Discover more from ConservaTibbs
Public performances cannot be "leaked" to anyone
When you perform sex acts on camera for money, you have given explicit permission for the explicit video to be widely distributed.
Donald Trump said in January of 2016 that he could shoot someone in the middle of Fifth Avenue and not lose support. We will see if the same principle applies to a candidate for the state legislature in Virginia who live-streamed sex acts with her husband, asking for money from the people viewing the live stream.
Speaking of Trump, no one who excused or tried to hand-wave away concerns about Trump's sexual immorality (he committed adultery against all three of his wives) has any moral credibility to condemn Susanna Gibson at all. You have proven that you are not concerned about morality, so spare us the visual of you clutching your pearls. You can go ahead and sit this one out.
With that said, distributing video of sex acts is wicked and destructive, even if you are doing it with your spouse. Porn destroys families, warps perspectives on sex, and steals innocence. Streaming sex acts is not "free speech" and should not be protected by the First Amendment.
Neither Gibson nor her husband are victims of "sex crimes" or "revenge porn," and neither of them can credibly claim their "privacy" was violated. When you perform sex acts on camera for money, you have given explicit permission for the explicit video to be widely distributed. This is not a case where someone's iCloud was hacked, or video was taken without the subjects' knowledge. It is a waste of law enforcement's valuable time and resources to investigate this obvious non-crime, and a candidate for state legislature should not be wasting public resources in this manner.
The first concern ought to be the couple's young children. Kids, especially once they reach middle school, can be vicious and nasty. This will follow them for years and they will likely be bullied and tormented because of this. Both Gibson and her husband have brought this on their children and are equally guilty. If anyone has concerns about privacy, it should be for those innocent children.
The sad thing is that it may not matter. We already have some people defending her "sex work." Republicans need to be careful how they deal with this in the age of Trump, as Gibson could easily retort that she only "worked" with her husband and not other men. Hypocrisy could easily work to galvanize support for her. And once again, no one who defended Trump's immorality or said people should "lighten up" about it has any credibility or moral authority to condemn Gibson at all.
This is indeed new territory, and yet another taboo has been reached and will fall soon. We are a culture that has no shame whatsoever. While there is a place for politics, the only thing that can turn back the tide is revival. Prayer, personal repentance and preaching the Word are the best weapons we have against a culture sliding into depravity. We cannot win on our feet, but we can win on our knees.
Thanks for reading ConservaTibbs! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.