Moral Question

[DrLove42]

OK a moral question here

Pornhub, a youtube style website for all things Porn make money through advertising and subscriber features (what they are, i have no idea).

They recently tried to make a $10,000 dollar donation to a Breast Cancer Research charity (cos lets face it....they make their money on boobs)

Said charity refused to accept it because of who the donor was.

Do we still live in a world where porn as a business is that looked down on?

And how do you feel about denying money for a good cause because its source doesn't agree with your morals, but is still legal

[Bean]

I'm not sure that's a moral question, but the answer is obviously yes: we do still live in a world where porn as a business is that looked down on.

Whether or not that's a good thing (and there are some reasonable arguments either way) would be a moral question.

[DrLove42]

OK then I think the question I was going for was something along the lines of how do you feel about deying money for a good cause because its source doesn't agree with your morals, but is still legal?

[Psychosplodge]

They should have taken the money, it's not from illegal means.
I would also assume at least 50% of the charities staff access porn in some form or another.

[ElectricPaladin]

I take issue with a cancer charity using its position to moralize. Cancer is a terrible disease - the biggest disease of all, as its tied to the central flaw of multicellular biology - and we should all pool our resources to limit its impact on our lives. This is not a place for petty concerns.

At the same time - and for the same reason - I take issue with (and no longer support) the "Komen For the Cure" foundation, as it has become apparent that they are more interested in protecting their IP and market share, pursuing a bizarrely anti-women's health anti-Planned Parenthood agenda, and otherwise meddling in politics than they are in cancer research and awareness. I still donate, just not to them.

That said, I also have a problem with the "save the boobies!" campaign. Sure, it's cute, but breast cancer kills women. It also kills women. Reducing it to "let's stop this disease from making women who we are attracted to less attractive by hurting their boobs" is childish and a little insulting.

But... it also sells, and why should we look a gift donation in the... mouth?

And, frankly, sh*t always gets done by appealing to the in-power-group. Because, you know, they have the power. Dr. King did the same thing with civil disobedience to overcome America's Jim Crow laws. If we have to appeal to the lust of men - especially in such a light-hearted way - to get money for breast cancer research... well, there are worse strategies.

But back to the issue at hand - yes, I think that refusing to take money from porn producers when lives are on the line is morally questionable. Porn is an industry, and most porn actors and actresses are in it because they like it, or at least can live with it, which is all that most people can say about their lives. Refusing their money is nothing but self-righteousness, and when it's a matter of life or death for people suffering from or who might develop cancer, it's a pretty terrible kind of self-righteousness.

[Psychosplodge]

There are probably cancer charities in other countries that are less "self righteous" anyone know if they tried one of those?

[White Tiger88]

What idiot said "hey lets turn down 10,000 dollars we can help people with"?????

[Chris*ta]

It's most likely because they're worried that the people who will donate the next 100,000 would be upset at them taking money from the sex industry.

Which is sad, but that's life, I guess ...

[Mud Duck]

I take issue with a cancer charity using its position to moralize. Cancer is a terrible disease - the biggest disease of all, as its tied to the central flaw of multicellular biology - and we should all pool our resources to limit its impact on our lives. This is not a place for petty concerns.

At the same time - and for the same reason - I take issue with (and no longer support) the "Komen For the Cure" foundation, as it has become apparent that they are more interested in protecting their IP and market share, pursuing a bizarrely anti-women's health anti-Planned Parenthood agenda, and otherwise meddling in politics than they are in cancer research and awareness. I still donate, just not to them.

That said, I also have a problem with the "save the boobies!" campaign. Sure, it's cute, but breast cancer kills women. It also kills women. Reducing it to "let's stop this disease from making women who we are attracted to less attractive by hurting their boobs" is childish and a little insulting.

But... it also sells, and why should we look a gift donation in the... mouth?

And, frankly, sh*t always gets done by appealing to the in-power-group. Because, you know, they have the power. Dr. King did the same thing with civil disobedience to overcome America's Jim Crow laws. If we have to appeal to the lust of men - especially in such a light-hearted way - to get money for breast cancer research... well, there are worse strategies.

But back to the issue at hand - yes, I think that refusing to take money from porn producers when lives are on the line is morally questionable. Porn is an industry, and most porn actors and actresses are in it because they like it, or at least can live with it, which is all that most people can say about their lives. Refusing their money is nothing but self-righteousness, and when it's a matter of life or death for people suffering from or who might develop cancer, it's a pretty terrible kind of self-righteousness.

They're IP is the biggest thing that they've got. And if the majority of their monies come from Pro-Lifers, who do you think that they are going to support. It is also (I believe) a 'Christan' company at the core, so any support of ideas against that core would alienate the public to their message.
Breast cancer can effect men as well.
"Save the Boobies!" Hey it's easy to remember, funny, slightly; just a little bit naughty in context; hey it is Minnesota dontcha know. Also fits across the front T-shirt nicely. Come on! Who doesn't like Boobies?

I'd say refusing the money isn't self-righteousness, but self-preservation. They know or have a good idea where the most of the donations come from and the core values of those donators, and to be honest 10 grand is but a drop in the bucket....

[eldargal]

Is porn illegal? No. Then that should have been an end to it. If the money is not the proceeds of crime then the charity has no business refusing it, to me it is the worst kind of self righteousness. 'We're too good to accept your money because you made it through porn'.