Archive for the Morality Category

Gallup causing trouble (again)

Posted in abortion, liberals, Morality, Planned Parenthood, politics, Sexual revolution with tags , on May 24, 2012 by devilbloggger


Bad news on the wires today, my friends.  And I’m blaming the Gallup poll folks.  For my non-American readers, Gallup is a leading polling organization in the United States.  They ask all kinds of people all kinds of nosey questions, including stupid questions (for most Americans) like, “Are you for or against the basic human rights the Founding Fathers enshrined in the Constitution.”

Well, what red-blooded American wouldn’t be for constitutionally protected basic human rights?  The Founding Fathers, by the way, made it clear in the Declaration of Independence that these rights are inalienable because they derive from their creator.


Fortunately, no American children are ever exposed to these evil documents.  (How many Americans even know what inalienable means?)

And even more fortunately for my kingdom, my servants, is that those amazing Founding Fathers were primarily concerned with the rights of Mounding Mothers.

You did not know that?

Yes, in addition to ensuring future Americans would have rights to free speech, free exercise of religion, and the right to bear arms . . . wait, I thought these rights were inalienable!

Ha ha ha ha ha.

(Sorry, my friends.  But those Americans let their rights be taken from them with hardly a whimper.)

But back to my point–for some reason the Americans willingly let government quietly strip their rights to speech, religion and guns, rights for which many revolutionaries gave their lives.  But fortunately, there is one right enshrined in the US Constitution that will likely never be taken away.

In fact, thousands still die for this right each year.

Yes, it’s the constitutionally protected right of Mounding Mothers to end their mounding together with their motherhood.  And with each end to motherhood a little mound-causing person dies.

An innocent person, at that.

Sometime before their little mound is even detectable.

My kingdom come, my will be done on earth as it is in Hell.

Ha ha ha ha ha.

So, you ask, what does Gallup have to do with this?

Well, the Gallup meddlers are stirring up a non-controversy by asking people if they identify themselves as “pro-choice” or not.

Think about it, my friends, why is the question even being asked?

Really, why?

Does Gallup go around asking people if they consider themselves “pro-free speech”?

You see, my friends, the beauty of constitutionally protected rights that derive from God is that it doesn’t matter if you like them or not — they are guaranteed rights to all (already born) human beings.

And the right for a mother to end her motherhood was, thanks to the amazing foresight of the Founding Fathers, enshrined in the United States Constitution.

So why does Gallup keep asking people if they are for it or against it?

But it’s even worse, my servants.

It seems that in asking the question the Gallup troublemakers found a devastating result.  According to today’s,

The percentage of Americans who identify themselves as “pro-choice” is at the  lowest point ever measured by Gallup, according to a new survey released Wednesday.

Yes, a record low 41 percent of Americans now identify themselves as “pro-choice” (which is a euphemism for “anti-Mounding Mothers”).  And worser yet, 50 percent of Americans now consider themselves “pro-life”!

Blechhh!  Blechhhh!

Yes, it’s bad, my servants, and I put much of the blame on Gallup.

By continually asking whether people are “pro-choice” or “pro-life” (Gallup has been asking this question since 1995), they keep alive the notion that maybe, just maybe, abortion is not so inalienable after all (there’s that word again; look it up!)

Does Gallup go around asking people if they are “pro-constitutional rights” or not?

Then why ask the same question differently by substituting “pro-choice” for “pro-constitutional rights?”  The terms are synonymous, right?

By asking the question Gallup reminds everyone that, in fact, the right that thousands die for each year might actually not be so constitutional.

In fact, those thousands might actually die for something that is not only not consitutional, but might just be wrong.

And when people no longer have the cover of “well, it’s legal, so it must be right,” they will have to face what they already sense in their hearts: that abortion is wrong.

Plain wrong.

Gallup, please stop.


