By Jonathan Rutz
Years ago, I heard a joke about a Christian girl who was propositioned by a billionaire at her church. He said, "Will you sleep with me for $10 million?" She agreed to this crazy offer. Then he said, "How about $10?" She asked, "What kind of girl do you think I am?" He said, "We've already determined that – we're just negotiating the price."
In light of all the recent sexual allegations that have been in the news lately, finding a moral compass from a culture that doesn't want God or the Bible to be the plumb line for right and wrong is getting more complicated and, from this writer's point of view, outright hypocritical.
Advertisement - story continues below
Just a couple of months ago, one of the gurus and forefathers of our culture's current sexual revolution, Hugh Hefner, passed away. I read almost nothing in the liberal media that had anything bad to say about him. Here's a guy who furthered the sexual exploitation of women more than Harvey Weinstein ever did.
So someone help me out here. I'm trying to figure out how liberals define right and wrong. I might easily find a liberal who could agree with me when it comes to the moral irony that takes place in the prisons. You have prisoners who, from what I've heard, would kill a child molester who is in prison with them. Yet the same prisoners wouldn't carry out that same vigilante justice on fellow murderers and rapists.
TRENDING: 'Impeach Barack Obama': Lindsey Graham suggests liberals' worst nightmare
You have Natasha Henstridge, who brought forth her story that Harvey Weinstein had pleasured himself in front of her. You have Gal Gadot trying to do her part to end all these types of horrible sexual exploitations taking place in Hollywood by not allowing producer Brett Ratner (who has allegations against him) to take part in the sequel to "Wonder Woman."
So last summer, I allowed my aunt to take my 9-year-old boy and 11-year-old daughter to see "Wonder Woman" without checking IMDB's parents' guide. I saw the movie three weeks ago and was horrified that my 11-year-old daughter had to see a guy naked with his hand over his crotch in that movie. I know it's my fault. I just assumed "Wonder Woman" was a kid's movie. If I approached any 11-year-old girl in America stark naked with my hand over my crotch, I doubt I would have any normal person thinking I had done nothing wrong.
Advertisement - story continues below
So I asked the question earlier, "How do liberals define right and wrong?" I know it has something to do with "free speech" or "the arts."
I was working a booth at a home show years ago and had a guy across from me selling pictures. He put a large picture on the wall that faced my booth of a completely naked woman. I asked him kindly if he could put that picture on the other wall that didn't face my booth. I told him my reason was that when I was young, I struggled with looking at pornography, and that having that picture in front of me for the next three days was bothering my conscience. His answer to me: "That picture is not pornography. It's art." My answer: "My hormones can't tell the difference."
Now it's 2017, and most liberals would say my warped thinking is out of the Dark Ages. OK, OK. But I'm still not getting my question answered. "How do liberals define right and wrong?"
Was Harvey Weinstein's only sin that he didn't redefine himself also as an actor and confine himself to sexual escapades that he could create as a producer and also be cast as the actor in whatever fantasy his heart desired?
It's possible that the liberal media as a whole, which gave Hugh Hefner a thumbs-up, may not be hypocritical at all. They may not care at all about deviant behavior. They may have offered up Harvey Weinstein, Brett Ratner and Keven Spacey as sacrificial lambs to have a seemingly credible and consistent leg to stand on as they try to take out Roy Moore and President Trump for their sins (which would be a great strategy, by the way, if that's what they're doing).
Advertisement - story continues below
If that's not what they're doing, and they do really care, they (the liberal media) who were around at the time, should apologize to Kenneth Star for their lack of support of him, as he tried to hold President Clinton accountable for all his sexual misconduct.
I would like to offer a little bit of fatherly advice to these women who have been sexually abused. One of the main reasons our culture made laws a long time ago against indecent exposure is that when women take off their clothes in front of men, more often than not, it leaves the men wanting more. Often, these men who want more take it by force.
Because you actresses are role models for the next generation of young girls, I would also encourage you to take a stand against all the sexual abuse that takes place in the name of "art." The next time a movie producer tell you to get naked or have sex on a movie set, show them these two definitions in the English dictionary:
Slut – noun; derogatory; a woman who has many casual sexual encounters.
Advertisement - story continues below
Prostitute – noun; a person, in particular a woman, who engages in sexual activity for payment.
After you show him these two definitions, ask the movie producer, "What kind of actress do you think I am?"
Jonathan Rutz, a salesman, lives on a farm in the Ozark Mountains of northwest Arkansas. He's been married to the same woman for 27 years and has 10 children and four grandchildren. Jonathan has a love for people and a passion for happy endings for everyone, believing the only real solutions for mankind can be found in the Owner's Manual from the original Manufacturer of Humans.