Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 22, 2015 23:46:20 GMT -5
Kiddie porn, like the other porn, and lots of other
moral boundaries like divorce, adultery etc. will
get salami sliced over time. Bit by bit the shock
and horror will evaporate, people will get tired of
chasing after sickos, jails will get too full, some
will find novel ways to get around the law, laws will
be re-interpreted etc.. Soon child porn will be
ignored as an issue.
All of the above are happening now.
|
|
|
|
Post by Roselyn T on Apr 22, 2015 23:55:15 GMT -5
So Bert what has child porn got to do with workers abusing children ? Whenever CSA is discussed you always bring up child porn, are you trying to justify CSA by shifting the focus to something else? Also can you explain how you can put divorce & adultery in the same category as child porn ?
|
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Apr 23, 2015 0:15:13 GMT -5
We will have the wholesale legalization of narcotics within a generation or two. As they say, Nixon's "war on drugs" is over, and we lost. It actually makes sense to legalize narcotics, and treat addiction instead. Takes away a lot of the cachet of drugs, as well as destroying drug cartels. But kiddie porn is growing about ten percent a year. Do the maths. Is kiddie porn growing, or is the reporting of kiddie porn growing? Authorities seem pretty determined to control it Bert. Just as they're pretty determined to control the sexual abuse of children in religious groups. It will take time. |
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Apr 23, 2015 1:50:43 GMT -5
Kiddie porn, like the other porn, and lots of other moral boundaries like divorce, adultery etc. will get salami sliced over time. Bit by bit the shock and horror will evaporate, people will get tired of chasing after sickos, jails will get too full, some will find novel ways to get around the law, laws willbe re-interpreted etc.. Soon child porn will be ignored as an issue. All of the above are happening now.
It must be your dark outlook on life.
Actually people are becoming more aware of some of the terrible incidents that were concealed in the past.
I see many people & groups of people taking steps to stop it happening now.
I see more equality & justice happening now than I did when I was growing up.
|
|
|
|
Post by magpie on Apr 23, 2015 3:39:23 GMT -5
Kicking off the Convention grounds? Who will truely be left to speak from the platform?If all who are prepared to help cover up or turn a blind eye to CSA and other sexual indescretions,heresies,judgemental exclusivism amongst the unbiblical unatural demanded lives of the sects ministry,so are they also part of the danger list,or why do they do this which is not a christian and/or legal act? I go along as a past victim to take children to a convention or have unatural living male/female ministers in the home with them is endangering children a legally chargable offence.Fancy a worker stood down in South Australia because he lay a charge on an older worshiped one over his unappropriate SEXUAL indescretions.Kick all guilty off? No one to take the platform "but there is some wonderful schollars of theology who would come along and speak and teach on God, salvation,grace,assurance,discipleship (ours),serving,outreach,ministering,justice,triune of God,love, acceptance,christians responsabilities,etc---just to name a bit. OK lets put these wheels in action,as we all want to see and know the "TRUTH" not as Irvine invented but as scripture taught.
