Teen Vogue under fire after promoting sodomy among teens

Rusha said:

Apparently it's more interesting than discussing education, poverty, loving thy neighbor as thyself , peace on earth, good will towards men (and women) ...:idunno:

Click to expand...

You said it.

Education This Side of the Pauline Revelation This Side of The Cross:

2 Timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 3:17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

Poverty This Side of the Pauline Revelation This Side of The Cross:

Ephesians 4:28 Let him that stole steal no more: but rather let him labour, working with his hands the thing which is good, that he may have to give to him that needeth.

Loving Thy Neighbor As Thyself This Side of the Pauline Revelation This Side of The Cross:

Romans 13:8 Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law. 13:9 For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. 13:10 Love worketh no ill to his neighbour: therefore love is the fulfilling of the law.

Peace on Earth This Side of the Pauline Revelation This Side of The Cross:

Romans 12:18 If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men.

How? By what means?

Romans 12:19 Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord. 12:20 Therefore if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink: for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head. 12:21 Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good.

Good Will Towards All This Side of the Pauline Revelation This Side of The Cross:

2 Corinthians 5:12 For we commend not ourselves again unto you, but give you occasion to glory on our behalf, that ye may have somewhat to answer them which glory in appearance, and not in heart. 5:13 For whether we be beside ourselves, it is to God: or whether we be sober, it is for your cause. 5:14 For the love of Christ constraineth us; because we thus judge, that if one died for all, then were all dead: 5:15 And that he died for all, that they which live should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto him which died for them, and rose again. 5:16 Wherefore henceforth know we no man after the flesh: yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we him no more. 5:17 Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new. 5:18 And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation; 5:19 To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation. 5:20 Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God. 5:21 For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.

Rom. 5:8
Acts 17:11,12

This magazine is smut. I don't know if it's been smut all along, but this article relegates it to smut, and it should be sold in adult bookstores only.

Nihilo said:

This magazine is smut. I don't know if it's been smut all along, but this article relegates it to smut, and it should be sold in adult bookstores only.

Click to expand...

Kids should be protected (by law and family) from dirty magazines - not "educated" by them.

Angel 4 Truth, Teen Vogue isn't "promoting sodomy ". It's performing a valuable public service by telling teenage girls ABOUT anal sex , including the risks etc .
The magazine is't telling young girls they SHOULD do this.
And it's about time we got rid of that idiotic ,archaic and loaded term "sodomy "once and for all .
Conservatives fail to realize that this stupid term comes from the Biblical legend of two cities which are entirely legendary . There is absolutely no historical or archaeological evidence they ever existed . And furthermore, as I have explained before here , these cities were destroyed by God not because of homosexuality or any kind of sexual behavior, but because the inhabitants were wicked, cruel and callous people who had no compassion for the poor and downtrodden .
Sooner or later, young people, male or female will learn about non-standard sexual behavior whether they are male or female, straight or gay . You cannot keep them safe by trying to keep them ignorant of sex . This is why abstinence only sex education programs have been such an abysmal failure in public schools. All they have done has been to INCREASE the rates of teenage pregnancy and STDs in America markedly .

The Horn said:

Angel 4 Truth, Teen Vogue isn't "promoting sodomy ". It's performing a valuable public service by telling teenage girls ABOUT anal sex , including the risks etc .
The magazine is't telling young girls they SHOULD do this.
And it's about time we got rid of that idiotic ,archaic and loaded term "sodomy "once and for all .
Conservatives fail to realize that this stupid term comes from the Biblical legend of two cities which are entirely legendary . There is absolutely no historical or archaeological evidence they ever existed . And furthermore, as I have explained before here , these cities were destroyed by God not because of homosexuality or any kind of sexual behavior, but because the inhabitants were wicked, cruel and callous people who had no compassion for the poor and downtrodden .
Sooner or later, young people, male or female will learn about non-standard sexual behavior whether they are male or female, straight or gay . You cannot keep them safe by trying to keep them ignorant of sex . This is why abstinence only sex education programs have been such an abysmal failure in public schools. All they have done has been to INCREASE the rates of teenage pregnancy and STDs in America markedly .

