…nice deflection from the mess the Catholic church is in guys. Ratzinger and his cronies should pay dearly for everything they’ve done, or allowed others to do. We need a complete overhaul of the church and transparancy concerning financial records and abuse cover-ups. Let that part of Rome burn to the ground…
[quote]AceRock wrote:
The mind is what separates humans from animals, not the brain. We have a less obscured view of the world than animals. Not a clear one, but a bit better. They don’t usually argue morality through machines they create. Too busy finding food.
Society got its agreement from years of people like us having these discussions. Apparently not too many pedophiles are good at debate.
Since we used to have sex with kids in Greece, and we don’t anymore, then sure, we could “evolve” back into having sex with kids again. I’m not Nostradamus, or Darwin. Just a dude that thinks putting his dick in a kid’s hole seems weird. Hilarious to me that this point is actually being contested.
Cortes, sorry for skipping your question.
I think we both arrived at the same conclusion that harming kids is wrong because… we’re not stupid.
Are you implying that there’s something leading us both there? Other than simple reason? God, perhaps?
I hope not, but we’ll see.[/quote]
Yeesh, this is turning into a weird conversation.
Okay, so if we “evolve back” to having sex with kids again, is it then going to become morally acceptable?
And what do you mean by, “we’re not stupid.” Are you then saying that the reason we do not accept pedophilia “or” child rape is because that is the “right” answer?
Do you even know what you are saying? Because it sounds to me like you are all over the place.
EDIT: I see you answered this above in response to push. Morality does change.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
So in that respect tell me why pedophilia is wrong.[/quote]
The pedophile is wrong because he damages the child. Any group that sets out to promote behavior that could irreparably damage the future of our species is not acting in the interest of humanity.
[quote]ephrem wrote:
…nice deflection from the mess the Catholic church is in guys. Ratzinger and his cronies should pay dearly for everything they’ve done, or allowed others to do. We need a complete overhaul of the church and transparancy concerning financial records and abuse cover-ups. Let that part of Rome burn to the ground…[/quote]
Who deflected anything? Did you not twice see me state the following? The people who perpetrated these crimes should be punished and the victims or potential victims protected. What on earth more do you want?
For the record, I trust your moral repugnance with the actual crimes committed a whole lot more than I do Richard Dawkin’s or Mak’s.
I’m glad I’m not the only one who thinks this is freaking odd.
I’m saying we both agree we shouldn’t do it. I’ve stated that my reason is the pain caused to the victim.
Why do you think it’s wrong?
So far, I’m the only one explaining myself at all.
[quote]AceRock wrote:
I’m glad I’m not the only one who thinks this is freaking odd.
I’m saying we both agree we shouldn’t do it. I’ve stated that my reason is the pain caused to the victim.
Why do you think it’s wrong?
So far, I’m the only one explaining myself at all.[/quote]
…common tactic: wear them out, claim victory!
[quote]AceRock wrote:
Yes, morality changes. [/quote]
Ahh, now we are getting somewhere.
And trust me, Ace, when we get to the bottom of this, MY answer to this question will be resoundingly clear.
So, society begets morality, right? Whatever we collectively agree on is morally right.
Please let me know if I have this wrong. This is for Eph, too, because it seems to be at the root of your own argument.
[quote]ephrem wrote:
[quote]AceRock wrote:
I’m glad I’m not the only one who thinks this is freaking odd.
I’m saying we both agree we shouldn’t do it. I’ve stated that my reason is the pain caused to the victim.
Why do you think it’s wrong?
So far, I’m the only one explaining myself at all.[/quote]
…common tactic: wear them out, claim victory!
[/quote]
Yeah, that Socrates was a wily devil, wasn’t he?
[quote]ephrem wrote:
[quote]Cortes wrote:
[quote]ephrem wrote:
[quote]Cortes wrote:
[quote]AceRock wrote:
If it causes unnecessary harm to other beings, it’s wrong.
