Paedophila

[Professor]

Professor, it's almost always simple to determine if someone has been harmed. If someone has been harmed, than an immorality has been committed.

-almost
-always (contradicts almost)
-simple

And the determiner is you? THe Occult World? Soceity of the West? You see, The Thelma school in Germany believe you are hurting yourself. Without Proper and accurate Theism, your view fails miserably.

Do what the wilt [but don't harm anybody] is the whole of the Law!
Love under Will [just don't harm anybody] love under law!

Your subjective reference fails miserably and you assume ethics is simple (well, almost always?-lol). But I assume you are a theist to some degree. The real concern at this point is the inability for a true atheist (completely consistent) rto say that it is wrong to be a Paedophila. If many are they would be able to justify it via their own religion of atheism, agnosticism, skepticism.

The Professor

 

[Mike182]

ah yes - the good old euthyphro dilemma - is 'X' good because God loves it, or does God love 'X' because it is God?

there have been a few point come up here that i dont agree with - first and foremost my dislike of statistics - a statistic is a report of what we know in numerical form - to use this as empiricle evidence is faulty because we do not know the exact figures - we only know what is reported

for instance - people think there are more rapes in todays society - wrong - its just that more are reported


the second thing that came up was the debate over sexual orientation - is paedophilia a sexual orientation despite the fact that we think the majority of them do not mollest children? i think that it is an orientation - but i dont think it was fixed at birth - i dont believe any sexual orientation was fixed at birth

paedo means child
phile means lover

ergo a paedophile is someone who loves children - todays societ uses the word with a sexual/physical slant as apose to agape love

so a paedophile is someone who love (as in physically) a child - ergo someone who only has sexual thoughts about children cannot be charged for paedophilia - ergo they are not a paedophile for having those thoughts

with that premis set i can now say that paedophilia is wrong in my oppinion - and i would include child pornography in this aswell because that also uses a child as an aid



immorality? at what point does something become immoral - when someone is hurt either physically or emotionally? no, i believe it goes deeper than that

i dont think it is as simple as saying something that hurts soemone is immoral because by setting that as a universal law you get situations like:

1) i have dislocated my shoulder and we are in a situation where it is impossible to get any pain killers - my shoulder must be re-set - this will cause pain - ergo it is immoral to re-set my shoulder

2) this person likes me a lot, but i have no feelings for them - so i will tell them im sorry but imnot interested and not make an issue about it - the person doesnt take it well and overdoses on paracetamol - i upset them emotionally which lead to their physically hurting themself - ergo it was immoral and i should have gone out with them - and lead her on - but that would inevitably hurt her - so either way i am doing something that is immoral

so how do i define morality? i, as a follower of christ, have the bible and its laws to gevern my morality - but more than that i have my god-given conscience to help me make decisions and to feel remourse and guilt when i do something wrong

hope all that makes sense and i hope ive split it up right - God Bless
preist


ps i use the word "ergo" a fair ammount - it means 'therefor' in latin - i find it easier to use when writing but perhaps not everyone figured out its meaning

xXx

 

[Pah]

The atheists on here may have ethics they hold on to. I don't know any of them personally. But if they do, it's stolen most likely from a theistic worldview (usually Judeo-Christianity).

Thus a consistent, no holds bar, 110% sold out, no compromise, totally and complete atheist, agnostic, skeptic, etc CANNOT speak on absolute right or wrong, good or bad issues. They must guess, adopt to the society they live in, fasten their seat belts, and hope that they'll come out on top.

:biglaugh: Morality was around long before any religious morality.

But I digress

 

[jamaesi]

And the determiner is you? THe Occult World? Soceity of the West? You see, The Thelma school in Germany believe you are hurting yourself. Without Proper and accurate Theism, your view fails miserably.

It's rather a pity I'm not a part of the Thelma school in Germany then? I wonder how these people, who don't even know me, know I'm hurting myself. Well, silly old me thought that only I would know if I was hurting myself. Isn't that hoot? Independant thought! XD!

There's a simple way to know if something hurt someone. Do they feel hurt? It's rather easy to see when you stab someone and they bleed and cry that they are hurt. When someone feels worthless after they were abused it's easy to see they were hurt. When someone was raped and has trouble just coping with life without attacking themselves for the crimes committed against them it's easy to see they were hurt. In some places it's the norm to cut off a girl's external genitals- and they feel pain, they don't want it done. Just because it's the societal norm doesn't make it right. I don't need a "Holy Book" to tell me that.

