know that it’s true.”
Allie ended with this powerful reminder: “One day Jesus is coming back, and there will be no more politics. There will be no more debate. There will be no more division.”
“But he’s not here yet, which means that in the meantime ... we’ve got work to do. And that might look different for every single one of us, but let me tell you what I tell my audience all the time. ... Do the next right thing in faith with excellence and for the glory of God.”
To hear Allie’s full speech, watch the video above.
Want more from Allie Beth Stuckey?
To enjoy more of Allie’s upbeat and in-depth coverage of culture, news, and theology from a Christian, conservative perspective, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
Before Drag Queen Story Hour, There Was Alfred Kinsey
If Congress wants to fight sex trafficking, it should investigate Kinsey’s fraudulent research and criminal experiments in the 1940s and 50s.Don't fall for the fake 'banned books' narrative
October 11 marked the end of another Banned Books Week, the American Library Association's annual campaign celebrating works it claims have been unjustly kept from the reading public.
While the event has skewed liberal since its 1982 founding, this year’s theme seems to make a direct appeal to those worried about the Trump era's incipient fascism.
A book does not need to induce the behavior it depicts to have an ideological impact; it just has to imply a world in which such behavior is either normal or inevitable.
“Censorship Is So 1984 — Read for Your Rights” rebukes recent successful conservative campaigns to rid local school libraries of books deemed to promote racial, gender, and Marxist ideology or to expose children to inappropriately explicit material.
Censor censure
On its website, the ALA dismisses these campaigns as either disingenuous, hysterical, or malicious.
“The most common justifications for censorship provided by complainants were false claims of illegal obscenity for minors; inclusion of LGBTQIA+ characters or themes; and covering topics of race, racism, equity, and social justice.”
The recent Kanopy documentary "Banned Together" exemplifies this perspective, portraying book challenges as the work of fearmongering politicians like Governor Ron DeSantis (R-Fla.) or “dark money” groups such as the Heritage Foundation and Moms for Liberty.
Not for teacher
Opponents of these "bans" do have a point. At times overprotective adults can underestimate the capacity of high-school students to handle challenging subject matter. I recall reading Kafka, Camus, and Sherman Alexie as a senior without becoming either a nihilist or an activist.
But there is a deeper question at the heart of this debate: What rights do parents have when it comes to their children's education?
Teachers, progressives argue, are certified experts entrusted with the crucial duty to help students navigate complex issues and protect them from abusive home environments. Who are the parents — relative amateurs when it comes to the formation of young minds — to meddle?
Yet given the recent injection of what used to be considered radical ideas about race, sex, and religion into curricula, skepticism at this expertise is understandable. Educators may laugh off the idea of "liberal indoctrination," but any parent who has been called "racist" or had his faith "deconstructed" by his newly minted college student may disagree.
'Sold' out
The ALA may be technically correct that the books it defends don't meet the strictly legal definition of "obscenity," but something is nonetheless rotten in the state of Denmark (if the reader will permit me a Eurocentric "Hamlet" reference).
Consider the ALA’s "Top 10 Most Challenged Books of 2024." Without exception, each has been flagged by concerned parents as "sexually explicit." It's telling that the ALA diminishes these characterizations as mere "claims." Unlike "pornography," the label "sexually explicit" generally implies no judgment; it's merely descriptive.
So perhaps something more than prudishness is motivating parents. To what end do these books employ explicit depictions of sex? In Patricia McCormick's "Sold," the first-person account of a 13-year-old Tibetan girl sold into sex slavery, detailed scenes of rape and abuse are used to convey the horrors of sex trafficking.
In its defense of "Sold," the ALA clearly sides with McCormick, who says "To ban this book is a disservice to the women who shared their stories with me so the world could know about their plight. And to ban this book is disrespectful to the young readers who want to know about the world as it is."
Conveniently overlooked here is the obvious truth that we regularly educate our children about "the world as it is" while still leaving out age-inappropriate details.
Gender fear
"Tricks" by Ellen Hopkins is another unsparingly graphic account of the sex trade, detailing the stories of five American teens who fall into prostitution. "Crank," Hopkins' other novel on the list, charts a teenager's descent into drug addiction.
