Dennis Prager: What's Wrong With Masturbating To Child Porn?

[UCmeNdc]

This is the guy providing “educational resources” to Florida’s children.

But that pales compared to the video Ron Filipkowski recently tweeted.

In the video, Prager tells a host that he doesn't consider animated child pornography evil because "I would use "evil" only with behavior.” He added, "Forgetting the sex issue, you can’t be evil – you didn’t do evil if you thought evil.” Unless you think progressive or “woke” thoughts, I’m sure. But I digress.

“If I’m masturbating to animated pictures of pornography, I'm not doing something evil?” the host asked.

“That's correct,” Prager said. He didn’t even say he thought there was anything wrong with child pornography. When the host responded by saying the found Prager’s view “despicable,” Prager sounded shocked. “Really?” he said.

"Yes, of course," the host replied.

Apparently, a pedophiliac is A-OK at PragerU, so long as you’re a conservative. Good to know.

https://crooksandliars.com/2023/08/dennis-prager-whats-wrong-masturbating

[mahatmakanejeeves]

1. This is not what Dennis Prager said. NT

[hlthe2b]

4. Okay. What DID he say, then?

[mahatmakanejeeves]

5. He's talking about animated or cartoon images. Real kids do not appear in those.

... Prager tells a host that he doesn't consider animated child pornography evil ...

That's not so much cut and dry.

[hlthe2b]

6. OMG. You too?

That is NOT so cut and dry. Imagery of child pornography? Really? I find that unbelievably sick.

[mahatmakanejeeves]

8. I'm just telling you what he said, which is not accurately reflected in the thread's title.

I'm at work, and I can't get into this now.

[617Blue]

9. I guess it depends on you definition of "child porn"

I don't know, looking at animated images of children engaged in sex acts comes pretty close?

The kind of person that does this probably wants the real thing.

[stopdiggin]

13. the 'discussion', if you care to look back

circled around this very topic. Does 'wanting' something - or 'imagining' something represent the same thing - as actual action? (with the 'thing' here being represented as 'evil') Is evil in the mind - or in the action? Or - will we try to argue for equivalency?

[edisdead]

18. The portrayal of children in porn IS wrong

I don’t care animated or not. Given where AI is going with the ability to create life like images are we REALLY going to be ok with that being disseminated? It doesn’t matter what the image quality is because it can and will be more lifelike if we allow it to. Which will lead to more problems with actual children beong targeted.

[Whiskeytide]

19. Clearly both imagining it and doing it are ...

… unhealthy. Maybe it could be argued that it’s a matter of degree? Maybe not “equivalent”? Idk. But I feel confident saying every child predator imagined it well before acting on it.

[stopdiggin]

11. that particular sentence (excerpted from the larger discussion)

had to do with drawing distinction between animation and real life recordings. (in this case, as illustration for the sake of the argument) Pointing to a legitimate and reasonable distinction in the minds of many. And a difference demonstrable as far as fact, material process, construct, content, and a whole host of other factors and checkpoints. If your reasoning or ethical construct does not choose to recognize a difference ... That's fine. Your choice. But many would disagree just on the basis of a logical argument.

But this is all at least several degrees away from what the original discussion between Pranger and host actually concerned. (and one suspects that crooksandliars and the OP were probably aware of that)

(zero defense for either Pranger - or any of his ilk - or child porn, which kind of goes without saying. but, sloppy argument - and deliberate misrepresentation - kind of gripe my gut as well.)

[hlthe2b]

12. I am well aware of what it says and the distinction some are trying to make. Despicable, IMO

As a primary ER Health Care provider I can tell you that I would be legally obligated to report such material held by anyone that worked there, given the children that we see and treat. It is NOT funny nor an academic exercise in distinctions as some here seem to want to make it--something that I find despicable. Because it may signal risk or signal ideology, it would be taken as such. And that is the law in Colorado. Child abuse or the suggested risk of child abuse is not taken lightly. We are obligated to report--not excuse it away as some distinction without a clear difference.

Is holding the material illegal? Almost certainly not. But, that doesn't mean possession does not signal a potential to act.

[stopdiggin]

14. that is your take

and while I can understand your sensitivity to the topic - that does not mean that I yield ground on arguing that a distinction between the two materials is a reasonable (and logical) inference.

