U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Philosophy
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-11-2013, 03:36 PM
 
354 posts, read 245,427 times
Reputation: 105

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth View Post
Why does it have to have anything to do with morality or religion? Pedophilia traumatizes people. Isn't that enough justification to prohibit it?
Morality is generally considered to be what best promotes happiness and lessens suffering. If pedophilia (the actual act of having sex with prepubescent humans) in fact decreases happiness and increases suffering, then yes, it's a moral issue. The very fact that you believe it "traumatizes people" seems to bare this out. The fact that we are socially stigmatized against this type of behavior would make it harmful because of the embarrassment factor alone.

The question of why it traumatizes people is actually the interesting question here. There are human cultures on the planet that are less sensitive to this issue, and other's more so. Some deem the age of consent very low and others very high. That case I recounted about the 14-yo with the 18-yo would have been seen as perfectly normal in some cultures, but it's punishable in most US states (isn't there one where the age of consent is 14?). Some cultures have no problem with the adult parents having sex in front of the children, while others would see this as extremely immoral. Until just recently homosexuality was viewed almost as negatively, if not more so, than pedophilia. I believe these differences are mostly a factor of various religious indoctrinations. One could argue which came first, the social or the religious, but I'm not sure it makes any real difference at this point. The two have basically blended to become the same thing.


Our social structure could have evolved differently where we basically had no sexual inhibitions; where we viewed sex as any other open biological function, such as eating. We can look at other higher brained mammals such as dolphins who's social structure doesn't seem to inhibit any sexual behavior. I would guess this same uninhibited behavior would be present in most, if not all primates, excluding humans of course.


Edit: Just looked at the recent AoC (age of consent) laws in the US and 16 seems to be the lowest now.

Last edited by NOTaTHEIST; 08-11-2013 at 03:52 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-11-2013, 06:36 PM
 
3,523 posts, read 3,909,645 times
Reputation: 2170
probably the want to not have their babies used for sex, i'd guess.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-13-2013, 12:51 AM
 
Location: Eugene, OR
14 posts, read 17,994 times
Reputation: 21
Laws/morals coming either from God or government is a false dichotomy. Go read Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, and the Constitution, and all that other stuff you should have read in the 8th grade. Then get back on the internet and re-enter the discourse with your new-found informed opinion. Not only is your entire premise here ignorant, ATTC; it is also disgusting. This is a philosophy forum; you should understand what a straw man argument is, and if you do, then you are basically trolling. Nearly every thing you post here is a pack of generalizations about a group you disagree with, and you basically characterize them of making these ridiculous arguments such as "atheists don't believe in morality," that most probably do not in fact make! So, you know, answer your own question. The bases of a moral objection to pedophilia are many, but first and foremost, people don't want their children being raped by adults, so they set up laws to prevent it. God or no god, it makes absolutely perfect sense to have laws that benefit the people they were made to protect. The fact that you think the reason for this is either God or guvment shows how twisted and cynical you are, in fact. WWJS?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-13-2013, 11:11 AM
 
3,947 posts, read 4,113,819 times
Reputation: 4711
Quote:
Originally Posted by ATTC View Post
Atheists often make arguments against faith by pointing to "evil" in the world. But ironically what is used as a supposed Achilles heel against a creator is actually an Achilles heel against belief that there is no creator. The idea specifically that there is no universal moral basis or external basis from the intuition of mankind himself that we are held to.

So for instance let's take pedophilia. If someone is naturally attracted to a minor, who are you to suggest that they cannot act on that attraction if the attraction is mutual from that minor?

You are imposing your own system of values on them. Why should they be held to your system of values. Why are you intolerant of their system of beliefs? If you suggest that the majority of the population would agree with you, since when does the majority determine what's right?


Here are the thoughts of a group of psychiatrists and mental health "professionals" of a Maryland group called B4U-ACT

[LEFT]

Here are the thoughts of a graduate student at the London School of Economics at the thought of removing the label on the next DSM (manual which lists disorders)


[/i]
Being atheist doesn't equate to being without morals or values.

An atheist's argument against pedophilia could be based on the desire to leave this planet peacefully, and wanting what's best for others based on the progression and evolution of humanity, can't it?

