A Plea to Atheists: Pedophilia is next on the Slippery Slope . . .

[manifold]

Let us turn back before it's too late
By Rabbi Moshe Averick
08/31/2011
Jewish World Review


One can reasonably predict that as the infatuation with skepticism and atheism grows among the influential "intellectual elite" of our society, so too will their readiness to embrace more radical changes in moral values. Religious believers expressing dismay and horror at the ominous moral storm clouds looming on the horizon are met with smug derision, hysterical counter-accusations, or utter indifference. There is nothing that atheistic societies are incapable of rationalizing and accepting --- including the sexual molestation of children.

No doubt, this assertion will appear preposterous to some atheists, and will spark outrage. Yet the logical and philosophical consequences of atheists' belief systems are inescapable. When asked by journalist William Crawley if he thought that pedophilia was "just wrong." Professor Peter Singer of Princeton University — a world-famous philosopher of "ethics" — responded as follows:

"I don't have intrinsic moral taboos. My view is not that anything is just wrong…You're trying to put words in my mouth. "​

Singer went on to explain that he is a "consequentialist." For the benefit of the philosophically challenged let me explain "consequentialism" in a nutshell: If you like the consequences it's ethical, if you don't like the consequences it's unethical. Thus, if you enjoy child pornography and having sex with children it's ethical, if you dislike child pornography and having sex with children it's unethical. In an article entitled "Heavy Petting," Singer likewise gave his stamp of approval to bestiality. As a reward for producing such pearls of wisdom, he has been granted the privilege of teaching our children "ethics" at an Ivy League university. Moreover, he is by no means the only atheistic philosopher industriously engaged in greasing the precarious slope on which Western society totters. Hence, my "plea" to atheists, for the philosophical groundwork for the acceptance of pedophilia has already been put in place by such philosophers.

 

[catzmeow]

In your mind it is. And yes, they always have known rape was and is wrong, just like killing and stealing was and is wrong, but in some cases it was and is considered necessary. You have proven nothing other then you have a good source to google Bible verses to support your point. Not much more.

Demonstrate a similar prowess at googling bible verses to support your views. The Bible doesn't say what you want it to say, bro. There is no verse in the old testament that states that rape is "wrong but necessary."

And, it has nothing to do with "in my mind." It is a historical fact that rape has not always been treated as a wrong act and/or punished as one. Thus, your claim that rape has "always been wrong" is simply inaccurate and apparently, uninformed by history and Judeo-Christian sources, like the Bible.

 

[NGSamson]

In your mind it is. And yes, they always have known rape was and is wrong, just like killing and stealing was and is wrong, but in some cases it was and is considered necessary. You have proven nothing other then you have a good source to google Bible verses to support your point. Not much more.

Demonstrate a similar prowess at googling bible verses to support your views, and you'll win.

You see, I am comfortable in MY faith. I dont need to google shit to impress you, or anyone else. I am totally happy with ware I stand on the issue at hand.

 

[catzmeow]

In your mind it is. And yes, they always have known rape was and is wrong, just like killing and stealing was and is wrong, but in some cases it was and is considered necessary. You have proven nothing other then you have a good source to google Bible verses to support your point. Not much more.

Demonstrate a similar prowess at googling bible verses to support your views, and you'll win.

You see, I am comfortable in MY faith. I dont need to google shit to impress you, or anyone else. I am totally happy with ware I stand on the issue at hand.

Translation: Your opinions are uninformed by both old testament scripture and history.

Well, they say ignorance is bliss. Your post demonstrates the apparent truth of this platitude.

p.s. On what is your faith based, if not the holy writings of your belief system?

 

[NGSamson]

Demonstrate a similar prowess at googling bible verses to support your views, and you'll win.

You see, I am comfortable in MY faith. I dont need to google shit to impress you, or anyone else. I am totally happy with ware I stand on the issue at hand.

Translation: Your opinions are uninformed by both old testament scripture and history.

Well, they say ignorance is bliss. Your post demonstrates the apparent truth of this platitude.

p.s. On what is your faith based, if not the holy writings of your belief system?

Translation, you are insecure in what you believe in, and were jilted by someone of faith, and because you felt left out, you try and bait any one you label a superstitious hick to make your self feel better. I pity you. You are in my prayers.

 

[catzmeow]

Translation, you are insecure in what you believe in, and were jilted by someone of faith, and because you felt left out, you try and bait any one you label a superstitious hick to make your self feel better. I pity you. You are in my prayers.

Why would I be insecure, when I'm able to provide evidence that supports my claims? Your silly emotionalism makes me smile at your obvious discomfort and lack of aptitude for argumentation.

