• This question has been deleted.

General Question

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

Of the two, which is worse; a person who had unforced sex with a child, or someone who murdered another human being?

Asked by Hypocrisy_Central (21090 points ) February 13th, 2014

edit Try to filter the actions as the Actions themselves and not making allowances for age, if you do make allowance for age please add details to justify why the age is important logically not simply because off kneejerk reaction because it is outside your ”ick factor”.

People try all of the time to say they do not judge or that everyone is he same in some way. Can we be real? There is always a classification and/or judgment. For example, there is a person known to most of us as a good acquaintance, he had sex with a minor but she lied and said she was legal, but she was 4 months short of being legal, when it was discovered and the good acquaintance went to break off the relationship, the young lady tried to blackmail him for her not to turn him in; he refused to pay her so it ended up in court and him losing, not terrible, but enough. Yet another person known has admitted to killing someone else and not by accident. They did their time and are now on the streets again. Now some may say both cases are just as bad. Ignoring the age which will surely taint many answers, and the extortion byproduct of the act, if the choice came down to one being tortured to death and the other sentenced to a short period of rehabilitation, which punishment would you choose for which offender? Whichever one you chose for rehab, the other would be tortured to death; there are no in-between or choices, one will be worse than the other, you can’t straddle the fence. View the death as intentional murder—not an accident, self-defense, manslaughter, or unintentional. Which of these TWO CRIMES, and these two alone, is worse to you?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

94 Answers

KNOWITALL's avatar

I’m not sure what ‘unforced’ sex with a child means, because a baby may not protest verbally but it’s still abominable, unsolicited and nigh on unforgiveable.

Anything to do with abuse of a child to be is the worse of the two.

zenvelo's avatar

A poorly constructed question allowing no plausible answer.

Your question poses a false dichotomy, a false choice. Both are reprehensible acts. And you have only allowed two false solutions.

Even the murder you described is not a capital offense in California, you don’t describe a special circumstance that would permit the death penalty.

hominid's avatar

@zenvelo nailed it. Also, you might want to fine tune this question a bit. Is it a question about the morality of the action or who you would like to see tortured? Anyway, very odd.

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

@hominid Also, you might want to fine tune this question a bit. Is it a question about the morality of the action or who you would like to see tortured?
This is not a question of morality, it is a question on which crime or evil act (if you believe an act can be evil or that evil exists) is worse to you and if you had the chance to punish one way harsher than the other which? How the death occurred is of no consequence, all you have to know is it was intentional; the person wanted another person dead and took their life. I know people want to have some wiggle room as to not confront their real feelings of which is worse, but most do have an idea in their mind which they hate more.

LuckyGuy's avatar

I can tell you which one NYS thinks is worse. Our friend, 21 and over who had consensual sex with his girlfriend 10 days before her 17th birthday (the age of consent) was convicted of Rape 3rd, a Class E felony. He served about 1.5 years and was let out early for good behavior but is on probation for 10 years and is on the sex offender list for life. Murderers serve similar time, often have a shorter probation and are not put on a similar list. They can move and live where they want. For the rest of his life whenever he moves the police must inform the neighbors of his crime. Your new neighbor might have killed a girl 10 days before her 17th birthday and you would never know about it. You’d welcome him into the neighborhood. Our friend will never have a neighbor bring over a loaf of homemade bread again.

hominid's avatar

@Hypocrisy_Central: “This is not a question of morality, it is a question on which crime or evil act (if you believe an act can be evil or that evil exists) is worse to you and if you had the chance to punish one way harsher than the other which?”

Again, these are two separate issues that you’d be wise to keep separate. You are injecting something in here that you most likely don’t intend or want. Do you want this to include a discussion of the ethics of punishment, the efficacy of punishment, the efficacy of rehabilitation, or the whole issue of free will?

If you are asking about those 2 acts and which one is “worse”, you might want to keep it clean and remove the whole torture/rehab thing. It still doesn’t remove the whole issue that @zenvelo refers to, but at least it’s not as confused a question.

Response moderated (Unhelpful)
ragingloli's avatar

murder is worse than rape, always.

XOIIO's avatar

@LuckyGuy Wow, what the hell? That is some bullshit.

GloPro's avatar

If you touch my child we would have to decide if I was worse because I will murder you.

Hypothetically.

keobooks's avatar

This reminds me of those kids “Would you rather…” games.. “Would you rather slide down a 50 foot razor blade? Or suck the snot out of a dog’s nose until his head caves in?”