Obama: Now I will pay for your sin

Posted in abortion, Bible, Catholic Church, christians, False religion, Government, liberals, liberty, Morality, Obama, politics, progressives, religion, taxes, Truth with tags , , on February 12, 2012 by devilbloggger


Oh, I just might be able to retire, my friends.  Yes, retirement really never was on my mind for thousands of years, but this past week’s events in the United States [the last bastion of freedom in the world] has made me re-think my short term plans.  (My long term plans were set long ago, unfortunately.)

You see, my servants, the Obama administration has put my agenda on warp speed in forcing my will on earth as it is in Hell.

But even I had no idea that those Americans would ever reach a place where large numbers would reject a Savior’s payment for past sinful pleasures, and instead demand that a goverment pay for future sinful pleasures.

Payment for sin is exactly what the Obama administration demands in its new policies demanding that all employers, including those having a Biblically informed religious conscience, pay for the sin of its employees.

Imagine: a formerly Christian nation in which God’s remaining people are literally forced to pay for the sins of mine!

Ha ha ha ha ha.

It’s a beautiful thing, my friends.  Can it get any better?

Well, yes, it can.

Let me explain.  I was just beaming this week, my friends, when at the National Prayer Breakfast (the what????) I saw my Self-righteous Servant Obama demand not only that taxes from the righteous should pay for the sin of heathens, but that his policy “as a Christian,” “coincides with Jesus’s teaching that ‘for unto whom much is given, much shall be required.’ ”

Ha ha ha ha ha.

Seriously, now, my friends.  Do you know what I do to deceive people?

Yes, you do.  I misquote scripture, use scripture for nefarious purposes, and generally cause mass confusion and deception by picking and choosing among various scripture passages as proof texts.

Do you know how Obama deceives people?

Ha ha ha ha ha.

Obama went on to emulate me by misquoting the “Golden Rule” this way, as reported at

“And I believe in God’s command to love thy neighbor as thyself. I know a version of that golden rule is found in every major religion and every set of beliefs.”

My friends, this is not the Golden Rule.

But who knows?

Apparently very few.  And when few know scripture, anyone can use scripture for ungodly purposes.

You see, unlike Obama, my misquoting of scripture was met with a swift and certain “Get thee behind me, Satan.”

But who will stand up to Obama?

No, really, who?

Obama has mangled the Golden Rule in the past, and you can read over at the Ye Have Heard blog here.  Note Obama’s “subtle” but “significant” mangling of the Golden Rule as “treating others as they would treat me.”  (In reality, there was nothing subtle about it; the fact is Obama is scripture-illiterate and didn’t have a clue what he was saying.)  As noted by a reader:

The most succinct statement of the Golden Rule in the Bible is Luke 6:31: “Do to others as you would have them do to you.”

There is a subtle, but rather significant, difference between saying “[I treat] others the way they would treat me” and “[I treat] others the way I would want them to treat me.”

But no matter; Obama believes that holy scripture is part of his playground for social and political engineering.  And to make matters better, his shameless select-a-scripture has revealed two great advances of my kingdom on earth.

First, I was thrilled by how much of the ensuing noise, smoke, and diatribification was directed at a “woman’s right to health care.”  For example, the always reliable Huffington Post ran a gem entitled “Students at Catholic Colleges Protest Lack of Access to Birth Control.”  The article summarizes an 18-year old student, Keely Monroe’s, life at Fordham University as:

Single, 18-year-old female, likes having control over her own body, looking for affordable birth control.

Yes, this is just an example of the genre of medianoisemachiniszation that framed the argument as “no insurance payment for birth control = robbing women of control,” i.e., taking away women’s control over their bodies.  That is, Ms. Keely believes that the good citizens of the United States should pay for her sinful bodily choices (which she apparently can’t control), and, if they refuse, she accuses them of robbing her of her bodily control.  Another student, Sandra Fluke went as far as to say that women enrolling in Catholic universities merely “expected women to be treated equally, to have their medical needs met.”

Ha ha ha ha ha.

Where are the sane Americans?

Where is someone to stand up and tell Ms. Keely and Ms. Sandra to stop begging for someone else’s money and control their own friggin’ bodies or go pay for their own damn birth control?