Is there a clear difference in 'signaling' involved? I honestly don't know the answer to that. But there is a very clear difference in content and process ... And on that basis alone ...

And, again - this all strays some distance from where the Pranger discussion centered itself - which had to do with whether 'evil' was found (and inherent?) in the imagining of something - or in the acting of it

[hlthe2b]

15. No. It is the state of Colorado's "take" on risk of child abuse. Just as I must report abnormal

behavior by the "parents" that might signal they are NOT the parents but instead "traffickers" OR the unexplained bruising or semi-healed past fractures that I identify. Zero tolerance for signs or signalment of potential abuse. We have to report such potential for further investigation.

You have to live with your viewpoints and defense of same-- including potential markers for child sexual assault. I don't have to accept them. And legally, if I see them, I cannot ignore them. That includes reporting an employee for review who I observe possesses them. And, I can guarantee there would be very little tolerance.

So, make it an academic argument if you like. But, I'd suggest you recognize how little that will gain you in the "real world" where many (teachers, HCWs, others with direct child interaction) are rightfully protective and legally obligated to report the signs and signalment of potential abuse. Frankly, I'd report such material if it showed bestiality as well. But, then Colorado likewise takes animal abuse seriously. YMMV.

[ananda]

24. Same. It sends a message that sexualizing children for cartoon porn is OK.

Yet cartoons that depict children of all sorts in very positive ways
are considered woke and evil.

Words fail.

[edisdead]

16. What.... The.... Fuck????

[Demsrule86]

25. Wrong. It is cut and dry...it despicable.

[maxsolomon]

2. He's one of a number of well-funded RW propagandists.

Flooding The Zone With Shit, as Bannon said.

Hillsdale College has "Classical" charter schools running their curriculum.

[hlthe2b]

3. OMG...

I've always found him disgusting... Little did I know. Where are all the QAnon hypocrites with this cretin?

[calimary]

7. I remember when Prager was on local talk radio, pushing his morality brand.

ALWAYS with the word “moral” being jammed into our ears and down our throats. And with this holier-than-thou delivery that was like the proverbial nails on a blackboard.

I found him hugely off-putting back then. Even moreso now.

[TheRealNorth]

10. I think there is a line between "creepy" and illegal.

I mean, there is the whole anime/waifu thing. While it's weird/creepy to me, I don't think it rises to the level of "evil"

Of course, I am surprised Prager doesn't think it's a "gateway drug" to pedophilia.

[Sympthsical]

17. One of the things that always springs to mind for me on this topic

Is hentai. Which is . . . not unpopular on the internet. Not my bag, but enough has crawled past my vision over twenty five years where I can say that more than a little of it does not look like it involves people of age. School girl and school boy imagery in anime/comic/manga styles.

And I've seen that imagery circulate in some communities more than others. The sexualized school girl with the big eyes and short skirt.

It's very, very strange to me. Is it evil? I don't know. I tend to veer on the side that thoughts aren't evil by themselves. However, in the real world, we do realize that constant thoughts and obsessions are likelier to result in acts than others. Where does the line get drawn.

I think it's interesting that sexually graphic content of underage children is being debated when certain books people have been defending have precisely that in them.

It's so confusing. People should be less situational. Pick a lane.

[Demsrule86]

26. First of all masturbating to cartoon images of children is evil behavior...you still are finding

kids sexually attractive...I would go so far as to say it is beyond evil.

[jmowreader]

20. Hi, I'm Dennis Prager. I jerk off to hentai.

But don't you even THINK about reading a book to a child if you're wearing a dress!

[Demovictory9]

21. Prager loves porn..for males

[dsc]

22. Regardless of what should or shouldn't be legal

in terms of what was being discussed, it is a fundamental misreading of Christianity to say that evil thoughts aren't sins. No less an authority than Jesus says they are.

[Hekate]

23. You mean hard-wiring your brain to associate orgasmic pleasure with extreme cruelty to children?

Oh yeah, a grown man getting his jollies from seeing little boys and girls ripped up by a big penis — what could ever be wrong with that scenario?

Okay, I just made myself too nauseous to go on.