Stephen Chbosky's "The Perks of Being a Wallflower" is a slice of high school life that includes a ninth-grader taking LSD, a tumultuous love affair between two teenage boys, a middle-schooler's suicide, and a teen pregnancy that ends in abortion.
"Me and Earl and the Dying Girl" by Jesse Andrews addresses cancer and mortality through the profanity-laden, sex-obsessed voice of its adolescent male protagonist. John Green's "Looking for Alaska" is a coming-of-age novel with a heavy emphasis on drug use and sexual experimentation.
Toni Morrison's "The Bluest Eye" is a multigenerational saga that pivots on a father's brutal rape of his daughter and her subsequent descent into insanity.
The memoirs "All Boys Aren't Blue" by George M. Johnson and "Flamer" by Mike Curato each recount an adolescent's discovery and eventual embrace of his same-sex attraction, while Maia Kobabe's graphic novel "Gender Queer" charts the author's journey toward a "nonbinary" identity and the use of "e, em, eir" pronouns.
RELATED: Librarian group fights woke 'banned books' narrative
Groomer doomers
Likening those who advocate putting such books in the hands of minors to "groomers" only obscures the real issue. A book does not need to induce the behavior it depicts to have an ideological impact; it just has to imply a world in which such behavior is either normal or inevitable.
The "reality" these books represent is in fact the relatively recent consensus of a small liberal elite, imposed on our society from the top down. It confidently asserts that racism is an intractable quality of "whiteness," premarital sex and drug abuse are normal parts of growing up, homosexual relationships are in no way less preferable than heterosexual pairings, and one's "gender" is open to interpretation.
This consensus casually dispenses with the de facto Christian values that have guided America — with varying degrees of success — since its founding.
Slaves to fashion
Most of the "banned" book defenders act not out of malice but rather from an unthinking adherence to fashionable opinion. As G.K. Chesterton observed, compulsory secular education inevitably produces an inoffensive, pluralistic system that offends no one and invests enormous moral authority in teachers:
And if his own private opinions happen to be of the rather crude sort that are commonly contemporary with and connected with the new sciences or pseudo-sciences, he can teach any of them under cover of those sciences.
In other words, educators possess enough authority to smuggle personal beliefs into the classroom. The Ten Commandments and school prayer are impermissible in our secular age, but theories of gender and race are treated as objective truth. Indeed, many insist it would be irresponsible not to teach them.
A glance at what doesn’t appear on the Banned Books list reveals the imbalance. Are activists urging students to read banned right-wing literature? To restore the Bible to school libraries? To study "The Turner Diaries" — a genuinely vile book — in the name for of intellectual freedom? Of course not.
Meanwhile, the publishing industry’s broken business model incentivizes controversy. Slapping a "Banned Book" sticker on a new release is can lead to a major boost in sales.
School for scandal
That might be harmless if confined to a Barnes & Noble display. But it occurs in the context of public education, where foundational classics have been quietly displaced by shallower contemporary novels. Teachers boast about removing Homer, Shakespeare, and other “dead white men” from curricula. "Huckleberry Finn" languishes while legislators debate striking him from schools altogether.
A student’s reading years are limited. Prioritizing great works that shape moral and intellectual formation is essential. Yet in an age of collapsing institutional trust, progressive educators flaunt their credentials and demand the state’s blessing to teach whatever they see fit.
Despite left-wing rhetoric, there is no great epidemic of book-burning in America. Aside from the occasional Pentecostal preacher torching "Harry Potter" for headlines, such incidents are rare. Conservatives, generally, are classicists who want their children reading Homer and Shakespeare. Yet even modest debates over age-appropriate material draw accusations of illiteracy and bigotry.
And that's by design. Banned Books Week is little more than a marketing campaign — an annual ritual of ginning up demand for “forbidden” books and laundering blatant activist propaganda into the merely "controversial." Conservatives who approach this debate on the ALA's terms only add fuel to the fire, as it were. When it comes to the left's persecution narrative, there's no such thing as bad publicity.
TikTok Pushes Sexual Content To Minors While Censoring Christian Games: Report
All seven accounts soon 'encountered pornographic content just a small number of clicks after setting up the account.'Meta Muzzled Child Safety Findings On Virtual Reality Platforms, Researchers Tell Congress
'I wish I could tell you the number of children in VR experiencing these harms, but Meta would not allow me to conduct this research.''Sex recession': Study suggests Americans have lost their mojo
Movies and television programs reportedly have significantly more sexual content, nudity, and immodesty now than those shown just a few decades ago. The so-called "adult entertainment" industry has, meanwhile, exploded, with one projection suggesting that it will grow from an estimated global market size of $58.8 billion in 2023 to $74.7 billion by 2030.