|
|
|
|
Post by fred on Apr 23, 2015 4:16:10 GMT -5
Celibate men are restricted in their sexual activity and I believe celebrate priests, bro. workers and any other person FORCED to be single have more fantasies. I encourage all single men to not be one on one around children. Be safe. Workers aren't FORCED to be single - they CHOOSE to be single. There's nothing to stop them leaving the work and getting married if that's what they want to do. I don't believe the truly spiritual men who stick the course are spending their time having sick fantasies about other people's children. There'll be "tares among the wheat" till the end of time but there's still a lot of good wheat out there. You make it sound like all single men are dangerous. This is what the spin doctors say - it is not true. A man or a woman can choose to be single or married whilst not in the work. However once they are in the work being single or married is not a choice, it is a requirement to be single, if you want to be free to make that choice you must leave the work. In the early days of the fellowship there were a few examples of husband and wife workers, but that is not so today. Oh, I forgot to mention that divorcees are now accepted as workers, so that must mean they are single. That status doesn't apply though if they wish to re-marry when they would be reclassified as adulterers. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 23, 2015 4:48:34 GMT -5
Workers aren't FORCED to be single - they CHOOSE to be single. There's nothing to stop them leaving the work and getting married if that's what they want to do. I don't believe the truly spiritual men who stick the course are spending their time having sick fantasies about other people's children. There'll be "tares among the wheat" till the end of time but there's still a lot of good wheat out there. You make it sound like all single men are dangerous. This is what the spin doctors say - it is not true. A man or a woman can choose to be single or married whilst not in the work. However once they are in the work being single or married is not a choice, it is a requirement to be single, if you want to be free to make that choice you must leave the work. In the early days of the fellowship there were a few examples of husband and wife workers, but that is not so today. Oh, I forgot to mention that divorcees are now accepted as workers, so that must mean they are single. That status doesn't apply though if they wish to re-marry when they would be reclassified as adulterers. Why would anyone want to be married in the work nowadays anyway? It wouldn't be very practical. |
|
|
|
Post by Roselyn T on Apr 23, 2015 5:24:05 GMT -5
Felicity good point ! Why would they want to be married when they can have their cake & eat it to ! (I do understand they are not all like that though)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 23, 2015 6:00:30 GMT -5
Felicity good point ! Why would they want to be married when they can have their cake & eat it to ! (I do understand they are not all like that though) As I'm sure you know, that wasn't my point  |
|
|
|
Post by Roselyn T on Apr 23, 2015 6:01:42 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by rational on Apr 23, 2015 9:19:12 GMT -5
Celibate men are restricted in their sexual activity and I believe celebrate priests, bro. workers and any other person FORCED to be single have more fantasies. I encourage all single men to not be one on one around children. Be safe. While that is your belief, it is not supported by available data. I think this might be a case of projection regarding sexual urges and a person's inability to control them in various situations. Most priests, workers, etc. are not child molesters. Published data shows that the the rate of offenders is close to, or lower, than the rate in the general population. |
|
|
|
Post by snow on Apr 23, 2015 10:56:06 GMT -5
This is what the spin doctors say - it is not true. A man or a woman can choose to be single or married whilst not in the work. However once they are in the work being single or married is not a choice, it is a requirement to be single, if you want to be free to make that choice you must leave the work. In the early days of the fellowship there were a few examples of husband and wife workers, but that is not so today. Oh, I forgot to mention that divorcees are now accepted as workers, so that must mean they are single. That status doesn't apply though if they wish to re-marry when they would be reclassified as adulterers. Why would anyone want to be married in the work nowadays anyway? It wouldn't be very practical. Was it ever practical? Other than in countries where they couldn't get in unless they entered as a married couple, that is? The way your church works, no it isn't likely all that practical. |
|
|
|
Post by magpie on Apr 24, 2015 8:22:43 GMT -5
