Allow me to quote a few direct snippets from the letter itself...
"If an appointed servant inadvertantly comes across a pornographic image while on the Internet, or in some other way, and he reports this to an elder, such matters can generally be handled according to the direction in the Kingdom Ministry School textbook, page 97, paragraphs 4-7. There is no need to evaluate his qualifications."
Ignoring the obvious & juvenile pun re: "coming across" pornographic images...
So, the Service Desk thinks it is possible to accidentally just "encounter" porn images on the Internet? Like, say, you go to Martha Stewart.com, and instead of seeing a recipe for blueberry muffins, you see Mistress X and her band of S&M slave drivers? Right....
And they also think that if an elder "accidentally" stumbles across this site, he is to immediately report to other elders? "Say, Brother Bellybulge, while I was reading the latest upbuilding experience in my e-mail, I just happened to see this picture of 4 horses and a woman..." Right....
"Thus, when the body of elders learn that a publisher has made a practice of viewing soft-core pornography, sound Scriptural counsel and enlightenment should be given. Generally speaking, one persisting in this practice would not be viewed as exemplary and thus would not qualify for special privileges in the congregation. However, at this stage he would not be dealt with judicially unless he is also promoting it or encouragiing others to view it with him. This would give evidence of a brazen attitude characterizing loose conduct."
"Hey, Bob, me and the guys will be over your place around 8:30. We'll still watching the game, right?"
"Naw, Fred, I thought we'd all strip down to our underwear and watch Drunk Colleges Girls Going Wild.com. You down with that?"
"In the second example [from the KM school], a publisher 'for many years secretly viewed abhorrent pornography that is sexually degrading.' This would include child pornography, sadistic torture, bondage, gang rape, or the brutalizing of women. In such cases, 'a judicial committee would be formed because of the gross uncleanness involved.
"Therefore, viewing pornography escalates to gross uncleanness if the type of pornography viewed was abhorrent or sexually degrading in nature, as described in the second example above. An additional factor to be considered would be if it were a practice for 'many years.' As a general principle, when these elements are present, a judicial committee would need to handle the matter. At Ephesians 4:19 Paul stated: [scriptural quote with phrase 'uncleanness with every sort of greediness']. When an individual has 'given himself over' to this unclean practice as evidenced by his repeatedly viewing abhorrent pornography, the matter has escalated to gross uncleanness and needs to be handled judicially."
So, you can watch all the hard-core porn you want, so long as you don't admit you've been doing it "for years".
Hmm, they still haven't gotten around to explaining that child porography is a criminal offense. If I'm not mistaken, doesn't the FBI get involved?
If you are of a sensitive nature, you may not want to read the next quote.
"Further, viewing hetero-oral or anal sex (on a video or computer), while certainly unclean, is not to be considered 'gross' or 'judicial', though it may lead to removal as an elder, a ministerial servant, or a pioneer depending on the frequency and when it last occurred. With regard to viewing oral (or anal) sex of a homosexual or group nature, this is more serious. However, it would still not be considered uncleanness of a 'gross' nature meriting judicial action, but likely would still result in removal from an appointed privilege of service."
Ok, so since we're getting so explicit and technical...
It is apparently OK to view still photographs of "hetero-oral or anal sex", since the pararaph only mentions "video or computer".
I don't get how viewing "homosexual oral or anal sex" is "more serious", but still isn't "serious" enough to merit a committee. What, do the elders read the scriptures to you in an angrier voice?
Here's my favorite paragraph:
"The direction regarding 'gross uncleanness' is not retroactive. So there is no need to reopen cases that have already been handled in the past prior to the Kingdom Ministry School. Additionally, if following the Kingdom Ministry choll the elders judicially reproved a brother for viewing forms of pornography that may not have merited judicial action, the decision should stand. However, they should make arrangements to help the brother make a spiritual recovery. It may be that judicial restrictions could soon be removed. As he makes spiritual progress, the elders may decide that he can be given privileges in the congregation. After a time, he may also qualify to serve once again in an appointed position. If you have questions regarding the handling of these matters, please write with full details and we will be happy to assist you."
So, if some super-zealous elders D-F'ed somebody for viewing "soft-core" porn since November/Decemeber when the elders school was, and it turns out that he shouldn't have been D-F'ed after all,
-- DO NOT admit you were wrong
-- He is STILL considered D-F'ed
-- MAYBE you might consider "removing restrictions" soon (i.e., based on the Society's definition of "soon", as in "Armageddon is coming soon", you can lift the restrictions sometime within the next 120 years)
I'm just gob-smacked at all this. What a bunch of clueless [fill-in-th-blank]...