But already too many people agree with Ms. Keely and Ms. Sandra (and Mr. Obama) that it is the place of government to offer everything to everyone for free, including payment for sin.

Oh, I smell retirement now.

The second advance in my kingdom’s goals was revealed in a Daily Caller article on this topic, with the enlightening title, Southern  Baptist Convention’s Richard Land: ‘How dumb does [Obama] think we  are?’  Mr. Land’s question came after Obama, showing he really is my servant, offered an “adjustment” to the mandate that righteous people pay for the sins of others by shifting payment obligations from employers to insurance companies.

But the delightful question answers itself.

Obama does believe you are dumb.

And he has good reason.

Because, think about it, my servants, who can stop him?

Really, who can stop him?

Ha ha ha ha ha.

Who can stop me?

Retirement, here I come!

Your Glee is My (unstoppable) Glee

Posted in Ethics, homosexuality, Morality, political correctness, progressives, same sex marraige, Sex, Sexual revolution with tags , , on November 13, 2011 by devilbloggger


I knew it would come to this, my servants.  After all, what (or who) could stop it?  Yes, my friends, I’m bragging about the glorious boyboysex delivered into millions of households this week on Fox’s popular teen-targeted comedy “Glee”.


Maybe for you, but for me?  It’s pure glee!

Ha ha ha ha ha.

Boyboysex on prime time television.  According to Fox News’ article entitled “Straight, Gay Couples Lose Virginity on ‘Glee’ Episode, Spark Controversy,” my will on earth is hurtling along almost totally unimpeded.

Who can stop it?

According to the Fox News article, both a heterosexual couple and a homosexual couple will lose their respective virginities on this prime time fare.

And do you know what I like best?  It’s that the uproar is virtually solely over the boyboysex.  The world apparently yawns at two children of opposite sex “losing it” on television.  That is so yesterday.

But boyboysex?

Well, soon that, too, will be so yesterday.

You see, my servants, how far we have come. Today’s shock is tomorrow’s yawn.

And the beat goes on.

My Glee glee is particularly gleefulicious because it comes during the same week that the world is shocked at the allegations of boyboysex between a grown man and a 10-year old boy in the locker rooms of Penn State’s Happy Valley.

I love the hand-wringing over the fate of that poor little 10-year old (who was merely unlucky in time; within the next 50 years such behavior will be accepted as normal).  The popular press screams in high moral outrage about a grown man enjoying boyboysex with a 10-year old pinned to a shower wall.

You are all my 10-year olds, my friends.

While the world frets about that 10-year old on the receiving end of boyboysex in the locker room, do you know how many 10-year olds (or younger) watched boyboysex on Glee?

I’ll tell you.  I was gleefully counting: 2,744,992.

And do you know what else?  About 31% of those 10-year olds were watching with their parents in the room.

I’m not sure what I’m more proud of — the kids watching with their mind-numbed parents, or the kids watching without.  Both are huge victories for my kingdom.

Ha ha ha ha ha.

Now, of course, there are those against my kingdom who try to sound the warning bell.    Melissa Henson, the director of communications and public education for the Parents Television Council, a nonpartisan education organization advocating responsible entertainment, was quick to weigh in by refuting the standard Hollywood line:

Hollywood loves to defend teen sex story lines by insisting, “Kids are having sex! We’re reflecting the real world!” But the truth is much more sobering and

Yes, of course it is.  Because as Henson states:

Teens are also aware that television influences their behavior. According to one survey, a third of youths age 12 and older say the media encourages them to have sex by making it seem like “everybody does it.” And why shouldn’t they get that impression?

You see, my friends.  I use television to continually push back the lines of morally acceptable behaviour for language, sexuality, and culture in general.  But my greatest achievements come among the little chillen’s of the world.

And I’m proud not only because of what I’ve accomplished, but also at how easy it is.

