She doesn't specify what kind of porn. She just says porn.
Spike's Bitches 33: Weeping, crawling, blaming everybody else
[NAFDA] Spike-centric discussion. Lusty, lewd (only occasionally crude), risque (and frisque), bawdy (Oh, lawdy!), flirty ('cuz we're purty), raunchy talk inside. Caveat lector.
She also said this:
These who view or read such material run the risk of carrying over such attitudes and behavior into their own relationships and can come to lack reverence and respect for others as precious children of God and as brothers and sisters in the same human family. It also stated such a link between pornography and sadistic violence has particular implications for those suffering from certain forms of mental illness.
and does "moral harm" mean I am damaging my ability to distinguish right from wrong?
ugh. bad teaching. and porn is good.
"Children of God"? is this a theology class?
I like Vortex's answer.
Also she's citing a study that has been proved wrong many times over in the last 20 years. The only link between violence and porn lasts for mere minutes after the viewing of violent porn in a few test subjects (sorry I wish I could cite my sources.)
"Children of God"? is this a theology class?
Nope. Critical thinking. WTF.
It also stated such a link between pornography and sadistic violence
What link?
I have a headache. I have to figure out Christmas dinner, and Christmas breakfast, as the FiL is coming over for it, and I need Lisa's recipe for thumbprint cookies.
Is it possible the teacher is deliberately trolling in order to inspire students to argue about the ethics of porn and how it relates to theology in the message boards?
ETA: 'cause if this is not the case and it's not too late I think you should drop the class.
Okay, so I had been thinking that the knot in my stomach was some sort of reaction to the muscle relaxant but now I'm thinking that I'm just ill.