While depictions of sex are ubiquitous in the media, a new study suggests that the real thing is disappearing from the lives of everyday Americans.
The delay and avoidance of marriage appear to be another major factor.
Citing General Social Survey data, the Institute for Family Studies recently indicated that "Americans are having a record-low amount of sex."
Whereas in 1990, 55% of adults ages 18 to 64 reportedly were having sex at least once a week, that number reportedly dropped to less than 50% by the turn of the century. As of last year, the percentage of adults ages 18-64 having sex weekly had fallen all the way down to 37%.
When it comes to individuals ages 18-29 who reported not having sex in the last year, the number held steady at around 15% of respondents until 2010. However, between 2010 and 2024, that number skyrocketed to 24% in the General Social Survey.
There appear to be numerous factors at play, including shifting social norms; libido-killing prescription drugs; the pandemic; decreasing alcohol consumption; the interpersonal impact of social media, gaming, and the smartphone; and pornography. The delay and avoidance of marriage appear to be another major factor.
Dr. Brad Wilcox, professor of sociology at the University of Virginia and director of the National Marriage Project, and Lyman Stone, director of the Pronatalism Initiative at the IFS, noted in a 2019 article in the Atlantic that married people have sex more often but that the share of adults who are married was falling to record lows.
Whereas 46% of married men and women ages 18-64 reported having weekly sex, only 34% of their unmarried peers reported the same, said the new IFS study. However, married couples are also facing a so-called "sex recession," as 59% of married adults ages 18-64 reportedly had sex once a week in the period between 1996 and 2008.
RELATED: American fertility rate hits all-time low as Dems clamor for foreign replacements
The new IFS study noted that younger generations are having less sex than their predecessors did in part because of a "decline in steady partnering, especially in marriage, and a decline in sexual frequency within couples."
This "sex recession" has some obvious implications besides youngsters' joylessness.
Data released by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in July revealed that U.S. fertility rates dropped to an all-time low in last year, with 1.599 children being born per woman. For comparison, the latest reported fertility rates in Australia, England and Wales, Canada, and China are 1.5, 1.44, 1.26, and 1.01, respectively.
The fertility rate necessary for a population to maintain stability and replenish itself without requiring replacement by foreign nationals is 2.1.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
OnlyFans Is Teaching A Generation That Paying For Sex Is Normal
From early fame to young adult sexualized branding, the path is becoming alarmingly predictable.Fired cop avoids jail time after allegedly groping OnlyFans star in X-rated 'traffic stop' video while on duty
A former Tennessee police officer will avoid a jail sentence after he made a plea deal regarding an incident involving his appearance in an X-rated video.
As Blaze News reported in May 2024, the Metro Nashville Police Department was notified that one of the department's officers allegedly appeared in an OnlyFans video titled: "Can't believe he didn't arrest me."
'That was one of the most outrageous, disrespectful acts that a person here could do ...'
The video — posted on the adult-oriented subscription online platform — reportedly shows a police officer pulling a woman over. The officer's police cruiser is seen in the sexual video.
During the fake traffic stop, the cop identifies himself as "Officer Johnson."
The woman in the video allegedly pulls down her top to expose her breasts and offers that the officer may touch her.
WTVF-TV reported that the OnlyFans model offered for the "officer to grope her breasts, which he does while she is seen grabbing his crotch."
In the video, the officer appears to have a Metro Nashville Police Department patch on the shoulder of his uniform.
Investigators determined that the cop in the X-rated video was 35-year-old Sean Herman, an officer with the Metro Nashville Police Department.
Nashville police said in June 2024, "Specialized Investigations Division detectives discovered the video and identified him as the person in an MNPD uniform, seen in the video from the chest down, who took part in a mock traffic stop in an OnlyFans skit during which he groped the exposed breast of the female driver."
Investigators determined that the video was filmed in a warehouse parking lot on April 26, 2024, while Herman was "on duty as a patrol officer in the Madison Precinct."