Fred,what about those cast out to a lost eternity because they have laid a complaint about sexual deviants ,inc CSA,theological challenges to 2x2 teachings,unbiblical exclusivisms,1 Corinthians Ch 9,verse 5/6 it is an EG of negating the DEMAND to celibate ministry,1950's heard Rex Trewin in South Australia expounding the virtues of the irvine sect,HE was a Divorcee  ? .So Fred if they wish to be guided by examples of the disciples in the 1st century,home owners,many married,why? cant they take that verse in Corinthians and marry,without being expelled by a doctorine? Paul wrote----"Havn't I got the right to follow the example of the other "Apostles" and the "Lords" brothers and "Peter" by taking a Christian wife with me on my travels ?." Then history is revealing.via web,media,gossip,COURTS, more every day why many brother and sister workers have a problem and marriage would not fit into their reason to avoid it in the first place,statistics and revelations of a world wide cancer in celibate ministries is becomming more and more appalling on a daily basis. Ask "us" victims of worker CSA and homo/lesb/hetro/forced= (rapes) & adultries,there is plenty of us in so many countries,especially the ones where they send perpetrators sent to cover up their crimes and sins at home country. You wont get an answer from those who have developed mental issues or suicided because they were defiled by a/or more than one worker. WANT THEM TO MARRY NOW?? NOT LIKELY,TAINTED EVEN IF THEY KNOW OF THEIR FELLOW WORKERS SEXUAL INDESCRETIONS (SINS)AND NOT DICSLOSE THE SINNER. BUT MIND CONTROL HAS THEM HELD IN FEAR OF REPROCUSSIONS IF THEY LAY A CHARGE. |
|
|
|
Post by rational on Apr 24, 2015 11:13:27 GMT -5
Fred,what about those cast out to a lost eternity because they have laid a complaint about sexual deviants ,inc CSA,theological challenges to 2x2 teachings,unbiblical exclusivisms,1 Corinthians Ch 9,verse 5/6 it is an EG of negating the DEMAND to celibate ministry,1950's heard Rex Trewin in South Australia expounding the virtues of the irvine sect,HE was a Divorcee ???? Criminals determine who does and does not gain eternal life? If person "A" really believes that person "B" can damn them for all of eternity even though person "B" is a criminal or assists in covering up criminal activity there is little anyone can do. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2015 4:08:14 GMT -5
Quote - "No, they are not happening now, Bert.
It must be your dark outlook on life.
Actually people are becoming more aware of some of the terrible incidents that were concealed in the past.
I see many people & groups of people taking steps to stop it happening now.
I see more equality & justice happening now than I did when I was growing up."
In the USA laws are generally starting to liberalize concerning aspects of child
porn. As of 2014 (last year I looked) three states now won't criminalize* child porn
content on computer hard disks, and there has been some leeway provided for this
so-called "virtual porn."
Also, attempts will be made to separate "child sex abuse" from "mere" "child porn."
And then there's pederasty - sex with pubescent minors.
Dmmichgood, you are old enough to remember when YOU thought homosexual marriage
was repulsive. Social changes are like great swells in the ocean - they lift everyone
up and we don't feel the rise.
* Remember, social change slips in through the back door to avoid shocking the
sensibilities of people with conservative tendencies, ie abortion for "rape cases"
or marijuana for "medicinal reasons" or divorce for "domestic abuse" etc..
|
|
|
|
Post by rational on Apr 25, 2015 7:15:57 GMT -5
In the USA laws are generally starting to liberalize concerning aspects of child porn. As of 2014 (last year I looked) three states now won't criminalize* child porn content on computer hard disks, and there has been some leeway provided for this so-called "virtual porn." It might be because there is the possibility that images could have ended up on a hard disk without the owners knowledge. Routing internet traffic through random/unsuspecting systems is nothing new. You get a fair amount of your spam email that way. There is also the problem with images being created without any children being involved. It is difficult to show that there was child abuse when there were no children involved. And lastly, in the wake of the moral panic people feel regarding child abuse, there are cases where artists like Sally Mann, Robert Mapplethorpe, Edward Weston, Jock Sturges, and others have been prosecuted because of the photos they have taken and displayed although no one could point out how any children were actually abused. I do like the Sally Mann series of photos of her children growing up but, while I do admire the craft of Mapplethorpe, I would not go out of my way to see an exhibit. I have some prints of Weston on my walls. A friend of mine is an artist. She had taken photos of her children, and mine as well, when they were growing up that she fears could cause her legal problems. They are just photos of children being children. In London, Leena McCall’s Portrait of Ms Ruby May, Standing was taken down to protect children and vulnerable adults. It was a painting of a standing woman. Protect from what? What is a 'vulnerable' adult? Wow. Shocking that people do not feel that photos of their nude children are pornographic. Or that all photos of children in various states of dress are pornographic. I suppose we could reduce all images to something like: Not quite the accurate definition. Homosexual sex with pubescent or adolescent minors individuals. Whether they are minors or not depends on their physiological development and the age of consent where they are located. Now that the definition is cleared up - what was your point? Was abortion ever legal only for cases of rape? Where/when was that? You're reaching, bert. PS - remember, if you looked at any images of the artists I mentioned you may well have images of what could be considered child pornography on your hard drive. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2015 7:40:43 GMT -5
One of the "gateway excuses" (like that? just invented it!)
for the legalization of abortion was, "what would you do if
your daughter was raped, and now pregnant with the rapist's
child?"
