Yes. Unfortunetly for you our Nation is secular. Thus religious morality is actually a political imposition of a Chrisitan majority. The tyranny of the majority I would say.
Should the U.S not be so outdated and its constitution not so... useless then you would have a state such as the European ones which are built upon true constitutions that allow for less restrictive and puritan societies. Instead of the U.S constitution which does nothing but stablishing the form of the state.
But... wait! This magical thing happened and is called ammendments! By which my desire of freedom of expresion is more important than your sensibility.
edited 13th Nov '11 2:11:36 PM by Baff
I will always cherish the chance of a new beggining."[Unchecked] democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner."
Anyway, violence is usually more story-pertinent than sex, so there's that. Doesn't explain how Zack Snyder doesn't get rated NC-17, but in general, it's a good rule.
edited 13th Nov '11 2:15:18 PM by DomaDoma
Hail Martin Septim!Lets get back on topic before this just becomes a flame war.
I think the big reason why violence is considered more acceptable than sex is because of cutlure.
More secular cutlures are prone to have less worries about sex and violence.
More relgious countries are more prone to promote violence than sex though the sexual stuff is a bit more subtler take for example the Animaniacs.
A word of advice to all who think we should censor mild sexual imagery from tv.
if your TV causes you to sin, smash it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose your tv than for your whole body to be thrown into hell.
Or better yet: If a tv program causes you to sin... THEN CHANGE THE CHANNEL!!!!
edited 13th Nov '11 2:34:35 PM by Baff
I will always cherish the chance of a new beggining.Baff@You really did research that bible class a lot.
Also if you like it promote more Christian writers in Holly Wood.
edited 13th Nov '11 2:35:38 PM by JTIsCool
Well, consider Game of Thrones, a story that actually does have plot-relevant sex scenes. Then consider the HBO series, which drowns the plot-relevant sex in a lot of irrelevant humping added to spice up the exposition. Sex just tends to be both gratuitous and tempting to producers - which probably isn't the MPAA's reasoning, but it is my reasoning for being cool with their standards.
Hail Martin Septim!And I put the burden of proof on you because you were the one claiming something was the case. You can't prove a negative.
"The Daily Show has to be right 100% of the time; FOX News only has to be right once." - Jon StewartIf you don't learn formal logic in K-12, sue the school? That may actually be a means to upping their standards, scarily enough. But there's no necessary consequent for children learning about sex earlier than twelve, so yeah.
In any case, counterexample: I am a massive prude, and I knew what sex was when I was eight.
edited 13th Nov '11 7:34:32 PM by DomaDoma
Hail Martin Septim!"Actually if you think about it all laws are an extent of morals."
No, not all, unless you define morals so loosely as to include any arbitrary opinion on anything that does not have impact on anyone outside the person involved in the act (e.g. sodomy, smoking pot, etc.).
And better than thy stroke; why swellest thou then?Yeah, I think that men should be held to the same standard and not be promoted to act promiscious.
I would go the other way, and say that neither should be looked down upon for who and how often they decide to fuck.
I'm not American, but I knew about sex long before I reached the sixth grade. I'm pretty sure I knew about sex before I reached the second grade, actually.
Two-parent households are markedly better for children than one-parent households, and random hookups rarely result in the man being the single parent. Thus, I'd say slut-shaming guys is the way to go. (In fact, I believe I have slut-shamed you specifically.)
edited 14th Nov '11 4:21:16 AM by DomaDoma
Hail Martin Septim!Promiscuous != deadbeat dad. If you have taken measures to protect everyone involved from the possible negative consequences, why should people be berated for using their own bodies however they wish? Who are you to tell them what they can and cannot do with themselves and a willing partner?
edited 14th Nov '11 4:26:25 AM by tropetown
Nobody is forcing you to act one way or the other. Why is it your (or anyone's) concern what people do with one another in the privacy of their own bedrooms?
Which is fully conditional on the prior conception of children. If there are no children, there is no problem.
edited 14th Nov '11 4:36:49 AM by tropetown
What I find the most interesting in all of the above is that the representation of sex still remains taboo mainly in the US, it's not a problem in other cultures. Even more interesting, the US are the number 1 producer of porn in the world... Funny how the more religious countries are often the more perverted sexually (Saudi Arabia for instance).
You see, violence is more acceptable than sex because sex is supposed to bring about pleasure and, most of all, can feel good to both parties involved. Since there's a certain culture that dictates to take things from the other and own them to prove just how Badass you are, sex isn't desirable because it's an exchange. It's only acceptable when it's rape. Proof? Has anyone ever been to any other forum than this one? Threats of rape are omnipresent plus, the rates of sexual abuse are soaring in a certain country.
Since that certain culture revels in inflicting pain to others and deriving pleasure from it.... You do the maths.
A modern culture built on a foundation of rapacious sadism? Yeah, you lost me. There are Blue Meanie states out there - Saudi Arabia being the reigning champ since the Taliban was ousted - but ones that think theft is the only acceptable form of exchange? I've got nothing, sorry.
Hail Martin Septim!Also, "slut" is IIRC a female-specific term, and the male equivalent is "stud." So "stud-shaming" might be a more appropriate phrasing here.
edited 14th Nov '11 10:50:06 AM by HiddenFacedMatt
"The Daily Show has to be right 100% of the time; FOX News only has to be right once." - Jon Stewart

Baff@Thanks,Baff I knew I could count on you.
Actually if you think about it all laws are an extent of morals.So,without any morals there would be no laws.