• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

"Christian Moms Group Condemns Hallmark Channel for Airing Lesbian Wedding Ad"

SomeRandom

Still learning to be wise
Staff member
Premium Member
DO you believe in the idea that there could be an "inappropriate sexual attraction" at all?
Yes, pedophilia, since it’s an abuse of power dynamics. Beastiality since animals can’t consent and necrophilia, since corpses tend to also lack informed consent.
Other than those examples? Maybe a fascination of rape?
But notice one key underlining factor each shares? They lack informed consent for both parties involved.
Consistency!
 

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
Now would you finally care to explain why you claimed that my religion was "immoral" after you read my [personal opinion about racial tensions in the U.S.? (Post #486)
Because anyone who thinks that only white people still suffer from racism in the USA has a huge moral issue.
Although, I also know that LDS wasn't exactly a leader on this issue. So I'm drawing a connection between your religious background and your beliefs about modern society.
Tom
 

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
Now would you finally care to explain why you claimed that my religion was "immoral" after you read my [personal opinion about racial tensions in the U.S.? (Post #486)

Then, would you please explain why (after I called you out for saying something so nonsensical) you lied and claimed that you did not claim that my religion was immoral? (Post #488)

In post #515, I tried to clarify the distinction between your personal religion and ethics, and the LDS as a whole. Perhaps you overlooked it.
Tom
 

Jainarayan

ॐ नमो भगवते वासुदेवाय
Staff member
Premium Member
How do you believe I have compared them?

By bringing them up in the same conversation, a conversation in which you unequivocally voice your disdain for homosexuality, which you consider to be wrong, immoral, sinful, and say homosexuals give in to their "weakness". Do you truly not see any of that?
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber
Okay, at the risk of derailing the thread, I just have to ask:

What on earth could possess you to think that?
I'd liked to know. Myself, my more recent ancestors had it bad for being Irish, but a few generations later that's just not an issue anymore. But I myself have never faced any problems for being white. To the contrary, it still stands that not believing in an anthropomorphic god has landed more more problems than others than being white, or when I was Christian.
 

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
I'd liked to know. Myself, my more recent ancestors had it bad for being Irish, but a few generations later that's just not an issue anymore. But I myself have never faced any problems for being white. To the contrary, it still stands that not believing in an anthropomorphic god has landed more more problems than others than being white, or when I was Christian.
Same here.
My mom's family escaped British rule in the late 19th century, with little more than the clothes on their backs.
At the time, Irish people weren't really considered white, exactly. They were Papist.

My dad's family was smarter. They too were Irish, escaping British rule. But they went to Canada, far less racist than USA, and did a lot better for themselves.
Tom
 

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
How do you believe I have compared them?
Because you regularly bring them up in the same post and use the same word to describe them, "inappropriate".
I believe that a same-sex attraction is inappropriate.
But you never give a rational reason for comparing them like this.

The damage done by pedophilia, both to the victims and society at large, is enormous and well documented. So it's condemned by any rational person.

On the other hand, nobody can make a rational argument that homosexuality, or gay marriage, does any damage at all.

Quite the contrary, rational people can see the advantages to encouraging competent adults to form mutually supportive, compatible, teams of two. Then cementing that relationship with legal recognition.

Call me a prude if you must, lots of people do. But I strongly believe in modern marriage. Not the old fashioned traditional marriage, where a man acquires an all purpose domestic appliance and can legally enforce exclusive use of his possession. Rather, the modern kind where two competent adults choose each other and the state recognizes them as "next of kin". I think that's the best arrangement for everyone who isn't damaged in some way, whether they're straight or gay.

Your vague, unsupported, opinion that I'm wrong doesn't carry any more weight than that of racists who think that only white people suffer from racism in modern USA.
Tom
 

JesusKnowsYou

Active Member
I feel like I, and others have thoroughly explained this.
You see, I feel like I thoroughly explained how I did not compare pedophilia to homosexuality, but that didn't matter much to you and others.

Please explain exactly how I compared pedophilia to homosexuality. Please quote me.

I ask because I have come to believe that the reasons that people are making this claim about what I said are because,

1.) Rather than simply disagree with me about my beliefs, they want to assault my character.