I can't speak for every country or state's abortion laws.
I wouldn't be surprised if that excuse was actually on many
statute books - along with the medical reasons. I mean, now
we have "medicinal marijuana" as an an analogy.
Yes, child porn on your hard disk becomes an issue of ownership,
not censorship. But we are talking about the true and tried
practice of salami slicing contentious issues until they have
become neutered. This is probably the reason why the Queen of
England never took a stand against divorce as head of the church -
it just crept in so slowly, one tiny slice at a time.
|
|
|
|
Post by matisse on Apr 25, 2015 7:46:32 GMT -5
Dmmichgood, you are old enough to remember when YOU thought homosexual marriage was repulsive. How many can remember a time when the idea of heterosexual sex was repulsive to them? When I first learned about it, I was appalled. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2015 7:59:10 GMT -5
A bit different though - apples and oranges.
Heterosexual sex involves the "yuk factor" to young minds.
Homosexual sex involves a yuk factor and a moral factor.
|
|
|
|
Post by matisse on Apr 25, 2015 8:41:02 GMT -5
A bit different though - apples and oranges. Heterosexual sex involves the "yuk factor" to young minds. Homosexual sex involves a yuk factor and a moral factor. It is all "unnatural" for a young enough kid. When the hormones start flowing, heterosexual sex remains "unnatural" for some. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 25, 2015 8:46:50 GMT -5
"For some" yes. But in a sense ALL sexual acts are
"natural" - some more so than others.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jesse_Lackman on Apr 25, 2015 9:34:34 GMT -5
A bit different though - apples and oranges. Heterosexual sex involves the "yuk factor" to young minds. Homosexual sex involves a yuk factor and a moral factor. Maximum yuk factor with sodomy because it's not biologically or logically correct. |
|
|
|
Post by matisse on Apr 25, 2015 9:55:13 GMT -5
A bit different though - apples and oranges. Heterosexual sex involves the "yuk factor" to young minds. Homosexual sex involves a yuk factor and a moral factor. Maximum yuk factor with sodomy because it's not biologically or logically correct. The rectum and anus are conveniently positioned and sized and make up one of the earliest centers of pleasure in the human body. Sodomy is only "incorrect" if one insists that sex must be about procreation. |
|
|
|
Post by Jesse_Lackman on Apr 25, 2015 10:14:15 GMT -5
Maximum yuk factor with sodomy because it's not biologically or logically correct. The rectum and anus are conveniently positioned and sized and make up one of the earliest centers of pleasure in the human body. Sodomy is only "incorrect" if one insists that sex must be about procreation. Sodomy stinks. End of story. Man has always been capable of extremely gross and irrational behavior - and been able to "defend" it in all kinds of logically short circuited ways. One of the most bizarre defenses of sodomy is "animals do it". Animals are animals, man has logic and reason, and unlike animals has the ability to choose. The only reason gerbils end up in exhaust pipes is because humans choose to put them there. It may bring pleasure to the human, but it's still gross and biologically abnormal, not to mention really cruel to the gerbil. |
|
|
|
Post by matisse on Apr 25, 2015 10:52:35 GMT -5
The rectum and anus are conveniently positioned and sized and make up one of the earliest centers of pleasure in the human body. Sodomy is only "incorrect" if one insists that sex must be about procreation. Sodomy stinks. End of story. Man has always been capable of extremely gross and irrational behavior - and been able to "defend" it in all kinds of logically short circuited ways. One of the most bizarre defenses of sodomy is "animals do it". Animals are animals, man has logic and reason, and unlike animals has the ability to choose. The only reason gerbils end up in exhaust pipes is because humans choose to put them there. It may bring pleasure to the human, but it's still gross and biologically abnormal, not to mention really cruel to the gerbil. It is the end of YOUR story, Jesse. And where did the gerbils come from? What you refer to is animal abuse. I am talking about consenting adult human beings, who, by the way, are full members of the Animal Kingdom. A heterosexual male friend of mine told me about the first time a woman "took him" by surprise with anal penetration. He was astonished at the pleasure it gave him. His take - most men have no idea what they are missing. My understanding is that while this kind of interaction can be pleasurable for women, there are anotomical reasons that tend to make it especially pleasurable for men. If the giver and receiver are in agreement, why not? How is anyone hurt? |