Herman was fired from the department on May 9, 2024. He had been employed with the Metro Nashville Police Department for three years.
"That was one of the most outrageous, disrespectful acts that a person here could do, and by disrespectful, I mean to all the MNPD employees and this agency," Metro Nashville Police Department spokesperson Don Aaron told WTVF in May 2024.
In June 2024, Herman was arrested and charged with two counts of official misconduct. He was later released on a $3,000 bond.
On Thursday, Herman avoided a jail sentence by entering a "best interest" plea in Nashville criminal court for a felony count of official misconduct, according to the Associated Press.
"The best interest plea means that a defendant pleads guilty while maintaining factual innocence of the crime," according to the AP.
The second count of official misconduct was dropped, and Herman was sentenced to one year of supervised probation.
CBS News reported, "Additionally, he was granted judicial diversion, which means that certain eligible defendants who successfully finish probation under the judge's conditions will have their cases dismissed. They can also then request that charges be expunged from their record."
The AP added that a state board indefinitely suspended Herman's law enforcement officer certification, although he could petition for reinstatement following closure of the criminal case.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Why America can — and must — outlaw pornography
My daughter is 7 years old. She is adorable, kindhearted, and full of life. I would do anything to protect her.
Now think about all the 7-year-olds in your life — children, nephews, nieces, neighbor kids. Statistically speaking, 50% of them will be exposed to pornography in the next five years. Read this paragraph repeatedly until the gravity of it hits you.
Family is the building block of society, and pornography is the corrosive acid that is eating away at its foundation.
As bad as a Playboy would be, I am not talking about a magazine. I am talking about the most depraved, hard-core, and often violent sexual intercourse footage ever conceived in the human mind that is available with a few clicks to anyone with access to a smartphone or computer. The median age of first exposure to this content is 12 years old; 15% will view hard-core pornography before they graduate elementary school.
As Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier is finding out, age verification checks are doing little to deter any of this and are as easy to pass through as our border during the Biden administration.
What kind of sick society allows this?
Pornography's effects
Pornography is a corrosive acid that rots the soul; steals innocence; destroys marriages; fuels objectification, exploitation, and sex trafficking of women and children; increases rape and abuse rates; and unravels the moral fabric of society, causing great public harm. It increases anxiety, shame, sexual dysfunction, and relationship unhappiness among those who use it.
As J.C. Ryle said well, “Nothing darkens the mind so much as sin; it is the cloud which hides the face of God from us.”
Porn use affects every part of our mind, body, and soul. It inflicts immense external harms on individuals and society.
Not only does it directly warp the minds of America’s children, it affects them in indirect ways. Recent data indicates that marriages in which at least one spouse views pornography are nearly twice as likely to result in divorce, and the effects of divorce on children are staggering. Children of divorced parents often experience heightened levels of anxiety, depression, and behavioral issues.
A study by the University of Illinois Chicago indicates that divorce may lead to social withdrawal, attachment difficulties, and increased behavioral problems in children.
RELATED: Pornography is a threat to families — and to civilization
Research published in the Journal of Divorce & Remarriage found that children from divorced families are more likely to exhibit lower academic performance compared to their peers from intact families. Data from PLOS One indicates that individuals who experienced parental divorce before the age of 18 have a 61% higher risk of experiencing a stroke in adulthood. Research from Baylor University indicates that adults who experienced parental divorce during childhood have lower levels of oxytocin, a hormone associated with relationship bonding and emotional regulation.
Family is the building block of society, and pornography is the corrosive acid that is eating away at its foundation. Without any redeeming element whatsoever, pornography destroys marriages, destroys lives, and steals the innocence and protection of the young.
All of these outcomes are the result of a choice made by public officials who refuse to stand in the way of this obscene content being published.
What kind of sick society allows this?
What about the First Amendment?
Pornography is not “speech” in any meaningful, constitutionally protected sense. We rightly prohibit prostitution. Yet somehow, when the same act is filmed and distributed to millions of people over the internet, prostitution becomes exalted as “protected speech.”
This is legal nonsense of the highest order. It insults the intelligence of the American people and is a crime against children and the moral fabric of any society. To claim that the founding fathers fought and bled to secure a right to broadcast prostitution is as absurd as it is evil.