[/quote]
But why is causing unnecessary harm to other beings wrong? Other than your “feeling” it is so?[/quote]
…his other quote read, “We all know pedophilia is wrong because it causes suffering to a defenseless child for purely selfish sexual gratification.” Do you agree with this scenario?[/quote]
Sure I agree with it. But then, I’m not an atheist making this assertion.
If there is no God, then I would just like to hear a justification for why causing suffering to a child is wrong. Just saying “it causes suffering to a defenseless child” doesn’t in and of itself make the act wrong.
[/quote]
…this is absolute bullshit. I, or an atheist, do not need a religious damnation of something vile like child abuse to deem such acts “wrong”. That you would even go there amazes me…[/quote]
I think you’re missing the entire point here which is: what gives you the right to deem another individual’s actions wrong? Where is your high ground if we’re all evolved animals on level footing?
[quote]SRT08 wrote:
[quote]ephrem wrote:
…this is absolute bullshit. I, or an atheist, do not need a religious damnation of something vile like child abuse to deem such acts “wrong”. That you would even go there amazes me…[/quote]
I think you’re missing the entire point here which is: what gives you the right to deem another individual’s actions wrong? Where is your high ground if we’re all evolved animals on level footing?[/quote]
“Hurt not others in ways that you yourself would find hurtful.”
“In happiness and suffering, in joy and grief, we should regard all creatures as we regard our own self.”
“What is hateful to you, do not to your fellow man.”
“That nature only is good when it shall not do unto another whatever is not good for its own self.”
“We should behave to friends as we would wish friends to behave to us.”
[quote]pushharder wrote:
[quote]AceRock wrote:
Most likely where the dictionary got most of its terms: society. The collective agreement.[/quote]
Tell me where society got its collective agreement.[quote]
…And other animals don’t decide. Nor do they contemplate morality. That’s the whole human part of existence. [/quote]
What makes humans different from the other animals? Just a more highly evolved brain? That’s it? If so, as the human brain continues to evolve will it get even more moralistic than other animals? Is it conceivable that as the brain evolves pedophilia could some day be morally right and sex between adults wrong?
[/quote]
This of course, presupposes that we do, in fact, have the most highly evolved brain… which would seem odd from the evo point of view since life in the ocean would have billions of years of evolutionary head start in brain development. Then again people are pretty full of themselves…
[quote]ephrem wrote:
[quote]Cortes wrote:
[quote]ephrem wrote:
…i really don’t care what your opinion on these matters is. When a person is able to make an informed decision whilst being fully aware of the possible repercussions of that decision, and is thus able to consent to a sexual act, i have no problem with age per se…
…what children are concerned, we can, and must, safely assume that they are not able to make such decisions and are coerced and forced into these sex acts by men in a role of authority. Altough children are not able to consent to sexual acts, they are people who should not be forced into doing things that are damaging to their psyche…
[/quote]
Aww Eph, I care about your opinion, otherwise I wouldn’t be engaging you. You’re one of the most level headed and amicable of all of the posters on this site whose opinions I do not usually agree with. I’m usually a lurker but trust me and see my join date, I’ve been here for a long time. Though I may not agree with you all the time, I do respect you.
I just wanted to get some clarification from you on your previous answers to my question, though.
To keep this thread from bouncing all over the place, I’ll rephrase and ask the same one I did of Ace:
Why, specifically, is it wrong to cause harm to a child or for that matter another human?
Your previous answers were, paraphrased, of course: 1. Because I say so. 2. Because it’s the law. Is this your final answer?[/quote]
…combine points 1 and 2 with my post quoted above and you have my answer Cortes…
[/quote]
That is not an answer, that is a cop out.
I do not think introducing a “god” helps in any way, but to claim that either you or “the law” is somehow the source of morality is probably even worse than inventing an invisible being that gives us moral rules.
[quote]Cortes wrote:
[quote]AceRock wrote:
Yes, morality changes. [/quote]
So, society begets morality, right? Whatever we collectively agree on is morally right.