Click to expand...

Sodom and Gomorrah found: https://www.google.com/search?q=Sod...28DVAhUF4GMKHd73C5sQvwUIIygA&biw=1660&bih=901

Even if they actually are Sodom & Gomorrah, which is highly doubtful, there is absolutely no evidence they were destroyed by God or that God destroyed them because he disapproved of the way they were supposedly having sex there .
There are no signs saying "Welcome to Sodom, fun city " or Welcome to Gomorrah , fun city ."

The Horn said:

Angel 4 Truth, Teen Vogue isn't "promoting sodomy ". It's performing a valuable public service by telling teenage girls ABOUT anal sex , including the risks etc .
The magazine is't telling young girls they SHOULD do this.
And it's about time we got rid of that idiotic ,archaic and loaded term "sodomy "once and for all .
Conservatives fail to realize that this stupid term comes from the Biblical legend of two cities which are entirely legendary . There is absolutely no historical or archaeological evidence they ever existed . And furthermore, as I have explained before here , these cities were destroyed by God not because of homosexuality or any kind of sexual behavior, but because the inhabitants were wicked, cruel and callous people who had no compassion for the poor and downtrodden .
Sooner or later, young people, male or female will learn about non-standard sexual behavior whether they are male or female, straight or gay . You cannot keep them safe by trying to keep them ignorant of sex . This is why abstinence only sex education programs have been such an abysmal failure in public schools. All they have done has been to INCREASE the rates of teenage pregnancy and STDs in America markedly .

Click to expand...

Sodomy is alive and well in the world today, all the gays do it to each other. Many times it is against the victim's will

The Horn said:

Angel 4 Truth, Teen Vogue isn't "promoting sodomy ". It's performing a valuable public service by telling teenage girls ABOUT anal sex , including the risks etc .

Click to expand...

You have not read the article.

The Horn said:

This is why abstinence only sex education programs have been such an abysmal failure in public schools.

Click to expand...

Teenage promiscuity is not a failure of the schools. It's a failure of the parents.

It emphasizes how "awesome" it is, and specifically advertises it to boys. That's shameless promotion, unequivocally.

The Horn said:

Angel 4 Truth, Teen Vogue isn't "promoting sodomy ". It's performing a valuable public service by telling teenage girls ABOUT anal sex , including the risks etc .
The magazine is't telling young girls they SHOULD do this.
And it's about time we got rid of that idiotic ,archaic and loaded term "sodomy "once and for all .

Click to expand...

IF it were, instead of censorship, the argument should be parental responsibility. IF parents don't wish to have their children read this magazine, easy to remedy ... don't allow them to buy it.

Rusha said:

IF it were, instead of censorship, the argument should be parental responsibility. IF parents don't wish to have their children read this magazine, easy to remedy ... don't allow them to buy it.

Click to expand...

It's not censorship if the article's opponents argue that the magazine shouldn't have published it. It's censorship if we argue that the government should pull it off the rack.

Would you say the same if the article appeared in "Highlights for Kids" ?

glassjester said:

It's not censorship if the article's opponents argue that the magazine shouldn't have published it. It's censorship if we argue that the government should pull it off the rack.

Click to expand...

Do you want the government to "pull it off the rack"?

glassjester said:

Would you say the same if the article appeared in "Highlights for Kids" ?

Click to expand...

No. Different standard. This still goes back to the parents ... who HAVE the right to decide what their children read.

Rusha said:

Do you want the government to "pull it off the rack"?

Click to expand...

No - I think stores should. And, as you said, parents should not buy it.

Rusha said:

No. Different standard. This still goes back to the parents ... who HAVE the right to decide what their children read.

Click to expand...

I am not attempting to negate the parents' role. Nor am I attempting to negate the responsibility of the publisher - which you are.

If it had been published in "Highlights for Kids" would you agree that the magazine shouldn't have published it?

glassjester said:

No - I think stores should. And, as you said, parents should not buy it.

Click to expand...