KNOWITALL's avatar

@GloPro :) Understandably.

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

@ragingloli murder is worse than rape, always.
There is no rape involved here, that is the reason for non-force, rape is by force, actual or implied. That would change the whole direction of the question.

@hominid Again, these are two separate issues that you’d be wise to keep separate. You are injecting something in here that you most likely don’t intend or want. Do you want this to include a discussion of the ethics of punishment, the efficacy of punishment, the efficacy of rehabilitation, or the whole issue of free will?
It would not if people focus on the nugget of the question, you have ‘X’ which has the outcome of ‘A’, if you choose that, or you have ‘Y’ with an outcome of ‘B’ if you do not choose it. Narrowing it down to which one is worse it would be the one you would not want to see the perpetrator appear to have an easy sentence. If it were death for either, it would be easier for people to straddle the fence or try to better qualify why one would be worse by how it was carried out not that it was carried out. I.E. a murder is a murder, how it was done should have no barring. Should it be by shotgun blast to the face, rigged gas tank, poison, or a knife to the heart, if the person intended to do it, which should be the sole reason focused on.

hominid's avatar

@Hypocrisy_Central: “It would not if people focus on the nugget of the question, you have ‘X’ which has the outcome of ‘A’, if you choose that, or you have ‘Y’ with an outcome of ‘B’ if you do not choose it. Narrowing it down to which one is worse it would be the one you would not want to see the perpetrator appear to have an easy sentence.”

Either you did not understand what I was suggesting, or I am completely at a loss concerning your intentions with this question. I could try to parse out the two distinct, but confused, questions. But I suspect I’ll get pushback. I’ll sit this one out.

ibstubro's avatar

Well, if you had sex with @GloPro‘s 8 year old daughter, Lolita, and she shot you in the heart for it, yours would have been the worse offense and received the (arguably) worse penalty.

Of course we all judge each other. The best yardstick I know of is intent. In my scenario, by having sex with an 8 year old, your intentions were bad, and @GloPro‘s were good – or at least better.

rojo's avatar

@zenvelo exactly what I thought but much more succinctly.

I had thought “Hey, this is one of those ‘Have you stopped beating your wife’ type of questions’

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

@ibstubro Well, if you had sex with @GloPro‘s 8 year old daughter, Lolita, and she shot you in the heart for it, yours would have been the worse offense and received the (arguably) worse penalty.
Of course we all judge each other. The best yardstick I know of is intent. In my scenario, by having sex with an 8 year old, your intentions were bad, and @GloPro‘s were good – or at least better.
That would place it in the realm of vengeance. It would be reacting on something done to you, even if via a family member. If it were not your family, friends, or anyone connected to you but against a total stranger_, but you had to decide on the severity and which was more severe than the other, how would you go then?

Judi's avatar

If I have to choose then it would be the child molester. Those creeps continue victimizing poor helpless children. A murderer could be a crime of passion and they might never do it again.
@HC, sex with a child IS rape. It doesn’t matter if it’s consensual. Look @LuckyGuy ‘s answer.

GloPro's avatar

Just in case anyone feels bad using little Lolita as an example, @GloPro has no children. I imagine she would be a show stopper and I would already be imprisoned for beating the boys off with a stick, though.

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

@Judi Those creeps continue victimizing poor helpless children. A murderer could be a crime of passion and they might never do it again.
@HC, sex with a child IS rape. It doesn’t matter if it’s consensual. Look @LuckyGuy ‘s answer.
I could find exceptions to that train of thought, and take time to look up the cases, but for now I will save that. A crime of passion was not premeditated in the since it was planned, as the murder here is intended to be.

I did read @LuckyGuy answer, and I can say again, it hinges a lot on ideology more than biology or anything else that is really important to add clarity; that would be a whole different question anyhow. If I were to touch on it, the friend @LuckyGuy knew I gander would not have eyes for any other female, underage or not, it just happened the woman he had eyes on was considered by law as unable to legally decide whom she wanted to boink, though she could have with a fellow novice and no one would say anything, but that is a whole different story but it does show people who fall into that are not roaming around trying to drag every young woman into the bed, having victim after victim.

ibstubro's avatar

I guess my point it that the world is never black and white and you need to know the shades of gray to make an informed and intelligent decision. That’s why we have trials and juries. Both sides paint a picture, and, ideally, justice prevails.