Please let me know if I have this wrong. This is for Eph, too, because it seems to be at the root of your own argument. [/quote]
…i have stated this on numerous occasions. Now please, go for the kill shot…
[quote]Makavali wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
So in that respect tell me why pedophilia is wrong.[/quote]
The pedophile is wrong because he damages the child. Any group that sets out to promote behavior that could irreparably damage the future of our species is not acting in the interest of humanity.[/quote]
Who says that the interest of humanity is worth considering?
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]ephrem wrote:
…combine points 1 and 2 with my post quoted above and you have my answer Cortes…
[/quote]
That is not an answer, that is a cop out.
I do not think introducing a “god” helps in any way, but to claim that either you or “the law” is somehow the source of morality is probably even worse than inventing an invisible being that gives us moral rules.
[/quote]
…and your third option would be?
[quote]ephrem wrote:
[quote]SRT08 wrote:
[quote]ephrem wrote:
…this is absolute bullshit. I, or an atheist, do not need a religious damnation of something vile like child abuse to deem such acts “wrong”. That you would even go there amazes me…[/quote]
I think you’re missing the entire point here which is: what gives you the right to deem another individual’s actions wrong? Where is your high ground if we’re all evolved animals on level footing?[/quote]
“Hurt not others in ways that you yourself would find hurtful.”
“In happiness and suffering, in joy and grief, we should regard all creatures as we regard our own self.”
“What is hateful to you, do not to your fellow man.”
“That nature only is good when it shall not do unto another whatever is not good for its own self.”
“We should behave to friends as we would wish friends to behave to us.”[/quote]
So?
[quote]AceRock wrote:
The mind is what separates humans from animals, not the brain. We have a less obscured view of the world than animals. Not a clear one, but a bit better. They don’t usually argue morality through machines they create. Too busy finding food.
[/quote]
I’m not sure that the inane waste of time (which I realize I am freely participating in) is the best basis for an argument of a superior mind.
Obviously society begets morality. If there was only one person walking around, there wouldn’t be anybody to rape.
We need more than one person around to have these kinds of problems, and discussions.
I do not feel that there is a layer in my DNA somewhere that says “Thou shall not rape.” Doesn’t make sense to me.
However, this doesn’t mean that society always gets it right. Kind of like democracy. Jefferson and others didn’t really trust the masses to run the country themselves, they’re retarded.
Morality is a subjective thing. I don’t subscribe to Platonic Ideals.
People have different opinions on the subject. I’ve been voicing mine.
[quote]ephrem wrote:
[quote]SRT08 wrote:
[quote]ephrem wrote:
…this is absolute bullshit. I, or an atheist, do not need a religious damnation of something vile like child abuse to deem such acts “wrong”. That you would even go there amazes me…[/quote]
I think you’re missing the entire point here which is: what gives you the right to deem another individual’s actions wrong? Where is your high ground if we’re all evolved animals on level footing?[/quote]
“Hurt not others in ways that you yourself would find hurtful.”
“In happiness and suffering, in joy and grief, we should regard all creatures as we regard our own self.”
“What is hateful to you, do not to your fellow man.”
“That nature only is good when it shall not do unto another whatever is not good for its own self.”
“We should behave to friends as we would wish friends to behave to us.”[/quote]
It is SO WEIRD how all of those different religions, from completely different times, and cultures, and areas of the earth, came up with the EXACT same concept! You’d think, like, there was this absolute law that already existed and that each society discovered that law for itself. Or, like, something.
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]ephrem wrote:
[quote]SRT08 wrote:
[quote]ephrem wrote:
…this is absolute bullshit. I, or an atheist, do not need a religious damnation of something vile like child abuse to deem such acts “wrong”. That you would even go there amazes me…[/quote]
I think you’re missing the entire point here which is: what gives you the right to deem another individual’s actions wrong? Where is your high ground if we’re all evolved animals on level footing?[/quote]
“Hurt not others in ways that you yourself would find hurtful.”
“In happiness and suffering, in joy and grief, we should regard all creatures as we regard our own self.”
“What is hateful to you, do not to your fellow man.”
“That nature only is good when it shall not do unto another whatever is not good for its own self.”
“We should behave to friends as we would wish friends to behave to us.”[/quote]
So?
[/quote]
…so what?