A few minutes of prime time comedy will prove to anyone how effective my strategy has been.  The airwaves shining into the minds of chillens the world over are full of vulgarity, sexual innuendo, sexual exuendo, glamorized casual sex, shameless gratuitous sex, and, of course sex-laced laugh lines to make you laugh your way to moral rot and decay.

You see, my friends, I have almost the whole world grinning with glee as they face the shower wall.

And, again, who can stop me?

Apparently no one.

Ha ha ha ha ha.

(PS: Don’t tell anyone, but television would hardly be my playground of evil if only Christians and those who call themselves Christians stopped watching.  Shhhhh!)

Rough weekend, folks

Posted in Morality, prayer, religion, Uncategorized, worldview with tags , on August 7, 2011 by devilbloggger


Weekends are always rough around here, my friends.  And it’s not over yet.  Imagine: from the first dawn of Monday at the International Date Line, the rest of the world is still on Sunday for 24 more hours!  That’s 48 hours of Sunday every week for me, my friends.


Sundays are big prayer days.  Yes, many, many (too many, for sure) Godpunks pray every day, but on Sundays — wow, the cacophony of prayertalknoise practically drives us mad.

But I’m used to that.

What I’m not used to is a big, well-publicized prayer rally on Saturday!

And that’s what happened yesterday, my servants.  My head still hurts.  I need a rest.  But let me vent a bit.

Where in the world did this Rick Perry dude come from?  Who does he think he is?

For my non-American servants, Rick Perry is the governor of Texas who is rumored to be on the verge of announcing his candidacy for President as well.  I hope that doesn’t happen.  I really, really, really, really like the present President of the Divided States of America.

And yesterday, Mr. Perry did something unheard of in modern political discourse: he participated in a prayer rally which he helped organize.  And he even prayed in public a real prayer causing ear-splitting shock waves to echo about the depths of Hell for hours.  Do you know what he prayed?  I can’t repeat it all, but here is the worst part:

And as a nation, we have forgotten who made us, who protects us, who blesses us.


If this Perry dude wins, we’ll all be subject to Godtalk of the like we haven’t seen since the days of Washington, Adams (J.), Madison, Monroe, Adams (J.Q.), or Lincoln.  Not to mention some more modern Godtalkers like Wilson, Roosevelt (Teddy), Coolidge, Eisenhower, Truman, or Reagan.

You see, in the bad old days US presidents routinely invoked God, prayed publicly, and generally honored God as the creator and protector of us all.

George Washington even went as far as proclaiming the following at his farewell address in 1796:

Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports…. And let us with caution indulge the supposition, that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure; reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle. ‘Tis substantially true, that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government.

Fortunately, Americans quickly forgot this admonition, and conveniently “conceded” much to the “influence of refined education on minds.” 

Ha ha ha ha ha. 

I’m a “refined” kind of guy, after all.

John Adams, who followed Washington as the second US president had this to say:

We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion…. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.

“Unbridled” is a good word to describe America today, wouldn’t you agree? 

Ha ha ha ha ha.

I’m a great “unbridler.”

But back to this Perry dude.  Can you all help me in ensuring that he does not run for President?  If the American president really believed in God, like Perry does, I’m in trouble.  As it is, I have my man in the White House — a man who says he believes in God and acts like he does not.  (Did I mention I really like the present occupant of the White House?) With Perry I’ll have to contend with a man who says he believes in God and acts like he does.

It’s been a long time since I’ve had to oppose such a man as US President.

I’ve been able to practically coast the last couple of years.  It’s like I put the United States on autopilot headed straight for destruction.

Please don’t make me have to get back to the wheel.


Of course God is not a Christian

Posted in atheism, christians, False religion, heresy, Morality, political correctness, religion with tags , , , on June 2, 2011 by devilbloggger


No one likes exclusivity, it seems, except for everyone.  Know what I mean?  Everyone hates it when others make exclusive truth claims, unless they happen to agree with the claimers.  Then it’s OK.

And here’s a secret, my friends: everyone makes absolute truth claims.    Atheists do it.  Agnostics do it.  Everyone does it.

