Pornography & the Ten Commandments

I would like to preface what I am about to say by declaring that I always have, and always will feel that pornography is bad, harmful, and opposed to the laws of God.
But I have an odd character trait: I often take something that I firmly believe to be true, and then ask myself, why is this true?  More often than not, this process solidifies my belief.
So today the subject of thought was why is pornography (which I know from the word of God to be bad) bad?
I decided for the sake of argument to use the world's oldest and most widely accepted (in theory) religious code of conduct, the Ten Commandments, as a measuring stick.
Note: For the sake of this blog, pornography is defined as any form of media (print, music, digital images, etc.) that is used or intended to be used to excite sexual feelings.

The Ten Commandments

Thou shalt have no other gods before me:
To have another god is to have any priority be higher than worshiping Heavenly Father and furthering His work.  Pornography definitely does that. 

Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image:
This commandment is connected to the last one in that someone worships something of their own making in place of full devotion to God.  Again, pornography is guilty of breaking this commandment.

Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain:
By the strictest sense I am not sure that this one is directly broken though our topic, but it is certainly not defended either.  It is not enough for something to not do bad, it must do good in order to be considered good.  There is no morally contested issue that is morally neutral, all are either of God or of the devil.
However, if you view the taking of God's name in vain as not just words, but acting as if you are in the right (following God) when you are in opposition to it, this commandment would stand against pornography as well.

Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy:
Like the last, while this commandment may not be broken directly by pornography, it is certainly not protected by it, and how many viewers or purveyors of that filth take the Sabbath off?

Honour thy father and thy mother:
Pornography is in direct conflict with this commandment in that it focuses the viewer on themselves and their own passions, rather than on serving and honoring others.  It undermines proper authority and respect for such.  Every victim of this is someone's child, parent, or sibling.

Thou shalt not kill:
This filth is very often violent in nature, and thus encourages and glorifies violence.  The first step to destroying life is to decide that it is of little value outside of satiating one's appetite.

Thou shalt not commit adultery:
The Savior had the strongest words on the subject, "Whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart."  Enough said; no justification, pornography is in direct opposition to this commandment.

Thou shalt not steal:
When you take an offspring of Divinity, someone with unlimited potential, and turn them into an object with the sole proclaimed value of being sexually appealing, what else have you done if not stolen?  And stolen the most precious of all commodities at that: a human soul.

Thou shalt not bear false witness:
To bear false witness is to lie, proclaiming as true something that is not.  The lies of pornography are countless.  They claim it doesn't hurt anyone, that it is a good thing to be involved in, that it makes you better in some way; nothing could be farther from the truth!

Thou shalt not covet . . . thy neighbour’s wife . . . nor any thing that is thy neighbour’s:
Do I even need to comment here?  Of course pornography breaks this commandment!

Well, the count is in:  Pornography directly breaks or encourages breaking eight of the Ten Commandments of our Creator and Father, and at the very least indirectly breaks the other two.

As if all the above wasn't enough, pornography is scientifically proven to be extremely addictive.  Anything that creates an addictive habit inside of us lessens our ability to follow God, or even live a life with continuing options for choice.
I believe the Bible when, in its first chapter, it states that we are created in the image of God.  Yes, that does make the human body a creation of supreme beauty, but it also imbues in us a great deal of sacredness.  As something holy, we are to respect our bodies, not flaunt them before the world as tools to bring attention and fame to ourselves.
Please help refute the lies of this degrading filth.  There is nothing good about it.  I have seen it destroy lives, marriages, families, and careers.  While we must always love the sinner caught in the net, that very love requires of us that we do all we can to destroy that net and free them from its grasp!
We can fight against this plague, and protect our families and loved ones from it.  Just as no organization comes under more attack from Satan, so no organization qualifies for more help and protection from Jesus Christ than the Divinely created organization of the family.

"[We] can do all things through Christ which strengtheneth [us]." (Philippians 4:13)

What if they die before they are baptized?

The Savior declared, "Except a man be born‍ of water‍ and of‍ the Spirit, he cannot enter‍ into the kingdom of God." (John 3:5)  He further clarified that the authority by which baptism was performed mattered (Luke 20:4).  Now, have you ever wondered, what if someone dies before they are baptized, or if they never even hear of Christ?  Is Jesus' statement false, or are they excluded from heaven for something outside of their control?  The first assumption would make God a liar, and the second would make Him unjust.
What if there was a third option, one which allowed the Savior to be absolutely correct about baptism, and for God to be totally just?
It would only seem Christian to be as concerned for the welfare of our departed family as we are for the living.  In the temples built by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, we perform proxy baptisms; allow me to explain.
First, those who enter have themselves been baptized by authority (I will go into the origin and need for authority more in another post), and as baptism is a promise to follow Christ and act in His name, they need to be keeping some of the basic laws of God (the same ones Christ taught when He walked the earth).  Then they stand in the place of someone who died without authorized baptism (often a family member) and are baptized for them.  It is then between God and that soul to decide whether or not they want that baptism; it is no more forced on them than it was when they were alive.
This beautiful experience serves at least two purposes.  First, by doing something for another that they cannot do for themselves, we are made a little better, and become more mindful of Christ.  Second, the soul that did not have the chance to choose Christ in this life is put on an equal standing with us.  What could be more Divine and loving?
This was a scenario that the ancient Christians understood.  As Paul said in 1 Corinthians 15:29, "Else what shall they do which are baptized for‍ the dead, if the dead rise‍ not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?"  Besides, it just makes sense.  God is unchanging, and He loves every one of His children, no matter when or where they lived, and He wants all of them to choose to come live with Him again.

To learn more, visit www.mormon.org