I believe there is a huge difference in the age of the ‘consenting’ child, and that I do not believe that a child under the age of 15 can consent to sex with an adult under any circumstance. I also think that more than 5 years difference in age is an added offense, and I kick that in at age 16. So I think there should be leeway between the ages of 16 and 22.

Of course, the unprovoked murder you describe is the work of a sociopath, so in my world if the kids were between the ages of 14 and 22 and consented, there is no way the sex could be worse than the murder. So, by all means, kill the murderer.

filmfann's avatar

Q: Of the two, who is worse; a person who had unforced sex with a child, or someone who murdered another human being?

The people who think up questions like this?

LuckyGuy's avatar

Since we are on the subject . He was “21 or over” and she was 16. Done! That is Rape 3 in NY. All the DA needs are 2 admissions and birth certificates and the DA gets a notch on his belt.
If the act was forced or took place when she was incapacitated or drugged or unconscious that would have been Rape 2 or Rape 1 – more serious offenses.
Just for background, not that it matters… She was the aggressor and was much more experienced than he. She had been chasing him for months. Her father liked our friend and said his daughter was trouble and would ruin his life. He was right.
Such a waste.

kritiper's avatar

Sex with the child, every time. Murder is bad but some people deserve to be killed.

Kardamom's avatar

I guess it depends upon the specific circumstances.

If a 19 year old man has consensual sex with his 16 year old girlfriend, that is nowhere near as bad as if that same 19 year old killed his 16 year old girlfriend.

But if a 19 year old man had sex with a baby who could neither consent or not consent, that would be worse than if another 19 year old man killed the dude who had sex with a baby, especially if the baby was the child of the man who did the killing. It’s not legal, but sometimes it’s warranted and certainly understandable.

RandomMrAdam's avatar

I think that murder is worse MOST of the time but I can’t give a definitive answer without more details (I know I know you want a definitive answer)… I would say they are close IF the murder was swift and painless. If the murder involved prolonged torture and torment, then it’s worse in my mind than that of having sex with a child.

Don’t get me wrong; having sex with a child is wrong on sooo many levels, but murder is so definite. That child, even if scared for life, has the chance to recover and live a pseudo-normal life, whereas the person who was murdered is dead. There’s no coming back from that whatsoever.

Those points being made, I think details can really sway my decision. Someone being poisoned by a painless drug and dying in their sleep I would say is not as bad as someone manipulating a child and forcing sexual actions on him or her and scaring them for life. But then again, killing someone slowly in some gruesome and torturous fashion versus say a story that @LuckyGuy mentioned, then sure, murder is WAAAY worse.

Judi's avatar

I’m in my 50’s now. I thought when I had sex at 17 with a 33 year old man that it was consensual. In retrospect I was way to naive, vulnerable and easily manipulated. It wasn’t until about ten years ago that I realized I was a victim. That being said, I probably wouldn’t have been as vulnerable if it hadn’t been for the men who took advantage of me (again I thought it was consensual) when I was 15 and they were in their twenties. The adult needs to be responsible and look out for the child. Even if it’s a lonely girl with daddy issues who just wants a man to make her feel special. Even if she’s (or he) is forward, it’s the adult’s responsibility to put the brakes on.

AshLeigh's avatar

Murder is worse than consensual sex, mostly. But it isn’t black and while.
Plus, I’m pretty sure torturing someone to death is illegal no matter what they did.

LornaLove's avatar

To my mind crime is judged on factors such as premeditation,past history and other criteria used to measure how dangerous a person is, has been and could be in future. Both crimes are horrific. I might judge the sex crime more harshly if I had a young daughter for example. As it might hit home harder to me and have more relevancy to my life at that moment. That is why the judicial system ‘weighs’ crime and judges.

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

@ibstubro I believe there is a huge difference in the age of the ‘consenting’ child, and that I do not believe that a child under the age of 15 can consent to sex with an adult under any circumstance.
Just so I get you correctly, if said 13yr old decided to have sex with a 15yr old because they are with another legal novice, their intelligence to have sex increases to the point they are not a victim but equal willing participant?

@LuckyGuy Just for background, not that it matters… She was the aggressor and was much more experienced than he. She had been chasing him for months. Her father liked our friend and said his daughter was trouble and would ruin his life. He was right. Just for background, not that it matters… She was the aggressor and was much more experienced than he. She had been chasing him for months. Her father liked our friend and said his daughter was trouble and would ruin his life. He was right.
As you can see from most responses, she gets a pass because she is to ignorant to know what she was doing, that is, unless she was chasing the 17yr old captain of the football team. To many he is just a creep because he is supposed to ignore any physical development she might have and just say ”10 months too early, I have to wait one day afterwards then I can think like I may think now”. Situation doesn’t matter, so it should not matter with the murder.