2.) They don't like that I consider both same-sex attraction and an attraction to children to be inappropriate.
 

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
If one doesn't like same-sex marriage, then let me recommend not getting married to someone of the same sex.

Problem solved.
 

SkepticThinker

Veteran Member
You see, I feel like I thoroughly explained how I did not compare pedophilia to homosexuality, but that didn't matter much to you and others.

Please explain exactly how I compared pedophilia to homosexuality. Please quote me.

I ask because I have come to believe that the reasons that people are making this claim about what I said are because,

1.) Rather than simply disagree with me about my beliefs, they want to assault my character.

2.) They don't like that I consider both same-sex attraction and an attraction to children to be inappropriate.
Two posters just explained again in posts # 528 and #531 (right above). I don't know why you'd go with other explanations when actual explanations have been provided for you. :shrug:

Also, I don't think we ever got an explanation as to why homosexuality is inappropriate, other than "because God says so."
 

columbus

yawn <ignore> yawn
2.) They don't like that I consider both same-sex attraction and an attraction to children to be inappropriate.
Which is the comparison people keep referring to.
But you can't explain why you compare them, in rational and evidence based terms.

On the other hand, you acted all triggered when I pointed out that your teachings and pedophilia have a strong commonality. Both do a lot of damage to youngsters. People who are too unsophisticated and too malleable to recognize the damage being done, and protecting themselves from it. We expect adults to be capable of this, but not children.
Tom

ETA ~Telling black kids that they are the cause of racism, never victims, is similar. Sorry dude, I see you as quite immoral. I don't blame the LDS entirely, but clearly they could have done better educating you.~
 
Last edited:

JesusKnowsYou

Active Member
I can't fathom why you'd even ask that.
Are you unaware of the fact that there are people in this world that see nothing wrong with pedophilia?

There are people who believe that "Anything goes".

Everyone draws a different line in the sand of "inappropriate sexual attraction".

You think I'm strange for asking where people draw their line?
Of course there is. Underage people is the biggy. Nobody on RF has disagreed about that.
I'm glad. I like knowing that both you and I believe that an attraction to children is inappropriate and should not be indulged.
OThe question is why you keep bringing it up in a conversation about competent adults cementing an adult relationship with state recognition.
I first brought up an attraction to children in my initial post (#326) to Jainarayan after he said,

"I know what I feel. I was as naturally attracted as a boy to boys as other boys are to girls. Then as a man attracted to men as straight men are attracted to women. In fact, my first arousal and spontaneous orgasm at 13 or 14 was at the site of a male actor on tv. What makes you think I chose it? Especially when I have one of the most pathetic sex lives man, gay or straight, has ever been "blessed" with. So yeah, uh no... it ain't the sex."

After mentioning various examples of "inappropriate sexual attraction" (which included an attraction to children) I immediately claimed that I was not comparing all of these attractions, then I said,

"Someone who has an attraction to children may also feel that it is "natural" and that they were "born that way", but that does not mean that they should indulge that weakness or act on their desires.

I would not label someone a "pedophile" simply because they suffer from an attraction to children.

If they resist their urges, refuse to entertain inappropriate thoughts and desires and never once engage in sexual behavior with children - then I would not consider them pedophiles or claim that they committed the sin of pedophilia.

Even if society eventually ends up accepting pedophilia and encourages adults to engage in sexual behavior with children - it will never be morally acceptable.

This same logic can be applied to those who suffer from same-sex attraction. Just because homosexual behavior has been accepted in society today does not mean that it is morally acceptable."

I believe that any sexual attractions or relationships outside of a marriage between a man and a woman who are legally and lawfully wedded are inappropriate. That is where I draw my line in the sand.

I believe the arguments used by Jainarayan that same-sex attraction should be considered appropriate because it "feels natural" or because a person is "born that way" are not good arguments because someone who suffers from an attraction to children would use the same arguments to justify their inappropriate sexual attraction.

Something feeling "natural" or a person being born a certain way are not good argument to justify their inappropriate behavior.

Now, I understand that you and others do not consider same-sex attraction to be inappropriate, but I believe that it is.
 

SkepticThinker

Veteran Member
Are you unaware of the fact that there are people in this world that see nothing wrong with pedophilia?

