Your phrasing implies that it is acceptable by me! I hope that is not what you are inferring in your sentence "... if sex with children is in any way acceptable to you, whether you are part of a fringe sect or otherwise - seek professional help."
I find sex with children a depravity of humanity as is sex with animals. If sex with children is in any way acceptable to "people", whether part of a fringe sect or otherwise - they should seek professional help or chop off their own head! On Apr 9, 10:02 am, Molly Brogan <[email protected]> wrote: > There is much done in the name of morality that is not moral. Does it > need effect our moral compass? The issue of sex with children is such > a huge no brainer that most any shrink can handle it. Basic human > decency is not hard to figure, even for those limited to rationality. > I do agree, more spirituality in the sciences of human behavior would > be nice, but still, if sex with children is in any way acceptable to > you, whether you are part of a fringe sect or otherwise - seek > professional help. Lolita was written to highlight the subtle ways > that children can be abused and used - not as an affirmation of it. > > On Apr 9, 10:54 am, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > > > The question of being moral, whether influenced by theistic or secular > > drives is simply a matter of examination of the end result. A moral > > society is a happy society as each member can rely on the other to > > execute moral judgment in all aspects of daily life further instilling > > a sense of security in life. Attaching theism to morality creates a > > conundrum in that "acting out" immorally can in some cases bear no > > consequence or judgment, rendering the act as morally acceptable. > > Twentieth century cultures that still conduct barbaric ritual based > > upon religious criteria, such as clitoral scarification and other > > irremediable mutilations, through religious rite are justified in > > their act and engaging in moral conduct. This is why acting moral > > should not by infringed upon by theistic influence. Being moral is > > simply a conscious behavior based on the positive end result, the good > > outcome which benefits all creatures. I don't know of any religion > > that condones sex with children but the recent story concerning the > > FLDS and others comes to mind. A brief google search reveals the > > shocking truth that this does go > > on.http://www.google.com/search?ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=navclient&gfn... > > > On Apr 9, 8:45 am, Molly Brogan <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > If there is anyone reading this that honestly thinks that sex with > > > children is in any way acceptable my advise is RUN to the nearest > > > shrink and get help. If the reasons aren't obvious, stay a very long > > > time. But the question about adults shagging anything hot and ready - > > > is it immoral or just vulgar - that is a good one. > > > > On Apr 9, 1:40 am, Don Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Why for example is sex with a minor immoral? > > > > > Minors overwhelmingly lack the experience to make the right judgment > > > > calls. It's taking unfair advantage of them. It's FEELS wrong. The > > > > whole idea sickens me. > > > > > dj > > > > > On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 6:27 AM, [email protected] <[email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > Then may I respectfully suggest that you have not thought deeply > > > > > enough on the reasons why the majority of us proclaim the killing of a > > > > > human by another immoral. > > > > > > Why for example is sex with a minor immoral? > > > > > > On 8 Apr, 12:14, Don Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > >> I don't see any gray area here. Kids used to be considered property > > > > >> of their parents by law so didn't get the legal benefit of self nor > > > > >> are they expected to conduct themselves as well as adults. They get > > > > >> a > > > > >> break. When an adult has committed a heinous crime and their is a > > > > >> reasonable assumption that they will repeat the behavior I see no > > > > >> reason to allow them to continue to breath. I don't know if I could > > > > >> do > > > > >> it myself or not but I certainly wouldn't have a problem with the > > > > >> State doing the job. Nor would I shed a tear if someone else took > > > > >> him > > > > >> out. Some folks just need killing. > > > > > >> dj > > > > > >> On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 4:40 AM, [email protected] > > > > >> <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > >> > Hey Don, > > > > > >> > Now I'm know that Chris is going to object strongly here but meh, > > > > >> > people are diffeant which makes the world a whole lot of fun as > > > > >> > far as > > > > >> > I'm concerend. > > > > > >> > I think if we question more deeply why the majority find that the > > > > >> > killing of a human by another human immoral, we'll propably find > > > > >> > that > > > > >> > it has a whole lot to do with ownership. > > > > > >> > Ownership of mind and body. Who owns my Self? Me and only me, it > > > > >> > is > > > > >> > immoral to kill me for any reasons soley because to commit such an > > > > >> > act > > > > >> > elevates somebody elses wishes above my own in regard to what to do > > > > >> > with my Self. > > > > > >> > The fact that I have had sex (okay we all realise that this is an > > > > >> > example and not an admission) with a young boy of 6, does not > > > > >> > negate > > > > >> > my ownership of my Self. > > > > > >> > In addition one of the reasons that such paedophilia is considered > > > > >> > immoral (and rape also) is prescily because the very act itself > > > > >> > elevates somebody elses whish