Atheists can also believe people should be treated as equals. How can an older individual form a healthy relationship bond with a minor like a child (an engagement which is unlikely consensual)?

Pedophilia seems to me to be more about power, control, a desire to obtain..

Children are not objects; they are not play toys. And, not all atheists live by the rule that anything goes.. (there are just as much ill-intended atheists as there are religious people and non-religious indiviudals who do have ill-will).

It doesn't negate the fact that the assumption behind this argument is that atheists are without values or morals. I don't understand this generalization.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-14-2013, 04:24 PM
 
354 posts, read 245,427 times
Reputation: 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by PasturesoPlenty
Laws/morals coming either from God or government is a false dichotomy.
Yes, very well said, even though we probably shouldn't directly equate legality with morality, even though they're definitely related. Human morality is often (if not always) the result of objective conditions innate to our physical nature and environment. The fact that we as a species typically feel pain, typically feel empathy toward others, typically are reciprocal are among some of the prime innate reasons we have developed a moral structure. Not only do these things inform our morals, but they also inform our legal structure.

That said, the god believer will often give credit for these typical human traits to their preferred deity while the atheist can attribute their morality to a more grounded objective reality. The god believer generally has some type of guide book or "godly" intuition to go by, while the atheist should probably look at their morality as more of a cost/benefit analysis, which is obviously much more difficult and often much more rewarding and just.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-14-2013, 04:37 PM
 
354 posts, read 245,427 times
Reputation: 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by kat949
Pedophilia seems to me to be more about power, control, a desire to obtain..
Rape is often more about these things, or is generally claimed to be anyway. However, I'm not sure this is the case in the sexual attraction to prepubescent humans by adults. I've long held to the hypothesis that humans are typically sexually attracted to youth. You can see this quite plainly when we use sex to advertise things, and how young and youthful all the actors appear. I going to be a bit bold here, but the fact that most porn actors shave their genitalia seems to indicate what people are looking for. There's probably some variance with how strong these attractions are and at what levels, which could lead to individuals who are ONLY attracted to the very young.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-14-2013, 04:53 PM
 
354 posts, read 245,427 times
Reputation: 105
Quote:
Children are not objects; they are not play toys.
I should be working out, but I just can't resist this. I find it ironic you should say this as legally children are generally treated as objects of their parents discretion. They generally at not allowed to be their own individuals until reaching an arbitrary age. For instance, that case I noted about the 18-yo female having a sexual encounter with a 14-yo female. It wasn't the child who brought the legal proceedings against the 18-yo, it was her parents. And I've a strong feeling if the encounter had been male/female, they would have been more understanding and much more lenient. I'd wager the child had no desire to bring these charges against the older, but we don't even give the child the right to speak for themselves at this point. She is an object of her parents discretion. I would say society does treat children as objects, and certainly NOT just in a sexual context. We still allow corporal punishment by parents (and even schools) in most countries. There's never a situation where it would be legal (or perhaps even moral) to hit others to enforce your will. Why do we allow this? Because we still socially treat children as objects.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-19-2013, 01:19 AM
 
1,938 posts, read 2,846,104 times
Reputation: 2675
Quote:
Originally Posted by ATTC View Post
Atheists often make arguments against faith by pointing to "evil" in the world. But ironically what is used as a supposed Achilles heel against a creator is actually an Achilles heel against belief that there is no creator. The idea specifically that there is no universal moral basis or external basis from the intuition of mankind himself that we are held to.

So for instance let's take pedophilia. If someone is naturally attracted to a minor, who are you to suggest that they cannot act on that attraction if the attraction is mutual from that minor?

You are imposing your own system of values on them. Why should they be held to your system of values. Why are you intolerant of their system of beliefs? If you suggest that the majority of the population would agree with you, since when does the majority determine what's right?


Here are the thoughts of a group of psychiatrists and mental health "professionals" of a Maryland group called B4U-ACT

[LEFT]

Here are the thoughts of a graduate student at the London School of Economics at the thought of removing the label on the next DSM (manual which lists disorders)


[/i]
This is a twisted post. First, minors by definition cannot give fully informed consent. There is a power differential & nothing "mutual" about the relationship described.

Secondly, this has nothing to do with atheists/atheism. People can believe in a system of justice and rules for behavior without believing in a God.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Philosophy
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:43 AM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top