But, you say, there is no absolute truth!

Ahem . . . is that an absolute truth claim?

Ha ha ha ha ha.

You see, my servants?

The fact is that truth is by definition exclusive.  Truth requires falsity.  And when it comes to claims on conscience, belief, or behavior, some claims stem from truth, and some from falsity.

To deny this is to deny everything.

Which is why, my servants, I delight in “all paths lead to God” mumbo-jumbo, especially when it comes from the mouth of a Nobel Prize winner via the ever-reliable Huffington Post.  Today’s piece by Desmond Tutu is entitled, “God is Not a Christian.”

Duh!  This is really a stupid title. 

Of course God is not a Christian.  Only a spiritually mental midget would even entertain such a thought for a moment.   God, as the Father and as the God Man Jesus and as the Holy Spirit, is the object of Christian’s faith.  Christians, by definition, are those who exercise the gift of faith in Jesus Christ as their personal savior. 

God, by definition, can not be a Christian.

Anyone knows this.

So what is Desmond Tutu’s point?  You have already sniffed it out, I’m sure.  Mr. Tutu is advancing my lie that Christianity is not the only path to God, and, by extension, Heaven.

Observing that most people’s faith is the result of “accidents of birth and geography,” Mr. Tutu swallows my lie completely by advancing directly from “accidents” to the conclusion:

. . . perhaps that we should not succumb too easily to the temptation to exclusiveness and dogmatic claims to a monopoly of the truth of our particular faith.

Really? Is succumbing to this temptation a sin, Mr. Tutu?  Because if so, Jesus is a sinner.  Because Jesus, Mr. Tutu, made egregious dogmatic claims to a monopoly of the truth and a particular faith.

I must say, however, that I like the concept of casting Jesus as a sinner for succumbing to such a temptation. 

Mr. Tutu continues in his effort at erasing boundary lines of truth and falsity.  Attempting to make all truth claims true by virtue of their sincere adherents, Mr. Tutu pleases me by saying:

Surely we can rejoice that the eternal word, the Logos of God, enlightens everyone — not just Christians, but everyone who comes into the world; that what we call the Spirit of God is not a Christian preserve, for the Spirit of God existed long before there were Christians, inspiring and nurturing women and men in the ways of holiness, bringing them to fruition, bringing to fruition what was best in all.

But God doesn’t enlighten everyone.  Jesus said “Let him who has ears to hear, hear.”  Of course, there are many who do not have ears to hear.  I welcome them into Hell every day. 

Mr. Tutu delights me further by saying, in essence, that because God is the “God of all” by implication all belief systems are pleasing to God:

We do scant justice and honor to our God if we want, for instance, to deny that Mahatma Gandhi was a truly great soul, a holy man who walked closely with God. Our God would be too small if he was not also the God of Gandhi: if God is one, as we believe, then he is the only God of all his people, whether they acknowledge him as such or not.

Yes, Mr. Tutu, God is the God of Gandhi just as he is the God of me.

Is my belief system OK, Mr. Tutu?


Do you see the absurdity in believing that all belief systems in “God” are somehow OK, and valid, and worthy of respect and honor?  I believe in God more than most; my belief makes me tremble.

But I can assure you, my servants, God is not pleased with my belief. 

God’s pleasure rests on those who seek his faith in truth, which means, by definition, an exclusive truth that rejects falsity as error and heresy.

Oh, I love the post-modern Christian mind that seeks to make peace with heresy in the misplaced name of loving toleration.  Rather than speak the truth in love, people like Mr. Tutu speak falsity with a false love.  False love exchanges the glory of God for the fairness of Man, seeking to make good what God calls evil.

So, while I agree that “God is not a Christian,” I must commend my servants for extending this self-evident truth into a subtle lie that God accepts all, whether Christian or not.

If that was true, I would be God’s favorite.

Ha ha ha ha ha.

Botched abortion = murder? It’s a joke, right?

Posted in abortion, Morality with tags , on January 19, 2011 by devilbloggger

Keep your morals off my wallet.