@kritiper Murder is bad but some people deserve to be killed.
So anyone who murders another in cold blood can get a pass or wrist slap because in their mind the person they murdered deserved to die for whatever reason that was?

@RandomMrAdam That child, even if scared for life, has the chance to recover and live a pseudo-normal life, whereas the person who was murdered is dead.
Many celebrities have said they were molested as a child and turned out quite normal, a ”messed up child to a messed up adult” is no absolute, just saying.

I think that murder is worse MOST of the time but I can’t give a definitive answer without more details(I know I know you want a definitive answer)…
It was an honest answer that said a lot in what it didn’t say.

@Judi I’m in my 50’s now. I thought when I had sex at 17 with a 33 year old man that it was consensual. In retrospect I was way to naive, vulnerable and easily manipulated.
If you had boinked a boy 15yr to 17yr would you have felt played then, or would you feel you played him if he was the younger, or that you both played each other? Being the same age or close to it would you felt your choice to have sex more informative or intelligent because the person you were having sex with would have been as naïve as you?

It wasn’t until about ten years ago that I realized I was a victim.
If for some reason he was younger than you, would you feel you made him a victim? If not, why not?

The adult needs to be responsible and look out for the child.
Here, here, and that should go beyond the bedroom.

@AshLeigh But it isn’t black and while.
Why not?

@LornaLove I might judge the sex crime more harshly if I had a young daughter for example. As it might hit home harder to me and have more relevancy to my life at that moment.
Ahhhh…..there is the rub, isn’t it? You can’t have an act treated the same because it can be viewed differently by several people. Maybe to someone else the murder is worse because they were left orphaned by a gunman who murdered their father as he worked late and was never caught. Everything is tainted by personal conviction, and not simply by the facts or actions that happened. you illustrated why it is so difficult for anyone to have a consistent answer, we can all go home now. ;-)

Simone_De_Beauvoir's avatar

Who did the murderer kill? Depends on that.

LornaLove's avatar

@Hypocrisy_Central Of course we do , that’s why my comment included the fact that we therefore have judges and courts in order to judge objectively.

kritiper's avatar

@Hypocrisy_Central That is not what I meant. Those in society who have the responsibility of determining those to be killed do the killing, not just any one random person killing randomly by themselves.

whitenoise's avatar

It is a very strange question that wants me to compare things that cannot be compared without proper context.

However… let me make it comparable.

Would I think it is worse for some grown up to kill my child or to have unforced sex with him?

Easy… the killing is worse… I cannot think of any circumstance where given similar backgrounds I would say: “no… don’t have sex with tyne child… please kill someone.”

This is a strange question…

ibstubro's avatar

Yes, @Hypocrisy_Central, I live in the United States, and we have a separate Juvenile Justice system that metes out punishment based on the assumed innocence of the minor child. I agree with our legal supposition that neither child, 13 or 15, can maturely ‘consent’.

Judi's avatar

@HC, if the boy were 15 or 17 we would have been on the same maturity level. He wouldn’t have the huge manipulative advantage.

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

@whitenoise This is a strange question…
For a difficult and strange question you did very well. The question makes one think, or it should. People often look at the same bowl of peas but if you like peas or hate them how good or bad the peas are cannot be seen the same. The peas are what they are if you look at it unfiltered for what they are. Thanks for your honest answer, that is the way Fluther should work.

@ibstubro Yes, @Hypocrisy_Central, I live in the United States, and we have a separate Juvenile Justice system that metes out punishment based on the assumed innocence of the minor child.
But even that is flawed, if a 15yr old is deemed wise enough to do an adult act with a 16yr there is no foul; since both are novice the presumed sexual intelligence increase more for both than if one were 19yr or even older. However if the 15yr robs 5 quickie marts, shooting 2 clerks in which one dies, now that same 15yr old could be tried as an adult, because a supposedly adult act was done. It is not the fact that adult acts were done, it is which adult act society cares to deal with as destructive to it, not so much the youngster.