|
|
|
Post by Jesse_Lackman on Apr 25, 2015 11:01:51 GMT -5
Sodomy stinks. End of story. Man has always been capable of extremely gross and irrational behavior - and been able to "defend" it in all kinds of logically short circuited ways. One of the most bizarre defenses of sodomy is "animals do it". Animals are animals, man has logic and reason, and unlike animals has the ability to choose. The only reason gerbils end up in exhaust pipes is because humans choose to put them there. It may bring pleasure to the human, but it's still gross and biologically abnormal, not to mention really cruel to the gerbil. It is the end of YOUR story, Jesse. And where did the gerbils come from? What you refer to is animal abuse. I am talking about consenting adult human beings, who, by the way, are full members of the Animal Kingdom. A heterosexual male friend of mine told me about the first time a woman "took him" by surprise with anal penetration. He was astonished at the pleasure it gave him. His take - most men have no idea what they are missing. My understanding is that while this kind of interaction can be pleasurable for women, there are anotomical reasons that tend to make it especially pleasurable for men. If the giver and receiver are in agreement, why not? How is anyone hurt?  People can choose do what ever they want. They should keep it to themselves though and not whine about the consequences of their choices. It is amazing people will do in the name of "pleasure". |
|
|
|
Post by matisse on Apr 25, 2015 11:07:50 GMT -5
People can do what ever they want. They should keep it to themselves though and not whine about the consequences of their choices. It is amazing what they will do in the name of "pleasure". ...and where did the isopropyl alcohol come from, Jesse? I'm talking basic human anatomy and the giving of pleasure between consenting adults. No drugs or poisons or furry little animals. Of course, there are people who believe that anything other than "The Missionary Position" is perverse....no offense intended if this applies to you, Jesse. You are entitled to limiting your activities and holding your opinions! |
|
|
|
Post by Jesse_Lackman on Apr 25, 2015 11:18:10 GMT -5
Of course, there are people who believe that anything other than "The Missionary Position" is perverse....no offense intended if this applies to you, Jesse. You are entitled to limiting your activities and holding your opinions! I never said anything about perverse, that is your word. Obviously, for many people, the end justifies the means. |
|
? .So Fred if they wish to be guided by examples of the disciples in the 1st century,home owners,many married,why? cant they take that verse in Corinthians and marry,without being expelled by a doctorine? Paul wrote----"Havn't I got the right to follow the example of the other "Apostles" and the "Lords" brothers and "Peter" by taking a Christian wife with me on my travels ?." Then history is revealing.via web,media,gossip,COURTS, more every day why many brother and sister workers have a problem and marriage would not fit into their reason to avoid it in the first place,statistics and revelations of a world wide cancer in celibate ministries is becomming more and more appalling on a daily basis. Ask "us" victims of worker CSA and homo/lesb/hetro/forced= (rapes) & adultries,there is plenty of us in so many countries,especially the ones where they send perpetrators sent to cover up their crimes and sins at home country. You wont get an answer from those who have developed mental issues or suicided because they were defiled by a/or more than one worker. WANT THEM TO MARRY NOW?? NOT LIKELY,TAINTED EVEN IF THEY KNOW OF THEIR FELLOW WORKERS SEXUAL INDESCRETIONS (SINS)AND NOT DICSLOSE THE SINNER. BUT MIND CONTROL HAS THEM HELD IN FEAR OF REPROCUSSIONS IF THEY LAY A CHARGE. 