 

[NGSamson]

Translation, you are insecure in what you believe in, and were jilted by someone of faith, and because you felt left out, you try and bait any one you label a superstitious hick to make your self feel better. I pity you. You are in my prayers.

Why would I be insecure, when I'm able to provide evidence that supports my claims? Your silly emotionalism makes me smile at your obvious discomfort and lack of aptitude for argumentation.

You are the one being emotional. Most insecure folks tend to be that way. Go back through your post history. You post the exact same things, almost chapter and verse every single time. Arguing a point for the sake of arguing is stupid. And the fact that you have the same old stuff on hand only proves that you have an axe to grind further making it pointless to argue the point with you. You wont look at it any other way so why bother ?

 

[catzmeow]

You are the one being emotional. Most insecure folks tend to be that way. Go back through your post history. You post the exact same things, almost chapter and verse every single time. Arguing a point for the sake of arguing is stupid. And the fact that you have the same old stuff on hand only proves that you have an axe to grind further making it pointless to argue the point with you. You wont look at it any other way so why bother ?

Please, feel free to link this claimed repetition.

 

[Sky Dancer]

Homosexuality is an issue for Americans, It is already taken care of for Christians. To us, the life style is not exceptionable. I work with and I am pretty much business partners with an extremely gay man.While getting drunk, we have hashed this out many times, he knows ware I stand and I know ware he stands. He is a decent guy, and trustworthy. He does not expect me to accept his life style as proper, and does not expect me to try and convert him. If he asked I would, but he is happy ware he is at.I respect the man, not the position. Don't know if that makes any sense but I tried.

it's and issue for SOME Americans.
what is extremely gay?
isn't getting drunk frowned on by Christians?
if I recall correctly Jesus never had much to say about homosexuality.
after all he did hang out with 12 guys.....

One of whom he loved

And what, exactly, is a straight or gay lifestyle? Because I know people, gay and straight, who live very different lifestyles. Is the gay lifestyle sitting in the library with a book and a sweater around your shoulders, listening to classical music? Is the straight lifestyle football, nascar, beer, and sleeping with as many chicks as you can?

Thanks for pointing that out. Homosexuality is not a "lifestyle". It's a way of being.

 

[NGSamson]

You are the one being emotional. Most insecure folks tend to be that way. Go back through your post history. You post the exact same things, almost chapter and verse every single time. Arguing a point for the sake of arguing is stupid. And the fact that you have the same old stuff on hand only proves that you have an axe to grind further making it pointless to argue the point with you. You wont look at it any other way so why bother ?

Please, feel free to link this claimed repetition.

Do it your self. Its in the religion/ethics forum. You have an axe to grind, and its pointless to discuss it with you.

 

[amrchaos]

Morals don't come from Religion.

Yes they do, it depends on the person. A devout catholic takes thier cues on morality from Catholic doctrine. Where else would they get it from?

wtf? So you think if there was no Religion, that Catholics would.. what? All be evil anarchists?

I know an evil anarchist that used to be Catholic. So, using the logic of this thread, I have to assume yes.

(Of course I do not really believe that, but I do know an evil anarchist that used to drink the blood of christ.. He tells me that there is no real difference between who is now and who is was when practicing Catholicism. I bet the sisters used to have field day disciplining him! Then again, that maybe why he is such a freaky evil bastard?)

 

[NGSamson]

it's and issue for SOME Americans.
what is extremely gay?
isn't getting drunk frowned on by Christians?
if I recall correctly Jesus never had much to say about homosexuality.
after all he did hang out with 12 guys.....

One of whom he loved

And what, exactly, is a straight or gay lifestyle? Because I know people, gay and straight, who live very different lifestyles. Is the gay lifestyle sitting in the library with a book and a sweater around your shoulders, listening to classical music? Is the straight lifestyle football, nascar, beer, and sleeping with as many chicks as you can?

Thanks for pointing that out. Homosexuality is not a "lifestyle". It's a way of being.

Daws, yes it is. And to some, having an extremely gay friend and business partner would be as well. And he refers to himself as extremely gay. And he is. Homosexuality is covered in both old and new testaments, and is not excepted. You defined your perception of both lifestyles with your bigoted statement. Not me.

 

[catzmeow]

Do it your self. Its in the religion/ethics forum. You have an axe to grind, and its pointless to discuss it with you.

There are many ways to lose an argument. Thanks for demonstrating this one so adequately. I appreciate your gracious concession.

 

[NGSamson]

Do it your self. Its in the religion/ethics forum. You have an axe to grind, and its pointless to discuss it with you.

There are many ways to lose an argument. Thanks for demonstrating this one so adequately. I appreciate your gracious concession.