@Judi @HC, if the boy were 15 or 17 we would have been on the same maturity level.
Is that so, really? So if you were older than the boy and had the hots for him and pursued him as the young lady in @LuckyGuy tale, if he finally decided to do the horizontal mambo with you, it was because he came to that totally independent of your actions? What if he had the hots for you, you do not think he would be capable of lying, schmoozing, or whatever, to get you out of your Gloria Vanderbuilts? Should he succeed it was because you, independent of his lies, came to that totally on your own, he could not have been that smart to talk you into it even though you believed he did not?

He wouldn’t have the huge manipulative advantage.
How much of a tease, a flirt, a womanizer is incumbent solely on how many years one has survived on this planet? A 23 year old woman who lived in a protected and insolated environment or micro society like some Mormon sects, or the Amish would be more sexually knowledgeable than a 13yr surfing porn on the Net weekly and having older brothers and cousins schooling him on sex with girls and the best ways to get next to them, and get the young lasses out of their panties? Even at 23yr having never seen a porno or been on a date alone with a boy, she is still sexually savvier than the boy would? If you had been older would you believe your younger partner would have been some victim you manipulated simply being older?

AshLeigh's avatar

White* sorry. And because it depends on the circumstances.

Response moderated (Off-Topic)
Response moderated
Response moderated (Off-Topic)
Response moderated (Off-Topic)
Response moderated (Off-Topic)
Response moderated (Off-Topic)
Response moderated
Response moderated
Response moderated
Response moderated
Response moderated (Off-Topic)
Response moderated (Off-Topic)
Response moderated
KNOWITALL's avatar

@Hypocrisy_Central I understand what you’re saying and agree that children are showing signs of sexuality younger and younger.

What you should understand is that that particular subject is very sensitive, so any allusions to pedophilia will make you even more of a target than your being a theist.

Response moderated (Off-Topic)
ibstubro's avatar

@XOIIO, I remember your buss question, and I thought the question itself was a good one. I don’t really recall the discussion in detail, or why the question would be removed.

I think what makes this (type of) question disturbing is omission of detail as in the age of the people involved in “unforced sex” juxtaposed with superfluous detail (tortured to death), and a jarring absolute – unmotivated murder.

Which is then muddied with intentional slight of mind such as:
@ibstubro “I believe there is a huge difference in the age of the ‘consenting’ child, and that I do not believe that a child under the age of 15 can consent to sex with an adult under any circumstance.”
@Hypocrisy_Central “Just so I get you correctly, if said 13yr old decided to have sex with a 15yr old because they are with another legal novice, their intelligence to have sex increases to the point they are not a victim but equal willing participant?”

No, I specifically and clearly stated a child under the age of 15, and a legal adult, or some one over the age of 18.

It’s constantly changing the paradigm to try to force people to say that it’s better to rape a child than commit a sociopathic murder. In fact, some people believe that raping a child is worse because the child could be left to an entire lifetime of misery as a result. But the OP is constructed to prove them wrong.

ibstubro's avatar

Oh, and what was the average life expectancy in the time of Jesus? 40? Mary would have been well along her life at the age of 12. If her age had been an issue at the time, it would not have been reported as 12.

zenvelo's avatar

@Hypocrisy_Central Cultural sexualization of children by the media does not excuse your fascination with underage girl’s sexual activity. And, you regularly post questions regarding various ethical issues regarding sex, but this is the first I have ever seen you post anything about your own belief that only marital heterosexual activity meets your personal standard. It’s not a matter of posting something for us to reflect upon, since we as a group regularly find your viewpoints on child sex as being inappropriate.

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

@KNOWITALL What you should understand is that that particular subject is very sensitive, so any allusions to pedophilia will make you even more of a target than your being a theist.
I understand it is a sensitive subject because of secular hypocrisy, which I have not seen anyone try to even defuse but to attack God, which they do not believe in anyhow. So IF they are correct and there is no God, then who do they have to blame for their thinking?

@XOIIO So, by that logic I can make a religion where I am god, and then I can do whatever I want, cool.
In case you have not noticed, many have done just that, even if it is a private personal religion; they are their own god.

@ibstubro I think what makes this (type of) question disturbing is omission of detail as in the age of the people involved in “unforced sex” juxtaposed with superfluous detail (tortured to death), and a jarring absolute – unmotivated murder.
I would ask what difference does the detail of age make. If it is illegal, it is no matter if you are 10 years under the limit, three years under the limit, or four months under the limit. To think otherwise is hair splitting the exact illustration of the question, in part. The principal is the same as landing a jet on an aircraft carrier, the object is to get on the flight deck. If a pilot loses control of his jet and crashes 50 years off the flight deck and another pilot loses control of his jet and crashes 50ft off the flight deck, he can feel better that he got closer and use that as some justification that he was a better pilot, but the end result is the same; the jet crashed. To split hairs on what age, is non-violent the same as being forced or if this or that constitute force is to try to split hairs on how close to the flight deck one crashed from when the crash still happened.