 

[Mike182]

In some places it's the norm to cut off a girl's external genitals- and they feel pain, they don't want it done. Just because it's the societal norm doesn't make it right. I don't need a "Holy Book" to tell me that.

yes, this is quite blatantly wrong

i dont know what the bible says about cutting female genitalia - i know that the new testiment states that it doesnt matter if a male gets circumcised - if anyone can help me find the actual verse i would be would greatful appreciate it because ive lost it - i think it was around 2 corinthians

i believe that morality come from god - i stress that that is my belief and you are all entitled to slate it into the ground - but thats what i believe - and i believe that the apostles and the gospels were written in the inspiration of God and ergo are what God will hold us to!

i agree that society sets rules and laws to govern morality through things like media - but society must have some basis for these moral holdings - ok so one theory could be that we got our morality from our parents - that in its self is reasonable ........ and our parents got their sense of morality from their parents ....... and they got their's from the parents etc ___ ___ ___ ___ so where did the first humans get their's from if they weren't tought it? my belief is that the first humans to know God were adam and eve and they learnt morality from God, and passed it on to their children and their childrens children etc

i will grant that morality does change from generation to generation - i think this is Gods will showing through to help guide us in the changing societies

i will grant that as i re read my post it is incredibly biased and if you question the existence of God or if you question the premis of God then my arguement has no standing :bonk:

God Bless

 

[michel]

1 Corinthians 7:18 Is any man called being circumcised? let him not become uncircumcised. Is any called in uncircumcision? let him not be circumcised.

Is that what you are looking for ?

 

[Mike182]

1 Corinthians 7:18 Is any man called being circumcised? let him not become uncircumcised. Is any called in uncircumcision? let him not be circumcised.

Is that what you are looking for ?

yes indeed it is - thankyou :clap

the verses after that are deffinately worth a read aswell! very inspiring

 

[Fluffy]

Morality was around long before any religious morality.

But I digress

Are you refering to a god's morality?

 

[Mike182]

Are you refering to a god's morality?

i think that quote was saying that people had moral standards before people understood and used the concept of religion

i however believe that even if people had moral standards before they believed in God (and even those today who don't believe in God) still got their moral standard from God

i believe that God gave us free will - and as a result of that we were allowed to decide for ourselves what we deemed to be good or bad!

but in our decision process on whats good or bad - God drops us a few massive hints - he tells us that we should read the bible

God Bless

 

[Fluffy]

i think that quote was saying that people had moral standards before people understood and used the concept of religion

I agree. However, this is similar to saying that gravity did not exist before humanity evolved because we were not around to experience it. Religious morality is simply the human interpretation of god's morality and a theist would generally be implying the latter when talking of morality.

 

[Mr Spinkles]

*MOD POST*

Just a reminder, everyone: the topic of the thread is "Paedophila". Please stay on topic.
Thanks.

 

[Mike182]

I agree. However, this is similar to saying that gravity did not exist before humanity evolved because we were not around to experience it. Religious morality is simply the human interpretation of god's morality and a theist would generally be implying the latter when talking of morality.

ok so lets make the point relevant to the debate

paedophilia

god's moral rule

i believe that God hates the act of paedophilia (however as i explained in a previous post i dont believe someone who has thoughts of children but does not act on them is a paedophile - ergo God does not hate people who are tempted with these thoughts but only those who act out on them)

is Gods moral rule only applicable to those who believe it? my answer is no - Gods law was around before you, me, and the rest of the universe - but i stress that this is my belief

i have got a question though - say a person was to commit paedophilia - and later in life they were genuinly sorry for it and asked Gods Forgiveness - would they recieve it along with the kingdom of heaven

i think yes

but what do other people think?

 

[Druidus]

i believe that God hates the act of paedophilia (however as i explained in a previous post i dont believe someone who has thoughts of children but does not act on them is a paedophile - ergo God does not hate people who are tempted with these thoughts but only those who act out on them)

Semantics again. I paedophiles aren't necessarily child molesters.

 

[mr.guy]

An atheist or agnostic or skeptic...etc CANNOT say anything is right or wrong absolutely. To do so would imply universal knowledge. Since their authority is subjective, limited, and without reference to all, they fail miserably.

If an atheist borrows from other religions, cultures, etc. why is that wrong? Do any of us suggest that christians give up calling themselves as such and just refer to themselves as jews? That would be perfectly constistant with your logic, or do christians not "borrow" the bulk of their dogmas from judism? That being said, if you think anyone in the world dosen't draw their ethics from their surrounding culture, you're fooling yourself. One of the main ideas about atheism is that there are no appreciable absolutes, and that morality is a query of justice, order and co-existence: none of those are absolute either so one treads thoughtfully. Tell me, has christianity never had a problem deciding on the greater good or was it a mistake to stop burning folk at the stake? You needn't be an ateist to be objective towards these things, and mercifully alot of christians have had an easy time in building societies without resorting to such skewered logic.

 

[Druidus]

Good post, Mr. Guy! My sentiments exactly. :clap