What ever makes you feel better about your self. Glad to have been able to boost your self esteem.

 

[daws101]

The author's point is fucking stupid.

Child molestation is amoral because of the ill-effects it has on the child. Not because your Religion says so.

LOL! You don't grasp the author's point either. Fundamentally, it has nothing to do with religion, it goes to the moral and intellectual bankruptcy of materialism and the irrationality of moral relativism as opposed to moral absolutism. The familial concerns of stability and parental authority as well as the political concerns of ideological liberty and free association are pertinent to the dispute as well, though the latter, no doubt, utterly elude you.

So molestation is amoral merely because of its ill-effects? Well, many of your fellow materialists do not agree with you: Why Are We Surprised With the Push for 'Pedophile Rights'




So you materialists keep saying as if your assertion were not inherently self-contradictory, irrational—as if that were not objectively self-evident, as if you were not describing instead the limitations of scientific inquiry. The assertion that truth is relative is no more subject to scientific falsification than the assertion that truth is absolute. Indeed, the apriority of a metaphysical naturalism is not subject to scientific falsification either.

LOL!

Your ill-considered logic refutes itself.

By nature, ethics is a rational enterprise and is ultimately subject to the rules of logic, not to the rules of scientific methodology, though the outcomes of experience and the discoveries of science can certainly be applied to the rational calculi of ethics. You merely confound cause with effect.

Classical liberalism, like Judeo-Christianity, holds that the fundamental rights of humanity are self-evident. The Founders were not appealing to any scientific study, but to the rational imperatives of natural law. We are not merely creatures of induction, but experience reality through the deductive processes of human consciousness.

The absolute assertion that there are no absolutes . . . except the absolute that there are no absolutes (LOL!) is a reductio ad absurdum; it fails the smell test of the rational forms and logical categories of the human mind.

First you say that humans may "refine" their ethics and then contradictorily insist that the value assessments of good or bad are artificial. Artificial? Then what is the independent, controlled, objective standard against which ethics are refined within the materialist paradigm? LOL! One contradiction after another. That's what happens when you begin with an irrational premise.

But then atheists are notoriously bad logicians as they stupidly deny, based on nothing more substantial than blind faith, the only potential alternative that is logically consistent from premise to conclustion.

No, it's people. God said genocide was okay (see: conquest on Canaan) and killing those who don't believe in your religion was a moral commandment. People, collectively and as individuals, decided otherwise and tend to throw that part of the bible out because their own morals and ethics disallow such things. People might seek to attribute this to some deity or another in order to claim some authority (especially when speaking for or attempting to inflict their morality upon others), but saying the dog farted doesn't change the fact that it was you.

Judeo-Christianity does not teach that genocide is okay. Your reading of scripture is historically and theologically illiterate. Throw away? You just made that up. There's no need to throw away the annihilation of those who were bent on Israel's utter destruction in an historical setting where there were no prisons and no possible means of assimilation. With regard to survival, do you not comprehend the practical implications under primitive conditions? And they weren't the people of just any cultures, but the people of cultures that practiced ritual pedophilia and infanticide, by the way.

You're really, REALLY reachin,' bro.

to put it another way "you're talking alot but not saying anything" David Burne /the talking heads

 

[Sky Dancer]

Do it your self. Its in the religion/ethics forum. You have an axe to grind, and its pointless to discuss it with you.

There are many ways to lose an argument. Thanks for demonstrating this one so adequately. I appreciate your gracious concession.

What ever makes you feel better about your self. Glad to have been able to boost your self esteem.

She needs all the help she can get.

 

[catzmeow]

There are many ways to lose an argument. Thanks for demonstrating this one so adequately. I appreciate your gracious concession.

What ever makes you feel better about your self. Glad to have been able to boost your self esteem.

She needs all the help she can get.

There you go, demonstrating your ignorance again.

You really need to work on your ignoring skills.

 

[daws101]

One of whom he loved

And what, exactly, is a straight or gay lifestyle? Because I know people, gay and straight, who live very different lifestyles. Is the gay lifestyle sitting in the library with a book and a sweater around your shoulders, listening to classical music? Is the straight lifestyle football, nascar, beer, and sleeping with as many chicks as you can?

Thanks for pointing that out. Homosexuality is not a "lifestyle". It's a way of being.