That’s what I would say if I were a doctor facing jail time for merely performing my legally sanctioned duty of doctoring up a poor, inconvenienced already-born woman with an unwanted tumor that could turn dangerous if left to grow.  I would say the same thing if I were called on to remove a bothersome gall bladder, a painful kidney stone, or an annoying hangnail.  I’m a doctor; it’s my duty.

And if it were a fetus the poor, inconvenienced already-born woman wanted removed?  What’s the difference?

That’s the question I’m spittin’ mad about right now.  It seems some do-gooder in Philadelphia is charging a doctor, a licensed medical professional, with murder, simply because he waited until the tumor, er . . . the fetus, got too big before carefully removing it.  More on that later, my servants.  If I continue I will hyperventilate.  Give me a moment.

OK.  I’m, alright.  I’m steady now.

Lots of abortion in the news today, my servants.  Let’s work our way through the horror of pro-life activities.  The first story comes from today’s CBS Philly, entitled, “Philadelphia Abortion Doctor Charged With 8 Counts of Murder.”  Apparently a good Dr. Kermit Gosnell faces charges of murder for the deaths of his patients, in some cases both of them, Mommy and it.  It seems that sometimes he just couldn’t get the little boogers killed inside Mommy, so he had to finish the doctoring after it was no longer part of Mommy.

And the problem is?  Well, according to do-gooder District Attorney Seth Williams:

“A doctor who cuts into the necks severing the spinal cords of living, breathing babies, who would survive with proper medical attention, is committing murder under the law.”

Dang.  It seems a little technicality like “breathing” is going to end Dr. Gosnell’s $1.8 million per year practice at the “Women’s Medical Society” office where he performed his professional medical duties.

Note to abortion-providing, licensed medical professionals: strangle the li’l rascals inside Mommy.

The CBS Philly article goes on to do more damage to my kingdom by stating:

“Dr. Gosnell is suspected of killing hundreds of living babies over the course of his 30-year practice.”

Hey, Philly, what other kinds of babies can be killed?  I suspect my friend the good doctor killed all the living babies he could get his hands on.

So what?

It gets worse, my friends.  I also read in the Daily Caller where pro-life activist Randall Terry announced he will challenge President Barack Obama in a Democratic primary for the sole purpose of running graphic pro-life advertisements.

Is this bad, or what?

Now I have effectively shielded my good bud Barack on this issue.  He, like me, has no real problem with people like Dr. Gosnell.  And the last thing we need, my servants, is for graphic images of bloody, dismembered products of abortion (the only kind there are) to be shown on television for all un-aborted people to see.  Can you imagine if images like this, or this, or these, get shown on TV?

I’m beginning to think some of my peeps are playing a little joke on me, my friends.  A licensed medical professional performing his legal and moral duty to an already-born woman is charged with murder because he “killed living babies” outside the womb instead of inside?  A pro-life activist running against my fellow abortion enabler Barack Obama for the sole purpose of abusing federally enacted statutes that require his campaign commercials be aired?

Yes, it must be a joke, but let’s say I am not amused, shall we?  After all, this story comes right before a low point of my year: Sanctity of Human Life Sunday.  In fact, I’m going to issue a Level 3 devilblogger Alert for this, my servants.  A Level 3 alert is issued for threats of the highest order, threats to the very fabric of my kingdom.  You see, my servants, abortion is not just a sin.  It doesn’t merely break God’s heart.  Abortion has become the defining issue of all things ungodly in modern culture.  Abortion is the bellweather, the canary in the coal mine, the top of the slippery slope of all things cultural and political that define my kingdom.

But it seems that back in 1983 President Ronald Reagan, caving to the requests of a few radical Godpunks,  created a special day to focus on the intrinsic value of human life.  That year President Reagan issued a proclamation establishing a National Sanctity of Human Life Sunday.  And this year it is this Sunday, January 23.  I think I’m going to be sick.

