Over the past few months, my articles in our local newspaper column have discussed the degenerating morality evident in American culture today. As one steps down the slop of dissipation is taken, the next step seems easier and less perverse. When a society accepts promiscuity, it is not so hard to accept homosexuality. When it accepts that, other perverted behavior seem less horrifying.

That process has been underway in our society. One corrupt practice has led to the next until it seems difficult anymore for many in our world to see anything as wrong. Whether it be the popularization of promiscuity, homosexuality, sadomasochism, violence, or one of the other topics of smut, the road to debauchery in our time is frequently traveled.

No where is this fact more evident than in the sordid world of popular music stars. Rock and rap celebrities have been in the front of the procession of profligacy. Even their names show the trend. A recent survey of rock and rap publications showed "at least 13 bands named after the male genitals, 6 after female genitals, 4 after sperm, 8 after abortion and one after a vaginal infection." An article by John Leo reviewing the survey also showed "at least 10 bands named for various sex acts, 8 including the F-word" and a host of other perverted examples (U.S. News & World Report, 19 March 90, p. 17).

Newsweek (20 May 91) commented on another example of the same problem. They noted, "MTV's two favorite passions remain the environment and young women in exotic undergarments. After Madonna, no one is pushing the undergarment envelope as hard as Christina Amphlett of the Australian band Divinyls, whose hit, `I Touch Myself,' raises pop vulgarity to a new low." The article went on to say, "When it comes to smut, Amphlett is obsessed. . . ." Billboard magazine, a music trade standard, devoted an en-tire section in the publication to what they termed the trend towards open "autoeroticism" being displayed by Amphlett and Madonna. The magazine noted the display of such pro-vocative behavior on their album covers, in their videos, and during their concerts.

Without a doubt, the most noted example of open vulgarity is the popular music star, Madonna. Her stage name and early work seemed designed to satire that held sacred. Her attire popularized undergarments worn without anything else leaving little to the imagination. Her lyrics endorse one vulgar theme after another from promiscuity to homosexuality and other degeneracy.

Madonna is at the forefront of "gay and lesbian rights" activity especially in conjunction with the so-called "National Organization for Women" (NOW). Madonna is also a vocal advocate of "abortion rights," the euphemistic term for the movement seeking the freedom to murder babies in the womb with impunity. In short, Madonna has sunk about as far into the gutter of ungodliness as possible and actively seeks others to join her.

In a 1990 article entitled "Rock, Roll and Raunch," People magazine reviewed Madonna's "Blond Ambition" tour. The stage performance described in the article sounded more like an X-rated peep show than a music concert. The most tame thing they say about her material is that "the star sings coyly of the joys of sexual spanking. . . ." The rest of the content cannot be reprinted here. Her movie "Truth or Dare" was reviewed by the same magazine and said to go further still into the quagmire of sleaze.

Having read of Madonna's antics in the past, I did not think it possible for her conduct to get any more disgusting. I was wrong. A few weeks ago, the following appeared in an article entitled "Too Hot for Tokyo" in the Houston Chronicle (4 Sept. 92, p. 2A):

A Tokyo publishing house is so horrified by the photos of Madonna in her new book, Sex, that it has refused to publish it in Japan. Kadokawa, a major Japanese publisher, had agreed to pay $1 million for Japanese rights to Sex, but when the owner saw the red-hot pix (taken by fashion photographer Steven Meisel) the deal was kaput. The New York post reports that photos being considered for the book include one showing Madonna having sex with a dog. The editors at Warner Books are not as uncomfortable with the photos as their Japanese counterparts.

How far will it go before our society stands up and shouts, "enough!"? If Madonna's actions have not sunk to the bottom of the gutter, I do not know what else it would take. Even a pagan society like Japan's is caused to balk at such depravity. However, the "entertainment industry" in our country is ready to push the filth to make a buck, the Bible speaks of such depravity and its ungodly progression. Paul warned, "But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived" (2 Tim. 3:13). Never be misled, there is a degenerating influence of evil.

In the recent newspaper articles, I have written on the perversion of homosexuality (Rom. 1:26-28; 1 Cor. 6:9-10). Some of the readers have wondered aloud whether homosexuality was all that bad. I have been asked why I could not just leave the homosexuals alone and learn to accept their practice. I have been told that it is their right to choose an "alternate lifestyle."

After reading the article about Madonna's new book, I thought about how far these "open-minded" folks are willing to go. Would they leave Madonna and her dog alone and learn to accept their practice? Do Madonna and her dog have a right to choose this "alternate lifestyle"? Would they apply the same reasoning to an incestuous practice? A child molester? How far would they go? The same Bible that condemns a relationship with an animal or a child condemns such with one of the same sex. In fact, two places in the Bible associate the perversions by condemning them in ad-joining verses:

Lev. 18:22-23 -- "You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination. Nor shall you mate with any beast, to defile yourself with it. Nor shall any woman stand before a beast to mate with it. It is perversion."

Lev. 20:13-16 -- "If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them. If a man marries a woman and her mother, it is wickedness. They shall be burned with fire, both he and they, that there may be no wickedness among you. If a man mates with a beast, he shall surely be put to death, and you shall kill the beast. If a woman approaches any beast and mates with it, you shall kill the woman and the beast. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood is upon them."

Guardian of Truth XXXVII: 4, p. 21-22
February 18, 1993