No serious person believes this legal framework is the result of honest lawmaking or faithful judicial interpretation. Rather, this perverse outcome is a product of cultural rot and late 20th-century judicial activism. Our courts were captured by ideologues more committed to preserving the sexual revolution at any cost than upholding constitutional fidelity.
But common-law tradition and Supreme Court precedent provide a clear path to prohibition.
Justice William Rehnquist, writing for the Supreme Court in Barnes v. Glen Theatre (1991), rightly noted that public nudity was a criminal offense at common law. The founders did not interpret the First Amendment as a shield for public obscenity, indecency, or exhibitionism. In fact, Miller v. California (1973) gives us the legal test we need: If material appeals to the prurient interest, depicts sexual conduct in a patently offensive way as defined by contemporary standards, and lacks serious political, educational, or artistic value, it is not protected by the First Amendment.
Modern pornography clearly meets all three criteria — except where legislatures have failed to define and prohibit it accordingly.
RELATED: Porn has transformed into horror
Pornography’s advocates point to Reno v. ACLU (1997), but the ruling was based on the failure of the bill in question to distinguish “obscene” from “indecent.” Moreover, the court justified its decision by claiming the internet was less invasive than radio or television.
How well does that assertion hold up 28 years later?
The internet is now the primary battleground for the soul of this generation. Because of its incorrect factual findings and clear disregard for the power clearly reserved to the states, any element of Reno and other opinions that would prohibit states and municipalities from banning public obscenity should be overturned. There are upcoming opportunities to do so. State legislatures need to provide more.
It is past time for us to recognize that publishing prostitution footage is not speech — it is an attack on human decency and the moral fabric necessary to hold families and the republic together. We must deal with it as such.
That is why I filed SB593 to abolish pornography in Oklahoma.
What SB593 does
SB593 would define “obscenity” according to the Miller test and outlaw the production, distribution, sale, and possession of obscene pornography in Oklahoma. It would re-establish the state’s authority to prosecute those who profit from the destruction of marriage, innocence, and society. It would empower law enforcement to shut down pornography rings that exploit women and children. It also increases penalties for child pornography.
The American people — many suffering the effects of a culture drowning in pornographic material — are increasingly supportive of bills like this one.
A society without pornography is better than one with it.
A 2024 YouGov poll found that support for and opposition to the total pornography ban suggested by Project 2025 were split evenly at 42-42. Among Republican voters, 60% were in support, with only 27% opposed. Republican officials can ban pornography, knowing their voters have their back by a greater than two-to-one margin.
Many object that the bill, or others like it, will be challenged in court, but that is no reason to shrink back. The goal is to pass the bill, but not merely that — it is also to force a reckoning. The Miller test provides a well-established framework to ban obscene pornography. The factual findings from Reno have been proven disastrously wrong.
Public opposition to pornography is rising. There is no better time to put this discussion before the American people and the Supreme Court.
Time to act
The left possesses no limiting principle to forcing its twisted, Marxist vision of the good on society. Leftists weaponize agencies to perform raids on political opponents, meme-makers, and pro-life protesters. They collude with social media companies to censor right-leaning opinions. They shut down businesses and churches.
Yet too many on the right still flinch at any minor deviation from utter libertinism.
A society without pornography is better than one with it. Everyone knows this, yet too many cling to unlimited, laissez-faire state approval of public prostitution footage. People have been conditioned to believe that the highest conservative principle is inaction and “neutrality.”
It is children who pay the biggest price for this folly.
Pornography exemplifies this crisis: It objectifies people made as God’s image-bearers, reducing them to commodities for gratification, thus defacing the imago Dei and alienating us from our creator. Neurologically and spiritually, it rewires the brain's reward pathways, creating addictive filters that pervert sexual perception and fracture body-soul unity, as Jesus warns in Matthew 5:28.
This echoes broader anthropological harms, fueling exploitation, addiction, and societal division that undermine human flourishing and the common good.
In legislating against it, we affirm God's design for humanity. This is not about criminalizing private lustful thoughts (a sin for the church) but addressing external actions that exploit, addict, and divide (a crime for the state). By enacting such a law, we honor God, protect the vulnerable, and fulfill our duty to promote the common good.
What kind of sick society allows pornography?
For the sake of children and the survival of the republic, pornography must be abolished.
Today's top stories
www.theblaze.com