Whatever happened to conservatives advocating the business owners have the right to do business as they see fit? IF I were a business owner, I would *not* buy it because it goes against MY values. However, I also wouldn't sell alcohol or cancer sticks. Should I have the right to tell other business owners how to run their businesses?

glassjester said:

I am not attempting to negate the parents' role. Nor am I attempting to negate the responsibility of the publisher - which you are.

Click to expand...

Nope ... you are wrong again.

If it had been published in "Highlights for Kids" would you agree that the magazine shouldn't have published it?

Click to expand...

I agree with age-consistent laws which BAN business owners from selling anything that negatively targets CHILDREN. What is not being focused on is who is responsible for monitoring what teens are allowed to read. I am going with the parents.

Rusha said:

Whatever happened to conservatives advocating the business owners have the right to do business as they see fit?

Click to expand...

Nothing happened to it.

Rusha said:

IF I were a business owner, I would *not* buy it because it goes against MY values.

Click to expand...

Yes - that makes sense. So what are the values of business owners who do choose to promote sodomy among kids?

Rusha said:

However, I also wouldn't sell alcohol or cancer sticks.

Click to expand...

Fair enough. I assume you would find it especially heinous to market those products to kids.

Rusha said:

Should I have the right to tell other business owners how to run their businesses?

Click to expand...

Yes, you have that right. And the other businesses have the right to ignore you.

Rusha said:

Nope ... you are wrong again.

Click to expand...

Alright.
You don't think businesses should refuse to promote sodomy among kids?
(do not confuse "should" with "should be compelled by government to")

Rusha said:

I agree with age-consistent laws which BAN business owners from selling anything that negatively targets CHILDREN. What is not being focused on is who is responsible for monitoring what teens are allowed to read. I am going with the parents.

Click to expand...

I agree. And I also think businesses and publishers who promote sex among kids should be called out for what they're doing - not necessarily by the government - but by the public at least.

That's all anyone on this thread is advocating (I think).
I think you are mistakenly accusing the article's opponents of advocating censorship.

glassjester said:

Yes - that makes sense. So what are the values of business owners who do choose to promote sodomy among kids?

Click to expand...

You mean teens. I think there is a bigger problem that folks tend to ignore. Why do you suppose any teen would seek out material that discusses sex? I think it has to do with the failure of parents who promote abstinence only rather than sex education AND abstinence. Uninformed teens will seek info when they do not feel their parents are open enough to answer all their questions without scorn.

Fair enough. I assume you would find it especially heinous to market those products to kids.

Click to expand...

Absolutely.

Yes, you have that right. And the other businesses have the right to ignore you.

Click to expand...

Yep

Alright.
You don't think businesses should refuse to promote sodomy among kids?(do not confuse "should" with "compelled by government to")

Click to expand...

Kids is not the same as teens. For teens, I expect the criteria should involve not suggesting things that are illegal and unhealthy. For example ... showing teens it is cool to drink, smoke, and do drugs is far more damaging than expressing concern over teens having unsafe sex.

I agree. And I also think businesses and publishers who promote sex among kids should be called out for what they're doing - not necessarily by the government - but by the public at least.

Click to expand...

Kids, of course ... but we are speaking of teens. The only reason I can think of for a teen to be interested in these type of articles is because they are SEEKING info. Honest, open and NON-judgmental discussions between parents with their teens would shut down the interest.

Rusha said:

Kids, of course ... but we are speaking of teens. The only reason I can think of for a teen to be interested in these type of articles is because they are SEEKING info. Honest, open and NON-judgmental discussions between parents with their teens would shut down the interest.

Click to expand...

That's assuming that no kids happen across this article while reading a kids' magazine, and not necessarily while seeking information about sodomy.

That's also assuming that the article aims to inform, which it explicitly does not. See my previous post:

glassjester said:

Nihilo is right - magazine articles like that undoubtedly put the idea into some kids' minds, that maybe wouldn't have otherwise sought out such activity. Come on - it flat out told kids that anal sex is awesome. And it made a point of claiming that it's especially "awesome" for boys on the receiving end. The article is despicable. It even ends with a call to action!

It wasn't exactly an impassive informational piece.
The article was clearly more a tool of recruitment than education.

Click to expand...