No, I specifically and clearly stated a child under the age of 15, and a legal adult, or some one over the age of 18.
Perhaps I got caught up in the usual ”hair splitting” that permeates this site, because legal adult and someone over 18 has different significance depending which nation one happens to be in. Even here in the US it is not absolute depending on which state you are in.

It’s constantly changing the paradigm to try to force people to say that it’s better to rape a child than commit a sociopathic murder. In fact, some people believe that raping a child is worse because the child could be left to an entire lifetime of misery as a result. But the OP is constructed to prove them wrong.
I can’t force people to think in any way, if I did, this would be a better USA. How people think, is how they think. Some may not care to voice how they think for what it may look like. There is always a worse, no matter what. I can say which is worse, to be eaten alive by a shark or to burn to death trapped in your vehicle? They are different situations of death the are not related, but if you ask someone to choose between the two and they can’t straddle the fricken fence, they will choose one over the other depending on which they feel is worse; not that burning to death is better than being a shark’s lunch. Both are horrible ways to die, but if one is simply too timid to voice it audibly doesn’t change what their mind actually thinks about it.

@zenvelo Cultural sexualization of children by the media does not excuse your fascination with underage girl’s sexual activity.
You do not want to go there, that is an alley you are not prepared to travel down. The bone I will throw you, since you need it, the fascination, as you are proving, is societies hypocrisy over the sex it so craves. Not only that, to try to classify this sex is OK, that is nasty, this is OK so long as there is no money involved; even through all of that there is no proving why other than a group of people said so and thus it is followed without question, as those nameless, faceless, powers that be have complete sovereignty to decide which is good or bad.

And, you regularly post questions regarding various ethical issues regarding sex, but this is the first I have ever seen you post anything about your own belief that only marital heterosexual activity meets your personal standard.
I don’t have to declare to anyone on Fluther, outside of Fluther, or anywhere else my sexual beliefs, it is quite evident if one really knew the Bible, but then most here do not so they would not believe what my sexual morals and values are, and if they guessed they would say they were wrong and hateful anyhow. I answer 1st to the only sovereign God, who even let people believe they are their own god for a time.

It’s not a matter of posting something for us to reflect upon, since we as a group regularly find your viewpoints on child sex as being inappropriate.
Again, your comment illustrates the double-mindedness of it. Place three form of sex in front of the masses they will accept this one, natural or not, as OK, another as odd or weird but OK to those who want to do it, and that one we will see as debase and hate simply because we, the masses don’t like it. The point remains, who is sovereign enough to be the ultimate judge on which is right, and which is not? So far no one has been able to put a name on this person or these people and how they were given the authority to dictate right and wrong in the sexual realm.

If you can just say ”I hate this or love that because it simply benefits me”, I can hang my hat on that. To try to say ”I live or accept this because it is right” especially with no sovereign entity making that decision means in reality it is only popular opinion and majority rule; the danger in that is you can always find a majority to agree with you if you look hard enough.

ibstubro's avatar

@Hypocrisy_Central I would ask what difference does the detail of age make.
I answered this specifically, in detail, in this thread. What did you miss?

Response moderated (Off-Topic)
Response moderated (Off-Topic)
ibstubro's avatar

@Hypocrisy_Central “I can’t force people to think in any way, if I did, this would be a better USA.

Right there you get to the heart of the problem. By your own admission, you’re constantly trying to prove that you are morally superior to the majority while appearing intellectually mediocre, at best.

The principal is the same as landing a jet on an aircraft carrier, the object is to get on the flight deck. If a pilot loses control of his jet and crashes 50 years off the flight deck and another pilot loses control of his jet and crashes 50ft off the flight deck, he can feel better that he got closer and use that as some justification that he was a better pilot, but the end result is the same; the jet crashed.
Say what?? Do you have some sort of Jesus complex, that makes you think you need to speak in garbled parables? By SO, like the Bible, everything is open to interpretation and if your argument is proven to be faulty, it was actually someone else misinterpreting your little bedtime stories.

The only absolute here is your own narrow view of the world.