above that of the victim. > > > > > >> > If we find that is immoral then killing for any reason must also > > > > >> > be. > > > > >> > To declare otherwise is hypocritical in the extreame. > > > > > >> > On 8 Apr, 06:34, Don Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > >> >> How about the poedophile, who may seduce an unsuspecting mind but > > > > >> >> may > > > > > >> >> > not have actually " forced " sex upon a child ? > > > > > >> >> I thought of this also when I saw the word 'incest' used. I > > > > >> >> quickly > > > > >> >> surmised Michael was referring to adults only. Children don't > > > > >> >> know > > > > >> >> what's good for them and that's why we have laws against sex with > > > > >> >> children. There aren't a lot of people willing to argue this law > > > > >> >> except maybe NAMBLA. As far as I know; incest in general isn't > > > > >> >> against he law. It is certainly taboo, as it should be, but not > > > > >> >> unlawful. If it's not immoral, it is unwise and risky IMO. > > > > >> >> Definitely socially unacceptable in a way that homosexuality > > > > >> >> clearly > > > > >> >> isn't. > > > > > >> >> Someone said killing someone is immoral. Not in all cases I would > > > > >> >> say. What if the person being killed is the person that molested > > > > >> >> your > > > > >> >> child and just proclaimed their intent to do it again? It would > > > > >> >> be > > > > >> >> almost immoral not to kill the bastard. > > > > > >> >> dj > > > > > >> >> On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 10:50 PM, Vamadevananda > > > > >> >> <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > >> >> > How about the poedophile, who may seduce an unsuspecting mind > > > > >> >> > but may > > > > >> >> > not have actually " forced " sex upon a child ? > > > > > >> >> > On Apr 7, 7:34 pm, Michael Berkovits <[email protected]> > > > > >> >> > wrote: > > > > >> >> >> Is morality only what we feel is good for us? Or is there a > > > > > >> >> >> > greater good to consider? > > > > > >> >> >> Who here thinks that sexual "immorality," like homosexuality or > > > > >> >> >> incest, is immoral? I present the point because I think it > > > > >> >> >> beyond > > > > >> >> >> obvious that neither is, nor is any brand of sexual > > > > >> >> >> "immorality" (except for things like forced sex, which is > > > > >> >> >> immoral not > > > > >> >> >> because it has anything to do with sex but because it has to > > > > >> >> >> do with > > > > >> >> >> coercion) but obviously many people in this world disagree. > > > > > >> >> >> On Apr 7, 10:24 am, Molly Brogan <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > >> >> >> > I doubt that many people would see loan interest as immoral. > > > > >> >> >> > Yet you > > > > >> >> >> > see it this way because it goes against what you feel is > > > > >> >> >> > good for > > > > >> >> >> > you. Is morality only what we feel is good for us? Or is > > > > >> >> >> > there a > > > > >> >> >> > greater good to consider? > > > > > >> >> >> > On Apr 7, 2:55 am, iam deheretic <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > >> >> >> > > Frayed knot is an interesting way of putting it. > > > > > >> >> >> > > I think society is more immoral than moral. I think most > > > > >> >> >> > > people agree that > > > > >> >> >> > > killing some one is wrong. My problem with morality is > > > > >> >> >> > > when some one > > > > >> >> >> > > charges excessive interest like in credit cards (my wife > > > > >> >> >> > > and I have one -- > > > > >> >> >> > > and it is for emergencies only -- then immediately paid > > > > >> >> >> > > off ) justifying > > > > >> >> >> > > this as sound business when in reality to me it seems like > > > > >> >> >> > > this greed is a > > > > >> >> >> > > way of slowly killing some one, or Like ( i do have a > > > > >> >> >> > > very good health > > > > >> >> >> > > insurance.) when I ended up in the hospital a few years > > > > >> >> >> > > back in the USA and > > > > >> >> >> > > the bill exceeded $8,000. for 24 hour stay.. basically to > > > > >> >> >> > > get my heart beat > > > > >> >> >> > > stabilized and watched. I saw 2 doctors for a total of 10 > > > > >> >> >> > > minutes.. > > > > >> >> >> > > If I did not have insurance i would have an huge medical > > > > >> >> >> > > bill and to pay it > > > > >> >> >> > > I would have had to take food of my table to pay the bill. > > > > >> >> >> > > To me if a person > > > > >> >> >> > > is forced to pay an excessive amount to cover a bill > > > > >> >> >> > > cutting back on normal > > > > >> >> >> > > expenses to pay it,, the hospital is killing that person. > > > > > >> >> >> > > or by charging excessive rent.. or a myriad of other ways > > > > >> >> >> > > of killing some > > > > >> >> >> > > one legally .. the slower the better.. > > > > > >> >> >> > > On my savings account I am paid a meager 2.6 % but if I > > > > >> >> >> > > want to borrow money > > > > >> >> >> > > I have to pay 9.8% If I depended upon that interest for my > > > > >> >> >> > > living again > > > > >> >> >> > > corporate greed would be killing me.. and this difference > > > > >> >> >> > > is immoral yet it > > > > >> >> >> > > is easily justified as business. > > > > > >> >> >> > > I think people many people only want to appear to be moral > > > > >> >> >> > > yet at the same > > > > >> >> >> > > time want to use business or corporations to hide their > > > > >> >> >> > > immorality. > > > > > >> >> >> > > The only conclusion I can reach is people prefer to be > > > > >> >> >> > > immoral. Just talking > > > > >> >> >> > > the talk not walking the walk of morality. > > > > > >> >> >> > > On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 12:21 PM, Molly Brogan > > ... > > read more » --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
