Sunday, February 10, 2013


So not too long ago I was writing another article for this blog, but I had to stop to do more research, such is life. But anyways I really wanted to post something and leave it to our ol' friends at The Young Turks to provide me with something VERY interesting, check it out...

 When the whole Gay Rights Movements started Christians have been saying "What's next?". And OF COURSE everyone on the Left was calling it "The Slippery Slope" Fallacy. The funny thing is when it people actually start pushing for rights in other categories and exhibiting other behaviors the left openly mocks it, until of course, it becomes normalized. In the video below Cenk even mentions that Horse sex has apparently been on the rise, but does Cenk tie this to the so called "Slippery Slope" fallacy? Doubtful.

This is the other story in which Cenk is referring too;

Are we seriously ignoring the impact of this kinda stuff? We're at that laugh now, cry later Mode. Because as disturbing as it is for someone to have sex with an animal, Cenk laments the fact that he couldn't think of a joke about it...seriously? How about some realization that he's reported at least 3 stories so far all them involving people having sex with animals. But no, apparently a good joke about it is a much more pressing issue.

Also what's more disturbing is that Pedophilia is moving into Phase One of it's eventual rise, and by Phase One I means playing The Sympathy Card, which means *drums rolls*

 "In the laboratory, researchers are coming to the same conclusion. Like many forms of sexual deviance, pedophilia once was thought to stem from psychological influences early in life. Now, many experts view it as a sexual orientation as immutable as heterosexuality or homosexuality. It is a deep-rooted predisposition - limited almost entirely to men - that becomes clear during puberty and does not change."

Don't quote me, that's me quoting THIS article here (01/22/2013 Page T27). As a recovering porn addict, I can sympathize with having urges you don't want, what I can't sympathize with is providing a genetic reason behind something that is obviously disturbing. I am not doubting genetic factors, BUT now adding genetics to the discussion of pedophilia only allow them the ability to say "It's not my fault, I was born this way.", which as I Christian I believe, we are all born SINNERS. The only difference between us and the homosexual lobby is that we affirm our urges are wrong, they do not.

People may think I'm saber-rattling, but all I'm saying this is how it begins, psychologist speculate about the behavior, find someone who's struggling with it, make them the poster boy for it, sympathy ensues, the pedophile lobby gets mild support, it doesn't become a hot button issue and next thing you know we're having discussions about pedophile relationships that been going on for years, and those will be used as the measuring stick. I'm saying this because the same thing happened in The Homosexual Movement. There are already people who ultimately don't care about pedophilia as long as the child consented, so pedophilia already has a band of apathetic hordes who really don't care what they do as long as it's legal.

Also what's this nonsense about it "limited almost entirely to men"?! There are female pedophiles out there!

It's just crazy that Christians have been saying this animal sex and pedophilia would happen after gay marriage for years and when it actually happens NO ONE acknowledges it...interesting...


The Reginator said...

So if I find someone attractive who is under 18, I am a sinner?
SINNER FOR WHAT? Temptation IS NOT sin.
Unless you want to redefine Christianity.

The Reginator said...

Oh, yeah and the Bible says "Thou shalt not marry someone less than 1/2 your age plus 7"...oh wait.

Ugo Strange said...

I'm starting to think you're trolling because you're not dealing with anything I said in the articles you comment on.

Nowhere in this article did I say anything about attraction. I made a very clear distinction between having urges recognizing they're wrong and not acting on them and having urges, creating genetic excuses why you have them so they're not wrong anymore and then acting on them.

Temptation is obviously NOT a sin and I don't make that argument, so I haven't the slightest clue where you're getting that from.

Furthermore a mere acknowledgment that someone is attractive or pretty means nothing, but when that acknowledgment crosses over into sexual territory, that's a little thing called Lust and Jesus said Matt 5:27-28.

Anonymous said...

The Biblical condemnation of pedophilia is a logical fallacy.

Argument: The Bible says that

But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.
--Matthew 18:6

Conclusion: A adult dating, marrying, or having sex with a someone under 18 is inherently sinful regardless if he does it legally or not. (There are states where you can legally marry a minor.)
For example, a 19 year old marrying a 13 year old is abominable sinner. However, a 30 year old marrying a 24 year old is not sinning.

This is not logical. Let me explain why?

This whole argument rests on the following maxim:
Human beings under 18 years old are offended by sexual intercourse, marriage, and dating that involves another human being who is more than 1.15 times their age.

Example: a 20 year old marrying a 16 year old. A 17 year old marrying a 14 year old, etc.

However this fails when we realize that the reason why they are offended is because people say that.

“They are offended because they cannot give informed consent to sexual intercourse, marriage, and dating.”

They cannot give consent because their brain is not fully developed.

People who do not have a fully developed brain cannot give consent to sex.

The brain does not fully develop until age 25.

Therefore, 24 year olds cannot give consent to sex.

So the condemnation of pedophilia based on Matthew 18:6 is a flawed argument.