Daws, yes it is. And to some, having an extremely gay friend and business partner would be as well. And he refers to himself as extremely gay. And he is. Homosexuality is covered in both old and new testaments, and is not excepted. You defined your perception of both lifestyles with your bigoted statement. Not me.

nice dodge! ..the word is acceptedefinition of ACCEPTED
: generally approved or used <an accepted convention>
&#8212; ac·cept·ed·ly adverb
First Known Use of ACCEPTED
15th century
not: Definition of EXCEPT
transitive verb
: to take or leave out from a number or a whole : exclude
intransitive verb
: to take exception : object
&#8212; ex·cep·tive \-&#712;sep-t&#601;v\ adjective
See except defined for English-language learners »
Examples of EXCEPT
Children were excepted from the study.
<I must except to your remark that there are no great novelists currently living.>
Origin of EXCEPT
Middle English, from Anglo-French excepter, from Latin exceptare, frequentative of excipere to take out, except, from ex- + capere to take &#8212; more at heave
First Known Use: 14th century
also, i did not ask if homosexuality was covered in the bible .
my statement was: "Jesus never said much if anything about it"...it's a statement of fact.
how could my statement be bigoted?
BTW you completely sidestepped this issue of Christian drinking, is it one of the lifestyles you assume that I'm bigoted against ?

 

[NGSamson]

Thanks for pointing that out. Homosexuality is not a "lifestyle". It's a way of being.

Daws, yes it is. And to some, having an extremely gay friend and business partner would be as well. And he refers to himself as extremely gay. And he is. Homosexuality is covered in both old and new testaments, and is not excepted. You defined your perception of both lifestyles with your bigoted statement. Not me.

nice dodge! ..the word is acceptedefinition of ACCEPTED
: generally approved or used <an accepted convention>
— ac·cept·ed·ly adverb
First Known Use of ACCEPTED
15th century
not: Definition of EXCEPT
transitive verb
: to take or leave out from a number or a whole : exclude
intransitive verb
: to take exception : object
— ex·cep·tive \-&#712;sep-t&#601;v\ adjective
See except defined for English-language learners »
Examples of EXCEPT
Children were excepted from the study.
<I must except to your remark that there are no great novelists currently living.>
Origin of EXCEPT
Middle English, from Anglo-French excepter, from Latin exceptare, frequentative of excipere to take out, except, from ex- + capere to take — more at heave
First Known Use: 14th century
also, i did not ask if homosexuality was covered in the bible .
my statement was: "Jesus never said much if anything about it"...it's a statement of fact.
how could my statement be bigoted?
BTW you completely sidestepped this issue of Christian drinking, is it one of the lifestyles you assume that I'm bigoted against ?

No. I did not. I drink. At times I drink to much. Drinking is not a sin. Drinking to excess is. We are human and we do that at times. Your ignorance of what is and is not covered in the bible is your problem, and you like catsmeaow will google what ever backs up your mode of thought. That is a tactic of the pseudo intellectual. You and the other one should get together and hug so you guys can boost your self esteem.

 

[daws101]

Daws, yes it is. And to some, having an extremely gay friend and business partner would be as well. And he refers to himself as extremely gay. And he is. Homosexuality is covered in both old and new testaments, and is not excepted. You defined your perception of both lifestyles with your bigoted statement. Not me.

nice dodge! ..the word is acceptedefinition of ACCEPTED
: generally approved or used <an accepted convention>
— ac·cept·ed·ly adverb
First Known Use of ACCEPTED
15th century
not: Definition of EXCEPT
transitive verb
: to take or leave out from a number or a whole : exclude
intransitive verb
: to take exception : object
— ex·cep·tive \-&#712;sep-t&#601;v\ adjective
See except defined for English-language learners »
Examples of EXCEPT
Children were excepted from the study.
<I must except to your remark that there are no great novelists currently living.>
Origin of EXCEPT
Middle English, from Anglo-French excepter, from Latin exceptare, frequentative of excipere to take out, except, from ex- + capere to take — more at heave
First Known Use: 14th century
also, i did not ask if homosexuality was covered in the bible .
my statement was: "Jesus never said much if anything about it"...it's a statement of fact.
how could my statement be bigoted?
BTW you completely sidestepped this issue of Christian drinking, is it one of the lifestyles you assume that I'm bigoted against ?

No. I did not. I drink. At times I drink to much. Drinking is not a sin. Drinking to excess is. We are human and we do that at times. Your ignorance of what is and is not covered in the bible is your problem, and you like catsmeaow will google what ever backs up your mode of thought. That is a tactic of the pseudo intellectual. You and the other one should get together and hug so you guys can boost your self esteem.

wrong again ASSumption man...googleing the bible for me would be overkill..I grew up in a "religious"home I've read the Bible, the Koran, the Talmud etc.
I have no ax to grind..but you have proven that many "Christians" like you only read the parts of the bible that you like and disregard the rest..if that's not the very definition of "pseudo intellectual" there isn't one.
BTW congratulations on another fine dodge!