Response moderated (Off-Topic)
Response moderated (Off-Topic)
Response moderated (Off-Topic)
Response moderated (Off-Topic)
Response moderated (Off-Topic)
Response moderated (Off-Topic)
Response moderated (Flame-Bait)
Response moderated (Writing Standards)
Response moderated (Off-Topic)
Response moderated (Off-Topic)
Response moderated (Off-Topic)
Response moderated (Writing Standards)
Response moderated (Off-Topic)
zenvelo's avatar

@Hypocrisy_Central Your argument to my comments is the first I have seen on this site that uses belief in a biblical God as justification for child rape:

“The point remains, who is sovereign enough to be the ultimate judge on which is right, and which is not? So far no one has been able to put a name on this person or these people and how they were given the authority to dictate right and wrong in the sexual realm.”

Response moderated (Off-Topic)
Response moderated (Off-Topic)
Response moderated (Off-Topic)
Response moderated
muppetish's avatar

[mod says] Heads up: this question was posted in the General Section by the OP. As a result, questions that are not on-topic will be removed. Let’s try to reign in the conversation a bit from here on out, okay?

Response moderated (Off-Topic)
Response moderated (Off-Topic)
Response moderated (Off-Topic)
whitenoise's avatar

@mod
How about just anwering pm’s then…

There is an entry above… It says:
What you should understand is that that particular subject is very sensitive, so any allusions to pedophilia will make you even more of a target than your being a theist.

Why leave that up here?
Implying that fluther persecutes theists is just not true… Definitely off-topic and flame bait. The OP is questioned for his faulty reasoning and dubious stance on sex with underaged people.

Since you don’t respond to pm… This is the only way to do this. I am on this forum for over four years, I have never run into any problems with moderators, yet you cannot just address normal questions? This shows no respect…

Edit:
Sorry @KNOWITALL. I have no doubt about your integrity and positive intentions. I didn’t want to drag you into this dispute with moderators…

KNOWITALL's avatar

@whitenoise Probably because I gave a rational answer in response to HC’s explanation of what he meant. Geesh, you guys don’t like to be wrong do you?

whitenoise's avatar

You guys? I am only one…

And I am not wrong this time… You implied that HC is attacked for being a theist. That just wasnt true. He was questioned for his saying / implying that non-theists had no moral base to take a stance on sex with underaged children. That was just abject.

What is the rational answer part in “even more of a target than your being a theist”?

KNOWITALL's avatar

@whitenoise

First, when you ask about MY post, I feel like I need to say something.

Second, HC has been perpetually attacked on fluther because of his strong religious views, him and I even have disagreed on a few occasions.

Lastly, you may not understand how Christianity affects every aspect of your life/thoughts but I do. A lot of theists believe that without God, your moral compass may be skewed, that’s just something we’re raised to believe, or at least I was.

I was trying to gently point out to HC that any ambiguity in his posts about underrage sex would lead him to be ostracized even further than he already is.

If you don’t understand something, please feel free to PM or reply, I’ll check in later. Peace.

whitenoise's avatar

@KNOWITALL
Peace – and I actually may know…:-)

KNOWITALL's avatar

@whitenoise I guess my point is that regardless of your beliefs, you’re entitled to be as honest as you want here, whether it’s cussing God or talking about a sensitive issue like this one.

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

@whitenoise To be clear, secular people can take a stance on anything they want; and they do. I know the concept is near impossible to grasp because you are filtering the Holy and supernatural through crude human eyes and understanding, and you are not alone. What God sees as sin, is not measured by the way man sees it, which is the backbone of the whole question. Not all sins are crimes as not all crimes are sin. Some sexual crimes to God man see as his right to do. Other things man sees as a sexual crime while avoiding others are still just as much a crime to God. God is so far above us humans it would be as if we were in a hot air balloon looking down on a colony of ants trying to say which ant was taller than the others; it could not be done, all the ants look the same. Any sex outside marriage of one man and one woman is a sex crime to God. But it was never about God or how He see it.

However, since man has a sinometer, which often correlates to this is a crime, and that is not a crime, this is a crime but not as bad as that, it leads to the question at hand. How people answer it, if they are real with themselves, is how they dial it in. That line between them gets much harder when you can’t compare a shoplifter, a drug addict, and a murderer. I choose the two issues because many people have a visceral reaction to them. Next to each other the fine line between them becomes more, to the point people start to go off on other crimes that are not even part of the question, and issues that are insignificant to simply answering the question; what would you punish worse, a person that left a sexed up minor that is still alive, or a person who wantonly took another life leaving a corpse? That is the only issue to consider, how hard is that to figure out?

