Archive for Sunday, July 31, 2005

Poor reasoning

July 31, 2005

Advertisement

To the editor:

In response to William Skepnek's letter of July 28: Are you serious? I am compelled to give you the benefit of a doubt because it is so hard to believe that the "conclusions" you came to are so ridiculous!

News flash: There are men who view pornography who aren't Christians or priests. Are they, too, at risk? And if a man is truly religious, why is he viewing this material in the first place?

News flash: There is no proof that priests who have abused children did so because they looked at pornography.

News flash: It doesn't matter where Naughty but Nice is located; those who wish to shop there will. In fact, men who ordinarily wouldn't go there for fear of being seen there on Massachusetts Street might shop there if it is "put out on the highway."

News flash: Pornography is inanimate. It has no power over a person's actions. People make decisions, not magazines or videos.

Conclusion 1: The bottom line is, we all make choices; some choose to control themselves, some don't. Somewhere down the line, the choice is made.

Conclusion 2: The kind of thinking represented by Mr. Skepnek tells our young people that it is OK to kill and OK to abuse. All they have to do is blame pornography, drugs, bad upbringing, etc. We can always find something or someone else to blame.

Doris Stine,

Lawrence

Comments

Richard Heckler 9 years, 10 months ago

Doris I believe Bill was being a bit cynical...a shot at satire.

Kookamooka 9 years, 10 months ago

What an embarassment for Mr. Stepnek that his sarcasm was lost! It goes to prove that unless you personally know the letter writer, you can't appreciate the irony. I suggest that in the future we all try to steer clear of satire unless it is overwhelming and understood by all. Unfortuately, there are so many crazies in the reactionary State of Kansas that I never know if someone is being sarcstic. That porn argument sounds like something straight from the Phelps compound.

smittenkitten 9 years, 10 months ago

i think doris needs to read through that collumn one more time... i personally know bill and how he goes about doing things... he wasn't being serious- do you really think a lawyer is going to tell people that it IS porn that's the problem and people shouldn't take responsibility for their own actions? read the conclusions a few times over, and think about what they are actually saying. look back a few months at his letter about the bike races coming to lawrence- then maybe you'll understand what he was trying to say. doris-- get a clue. (maybe you should listen to phil hendrie on the radio... you'd be an excellent caller for his show.)

opinionated 9 years, 10 months ago

Well, maybe if people don't want their views strung out of context, then they should say what they really mean. After all there are poeple out there that really think that "porn" is the root of all evil. And furthermore it is not just Bill's friends and family who read those comments, everyone else does too. I work with Doris and she does have a clue on very many issues and would love to see anyone who thinks anything other than that to sit down and have a chat with her, she'll tell you what she thinks. And by the way, she is not the only one who read his letter and thaught him to be serious, everyone I know thaught the same.

smittenkitten 9 years, 9 months ago

sorry... i just THAUGHT you'd be the right type of person to listen to the Phil Hendrie Show on the radio... i'm pretty sure it's on KLWN... i'm serious. you and doris give him a call.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.