There are people who believe that "Anything goes".

Everyone draws a different line in the sand of "inappropriate sexual attraction".

You think I'm strange for asking where people draw their line?

I'm glad. I like knowing that both you and I believe that an attraction to children is inappropriate and should not be indulged.

I first brought up an attraction to children in my initial post (#326) to Jainarayan after he said,

"I know what I feel. I was as naturally attracted as a boy to boys as other boys are to girls. Then as a man attracted to men as straight men are attracted to women. In fact, my first arousal and spontaneous orgasm at 13 or 14 was at the site of a male actor on tv. What makes you think I chose it? Especially when I have one of the most pathetic sex lives man, gay or straight, has ever been "blessed" with. So yeah, uh no... it ain't the sex."

After mentioning various examples of "inappropriate sexual attraction" (which included an attraction to children) I immediately claimed that I was not comparing all of these attractions, then I said,

"Someone who has an attraction to children may also feel that it is "natural" and that they were "born that way", but that does not mean that they should indulge that weakness or act on their desires.

I would not label someone a "pedophile" simply because they suffer from an attraction to children.

If they resist their urges, refuse to entertain inappropriate thoughts and desires and never once engage in sexual behavior with children - then I would not consider them pedophiles or claim that they committed the sin of pedophilia.

Even if society eventually ends up accepting pedophilia and encourages adults to engage in sexual behavior with children - it will never be morally acceptable.

This same logic can be applied to those who suffer from same-sex attraction. Just because homosexual behavior has been accepted in society today does not mean that it is morally acceptable."

I believe that any sexual attractions or relationships outside of a marriage between a man and a woman who are legally and lawfully wedded are inappropriate. That is where I draw my line in the sand.


I believe the arguments used by Jainarayan that same-sex attraction should be considered appropriate because it "feels natural" or because a person is "born that way" are not good arguments because someone who suffers from an attraction to children would use the same arguments to justify their inappropriate sexual attraction.

Something feeling "natural" or a person being born a certain way are not good argument to justify their inappropriate behavior.

Now, I understand that you and others do not consider same-sex attraction to be inappropriate, but I believe that it is.
Why?
 

Jainarayan

ॐ नमो भगवते वासुदेवाय
Staff member
Premium Member
I believe the arguments used by Jainarayan that same-sex attraction should be considered appropriate because it "feels natural" or because a person is "born that way" are not good arguments because someone who suffers from an attraction to children would use the same arguments to justify their inappropriate sexual attraction.

Something feeling "natural" or a person being born a certain way are not good argument to justify their inappropriate behavior.

Again, you're missing a major, key element in the difference between homosexuality and pedophilia... informed consent. One is a mutual attraction on a physical and emotional level between consenting adult members of the same sex. The other is control, emotional, mental and physical abuse of a child.

Now, I understand that you and others do not consider same-sex attraction to be inappropriate, but I believe that it is.

As much as I'd like to say neither I nor anyone else gives a flying **** what you think, I can't say that with any truth. It's your ideas and beliefs that have often made the lives of gay men and women miserable, even all too often depriving them of life... literally. That's why we care.
 

JesusKnowsYou

Active Member
Because anyone who thinks that only white people still suffer from racism in the USA has a huge moral issue.
I don't believe I said that. Let me clear this up for you.

You said in post #473 (after trying to claim that Christianity is the source of racism in the U.S.) "Racism is still a problem in this country"

Which led me to say in post # 475,

"I don't believe that racism is a problem in this country (except against white people) and I also don't believe that Christianity or the Bible are the sources of racism."

There are racists of every creed and color in the U.S. but that does not make it a "problem" in this country.

It would be a "problem" if there were a systematic or enforced oppression of people based on their race, but there isn't, unless you consider white people.

White men are the only race and sex in the U.S. who are systematically denied certain opportunities and privileges based on their race and sex.
Although, I also know that LDS wasn't exactly a leader on this issue. So I'm drawing a connection between your religious background and your beliefs about modern society.
You believe this to be a reasonable thing to do?

Like how you claimed that my sharing my opinion was "similar" to raping children?

You'd be okay with me making claims about a group of people you associate with based on your personal beliefs?
 
Top