My servants, when Reagan established Sanctity of Other People’s Morals Sunday, only 15 million babies had been legally killed (inside Mommy, not out).  Now, the number is over 50 million legally killed (most inside Mommy).

We can be proud.

But we can do better.

Just be glad there are no more Reagans around.

Nudes, prudes and lewd dudes

Posted in Morality, nudity with tags , , on January 10, 2011 by devilbloggger

In the mood for lewd nude, dude?

If so, good news because lewdity, I mean nudity, was in the news this week.  And I love lewd nudity just as much, if not more, than the next guy (but way more than the next girl).  So imagine my delight when my peeps sent via Hell-mail two articles, the first from the New York Post entitled, “Bottoms Up,” reporting on the U.S.’s Federal Communication Commission approving naked women’s butts on network television; and the second from the Los Angeles Times entitled, “Racy calendar featuring nearly nude Spanish Catholic youth group members angers church leaders.”

Ah, yes.  Once again I get the satisfaction of seeing that sex sells, whether it be television shows or Godpunk youth calendars, sex leads to money, both of which irresistably attract the human heart in search of worldly pleasure.  From the very beginning I spoiled God’s perfect creation, causing the need for a fig leaf to cover in the name of modesty that which needed no cover before I came on the scene.

And I’ve been trying to get that fig leaf off in public ever since.

Fortunately, my schemes continue to bear fruit, so to speak, rendering confusion on the issue and resulting in a world where what used to be called pornography is now called “adult television” or “youth calendar.”

Ha ha ha ha ha.

I’m winning!

In the U.S. the FCC had fined a popular television show for showing actress Charlotte Ross’ naked butt during a 2003 television show.  This week a U.S. court overthrew the fine, stating that “nudity itself is not per se indecent.”

Well, duh! 

Ha ha ha ha ha.

No, nudity is not per se indecent.  Certainly when the good judge showers in the morning he is not indecent, but if he wants me to look at it, that’s indecent!  And not having seen the television show myself (we prefer hard porn to soft down here), my guess is that Ms. Ross’ butt was not shown in isolation, as in a scene where the wind blew her ankle-length dress up for a momentary view of her gluteal groove.  No, most likely Ms. Ross was romping and rolling in bed with an unmarried casual partner, doing in front of America’s children what she would be horrified to do in front of her own.

And those Catholic nudies?  Hey, even Godpunks want to have fun.  So lay off, you “church leaders.”  Besides, I see many of those church leaders watching internet porn in their private moments.  Note to church leaders: your porn fix is watched by heavenly spirits of both types, one smiling; the other not.

My servants, we should bask a moment in our successes.  Unlike you, I have the benefit of hundreds of years to compare how far I have moved my human captives on this matter.  There was a time when certain womens’ body parts were viewable only if you were married to her, and then only in private.  There came a time when those same body parts were viewable when published and mailed to home addresses in brown paper covers.  There came a time when those certain body parts were viewable at movie houses labeled “X”.  There came a time when those certain body parts were briefly flashed into homes on late night TV.  There came a time when those same body parts were shown in millions of homes on prime-time TV, in lengthy, suggestive, scenes of illicit casual sexual contact.  Next there will be a time when those same body parts will be on daytime TV, including for children. 

Why not?

No, really, why not?  You see, my servants, there is no reason why not.  Whatever reason my enemies will put forth for “why not” today will merely sound prudish in the future. 

Hey, Mr. Judge.  Is there any nudity that you would consider “per se” indecent?  What if Ms. Ross were fully naked.  Would that be indecent?  Why?

You see, my servants, the world of public pornography is one of drawing lines.  Everyone has a line that marks the difference between art and pornography, or decency and indecency.  My job is to patiently and imperceptibly move that line by sensitizing people, dulling the public conscience, shaming any cultural sense of propriety, and generally causing a steady coarsening of the public’s nudity diet.  At the current pace it should be only about 20 years before I’m showing anal sex, three-ways, and child sex on primetime TV.

Who’s going to stop me?

I’m good, am I not?

%d bloggers like this: