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.
What I would like to know is what is the sexual orientation of those who "understand" or think NAMBLA's free speech should be protected or their heros are known child molesters?
I am sure normal people would like to see them wiped off the face of the planet.
All of you would do well to read the conservative federal judge Posner's "Sex and Reason" on the history of laws regulating sex. It was very eye-opening about homosexual practices in Greece and Rome. Thus, out of context it is just wrong to term some people "child molesters".
More recently, in my lifetime many states had laws allowing 13 or 14 year old girls to marry. (Anyone remember the big stink about Jerry Lee Lewis?) These days we would consider that an abomination. So, some views do change over time. As I mentioned, the ACLU has taken on many causes; some which they should have left alone. But it has been protective of the civil liberties of all Americans.
But we don't live in a world of ethical relativism. We can use relativism as an intellectual exercise without sliding into the realm of infinite relativism in our present context.
This is the danger of intellectualism and post-modernism, that it can lead one to accept almost anything because deconstruction and decontextualization lead to the conclusion that there is nothing to conclude. But every point in space and time is contextual and contingent. Stuff matters in the context of every event. Maybe not in black holes, never been in one that I know of, but as humans on planet Earth it seems obvious that moral relativism is a tool for analysis, not a tool for creating excuses to abuse children. Know what I'm sayin'?
That's an excellent point. We could deconstruct any idea to mean almost anything, I think. Well, I can, anyway. But seriously, you're right about remembering the context without throwing out the ethical considerations.
Some laws may be too strict or not well-reasoned. No laws is crazy and would subject kids to abuse.
How reasonable of you! You're not permitted to be reasonable in this thread!
But seriously, you summarized it well. The objective, if we're all in agreement, is to protect children without hurting adults who haven't done anything particularly bad to a child.
A guy who looks at pictures of teens in bikinis or underwear isn't hurting children by merely looking at the pictures. A 20 year old who has a 16 year old girlfriend or boyfriend probably isn't hurting the teen.
My first girlfriend was 19 and going to college when I was 16 and still in high school. Back then, in the 1970s, it was fine for us to have that relationship. Today she would probably be considered a pedophile. Our culture is going through a brief phase of collective hysteria and we'll get over it after half the population is arrested and imprisoned for thinking that teens look good. They do. God made them that way. Look, don't touch. Why is it so horrible to look?
We could deconstruct any idea to mean almost anything, I think. Well, I can, anyway.
Ditto. It's a hazard of having a high level of intellectual curiosity and a good imagination. It's so easy to imagine infinite configurations of reality.
A recent psychological study (reported on TeeVee Gnuz) revealed that conservatives have more stable concepts about reality, morality, etc. Duh. Didn't we know that already? Being a non-conservative takes a lot of work. It wears me out. I wish I could buy into the rigid conformity and belief systems of a mainstream conservative Christian. Life would be so much simpler, and I'd have the comfort of believing that Jesus is with me and I'll live forever in Heaven.
But I'm laughing even as I type the words because it all seems so completely absurd to me. I'm trapped in the world of relativism and I have to make choices of my own free will to do what I believe is ethical in every moment, unaided by a religious text or a team of parishioners who will tell me how to live my life. I'll pay one of you so lobotomize me and make me a conservative Christian, I know I'd be happier (or at least I'd be less angst-ridden.)
Ditto. It's a hazard of having a high level of intellectual curiosity and a good imagination. It's so easy to imagine infinite configurations of reality.
A recent psychological study (reported on TeeVee Gnuz) revealed that conservatives have more stable concepts about reality, morality, etc. Duh. Didn't we know that already? Being a non-conservative takes a lot of work. It wears me out. I wish I could buy into the rigid conformity and belief systems of a mainstream conservative Christian. Life would be so much simpler, and I'd have the comfort of believing that Jesus is with me and I'll live forever in Heaven.
But I'm laughing even as I type the words because it all seems so completely absurd to me. I'm trapped in the world of relativism and I have to make choices of my own free will to do what I believe is ethical in every moment, unaided by a religious text or a team of parishioners who will tell me how to live my life. I'll pay one of you so lobotomize me and make me a conservative Christian, I know I'd be happier (or at least I'd be less angst-ridden.)
I could have written this exact post. In fact, I taught Pascal today and discussed this very thing. I long for the comfort I would be afforded if I were able to make that leap of faith. It seems like it should be so easy, doesn't it? You simply choose to accept that it is true. Why is it so hard??
I long for the comfort I would be afforded if I were able to make that leap of faith. It seems like it should be so easy, doesn't it?
Then surely you're a fan of Søren Kierkegaard, yes? I find his arguments to be very compelling on this topic.
Speaking of "on this topic," I'm risking the very existence of our posts by going so far off topic. And yet it seems relevant in a way. Faith and philosophy are at the core of our judgments about the behavior of others and they inform everyone from the ACLU to NAMBLA to the critics of the ACLU and NAMBLA. We all have faith and philosophy, don't we? Perhaps the struggle is to recognize and embrace that which we already know deep within our hearts.
In the context of this thread, I know deep in my heart that I will do no harm to a child, and this gives me freedom to be fairly liberal in my views about children. We've seen many cases of outspoken critics of "immoral" behavior who are subsequently arrested for engaging in that behavior. It seems to me that if you need to scream loudly about how righteous you are, then you're probably not very righteous. As the old saying goes, "Thou doth protest too much." Not that I'm pointing a finger at Larry Craig or Tom Foley.
Then surely you're a fan of Søren Kierkegaard, yes? I find his arguments to be very compelling on this topic.
Speaking of "on this topic," I'm risking the very existence of our posts by going so far off topic. And yet it seems relevant in a way. Faith and philosophy are at the core of our judgments about the behavior of others and they inform everyone from the ACLU to NAMBLA to the critics of the ACLU and NAMBLA. We all have faith and philosophy, don't we? Perhaps the struggle is to recognize and embrace that which we already know deep within our hearts.
In the context of this thread, I know deep in my heart that I will do no harm to a child, and this gives me freedom to be fairly liberal in my views about children. We've seen many cases of outspoken critics of "immoral" behavior who are subsequently arrested for engaging in that behavior. It seems to me that if you need to scream loudly about how righteous you are, then you're probably not very righteous. As the old saying goes, "Thou doth protest too much." Not that I'm pointing a finger at Larry Craig or Tom Foley.
It will come as no surprise that I agree with you. Philosophy is behind any discussion about anything we do as humans.
The certainty these people have is usually a mask for something else, it seems. How else can they claim such certainty? There is no such thing as a infallibility in humans, ya know!
Socrates = pedophile/NAMBLA sicko. He is no different than the "prophet" Mohammed who was also a pedophile who had sex with a 12-year old girl. These guys might have had historial/philosophycal important but that does NOT allow the sexual molestation and DESTRUCTION of CHILDREN!!! If Socrates was here today, I'd give his pedophile/monster/abuser/molester a swift kick in the a*s!
Suffer the little children to come unto me, and forbid them not... -- Jesus of Nazareth
Looks like we've got another of those perverted NAMBLA sicko's in need of an N-G kick in the a$$...
I know that is their stated purpose. It does not, however, address the fact that NAMBLA advocates sex between adults and children. If children have learned to consent and have reached the age of reason, then that's news to me.
You'll have to show me an example of NAMBLA advocating universal practice. NAMBLA advocates for wider acceptance of their beliefs, and their beliefs are that individual practice should be permitted, not outlawed. They would question whether any more advanced reasoning levels are necessary in consenting to sexual experiences than in decisions to make a sandwich or go get a glass of milk.
Note that it is not at all necessary to agree with NAMBLA's point of view to recognize that it IS in fact a point of view -- no different in its essence from a point of view favoring a reduction in the drinking age to 18 or an increase in the voting age to 35. Once it is conceded as a point of view, NAMBLA's right to express and disseminate that point of view is unassailably established under the Constitution...
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.
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.
But seriously, you're right about remembering the context without throwing out the ethical considerations. 
