Dear Editor:

I am responding to Phil Kennard’s latest rant, in the Aug. 1 Lake Region Weekly, in which he belittles Sen. Bill Diamond’s effort to make the state sex offender registry more effective by citing what the offender has done, so that people can differentiate between those whose offenses are relatively minor and those whose offenses are serious – such as rapists.

Then Kennard asserts that “cause of it all” is pornography! He further asserts that he can prove it and descends into a ramble about sin, homosexuality, the Ten Commandments, atheism, God and the need to lock our doors at night. But none of this is about pornography, let alone pornography as a cause for sex offences.

He claims that the past 50 years have “brought us hell on earth!” I remember the Eisenhower years very well and the sexual repression of that era, when it was forbidden to show a woman’s cleavage on TV and husbands and wives on TV comedy shows had to sleep in twin beds.

In 1991, in preparation for my testimony before the New Mexico House Judiciary Committee, I searched the scientific literature for evidence of harm caused by pornography – specifically sexually explicit images. I found that, only when persons were exposed to violence and pornography at the same time, was there any tendency for possible harm. Take away the violence and there were no harmful effects.

I also searched for polls showing attitudes, both local and national, regarding the right of adults to have access to sexually explicit materials. I found that typically nearly two-thirds of the respondents said that adults should have such access.

At that time, some 15 percent of videos rented in video stores were sexually explicit. Clearly many adults were enjoying such material without becoming pedophiles or rapists. Today, of course, the Internet has largely replaced such videos.

All in all, I am convinced that, compared to the 1950s, we live in a far healthier climate regarding attitudes towards sex. Of course, we will always have prudes trying to force their warped ideas of morality on us.

Harry M. Murphy

Windham