KNOWITALL's avatar

@Hypocrisy_Central “Any sex outside marriage of one man and one woman is a sex crime to God. But it was never about God or how He see it.”

I disagree and I would never be so bold as to speak for God, watch out for lightning bro.

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

@KNOWITALL I disagree and I would never be so bold as to speak for God, watch out for lightning bro.
I would never say God said something He did not clearly have in His word.

Romans 1:26–32

26 For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, 27 and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.

28 And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper, 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are gossips, 30 slanderers, haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, 31 without understanding, untrustworthy, unloving, unmerciful; 32 and although they know the ordinance of God ,that those who practice such things are worthy of death, they not only do the same, but also give hearty approval to those who practice them.

With that I can just say

Hebrews 6:18
..that by two immutable things, in which it is impossible for God to lie, we might have strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold of the hope set before us.

Philippians 2:12
Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling;

Again, it has no credence on the question at hand. How one believes on that is between them and God (if they believe in Him). :-)

KNOWITALL's avatar

@Hypocrisy_Central Can you read this sometime and tell me what you think? This is an organization of Christians that has been working for the equality of LGBT’s since 1964.

■Using their position within society as spokespersons for God to proclaim that all homosexual relations are disdained by God, thus knowingly contributing to the cruel persecution of a minority population.
......
Heterosexual Christians are being unbiblical by using the clobber passages as justification for applying absolute standards of morality to homosexual “sins” that they themselves are not tempted to commit, while at the same time accepting for themselves a standard of relative morality for those sins listed in the clobber passages that they do routinely commit.
Homosexuality is briefly mentioned in only six or seven of the Bible’s 31,173 verses. (The verses wherein homosexuality is mentioned are commonly known as the “clobber passages,” since they are typically used by Christians to “clobber” LGBT people.) The fact that homosexuality is so rarely mentioned in the Bible should be an indication to us of the lack of importance ascribed it by the authors of the Bible.

http://notalllikethat.org/taking-god-at-his-word-the-bible-and-homosexuality/

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

@KNOWITALL Can you read this sometime and tell me what you think?
I read it, I listened to it, as painful as it was. To say it politely I will let the Bible say it best:

2 Timothy 3:1–5
3 But know this, that in the last days perilous times will come: 2 For men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, 3 unloving, unforgiving, slanderers, without self-control, brutal, despisers of good, 4 traitors, headstrong, haughty, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, 5 having a form of godliness but denying its power. And from such people turn away

They did so much slicing and dicing I thought I was in an infomercial. They claim to know more about the Bible than God, or what was important or true. If that were so I can’t see how they can try to clean up the passage they posted ”During the time in which the New Testament was written, the Roman conquerors of the region frequently and openly engaged in homosexual acts between themselves and boys. Such acts were also common between Roman men and their male slaves. These acts of non-consensual sex were considered normal and socially acceptable.” As if they know for certain all instances were by force. I could easily twist that if I wanted, as they have with ”Clobber Verses”, and make any seemingly outrageous thing seem OK. If I wanted to be a homosexual rapist, which I don’t and would ever think, I could twist that so say if was acceptable and common place the problem is with this society not that forcing other males of any age is wrong.

Trying to use frequency to try to establish what is most important or what was said, I am sure the Bible said about as much about taking the name of the Lord in vain, so you believe that because it was not said every 50 verses or that it may have only been said in less than 8% of the total verses that it is OK to blaspheme the name of God?

I can agree with them on only one point, a homosexual is no worse than a straight fornicator. God doesn’t hate homosexuals, if they can find a way to be homosexual and not commit sexual immorality they are on the same footing as anyone else who doesn’t commit sexual immorality. If they have sex outside of a union that God has established for man and woman and not fornicate, they as well as any straight person having sex unmarried would be the same playing field. The Bible said if you love God you would keep His commandment so even if it were not instant death for such things as the other Old Testament things they mentioned, you would not do them because they are against what God said do, even if we are under grace, and not the law. I say they are the ones who need to beware of that fire from heaven than I. They need to go back and have the Spirit reteach them the Word, if they ever really knew it, they seem as though they never got off the milk.

The way they are speaking one would have a license to steal, cheat, swindle, step out on your spouse and anything else because that was all done away with the 10 Commandments.

Do you have a pecking order on which crime is worse or if the crime is a sin you view it differently?

This discussion is closed.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther