Pedophilia; I can't accept it.

[Minimalist]

Just because some men in the scriptures had children at very old ages doesn't mean it was common place.

Just because it is written in some stupid fucking book doesn't mean it happened at all.

[Arellius]

They took advantage of me and I didn't even realise it till they were long gone.

I think this is what happened allot in those times too. ''God gave me a message, he told me to bed you so you will be safe.'' Manipulative bullshit. I'm going to keep digging and researching on this subject until I have facts that theists can't deny. This statement would be so weird; ''Oh, sure there was pedophilia, but that's all in the past and those were different times.''

Then make it a fucking commandment; *Thou shalt not sexually abuse minors. If so, burn in Hell.* Change the scriptures to make it clear that sex with children under the age of 16 is revolting. There is nothing divine about it.

Here in The Netherlands, you can have sex when you are 16. I am not sure if we have a law on statutory rape but it would be frowned upon if a mid-20 year old [guy] would have sex with a 16 year old [girl]. In my opinion 16 is still quite young, I think it should be 18.

Thank you for being open.

[That guy who asked questions]

This was a very good point, your post in general too. Thanks, that does make sense, however another complex question popped into my head.

Why would God then provide us [Western Civilization] with the immorality and revulsion against pedophilia, but not some other parts in the world where they don't have access to the knowledge we have ?

That is very, very strange to me. God created man, but he would not create them equal. These are the kind of things that almost make me a certified anti-theist.


This in no way describes what you've read in scripture or was told about in scripture.

You're welcome, I try to give the best I can. In regard to your second question, I would say it's because he probably doesn't have a major problem with grown men having sex with a minor. I mean come on, you're talking about a being that said a rapist has to marry the woman he raped because she was defiled by him. Here we have a dilemma that I call the "unjustified justification principle" this is when we encounter the moral issues where we humans find the actions of "god" to be immoral, but we attempt to justify it by the conceived character of god (All-loving and perfectly just). A being's immorality is not justified by his conceived character no more than I would be justified as a good husband if I beat my wife just because I was perceived as a "good husband."

In regard to GC's post. Have you even read The Bible? I mean come on, god never endorsing violence?? Please, that's garbage that anyone could spot. All throughout Kings and Judges and Numbers and Deuteronomy and Leviticus are acts of violence endorsed by God!! Almost every punishment in Leviticus is death! In 1 Samuel God commanded Saul to kill everything in Canaan, even women and children and infants! If anything, the only thing God truly endorses consistently is death and violence.

[Praetorian]

As revolting as pedophilia is, it's all the more so when the abuser is a priest, or some other community trusted authority figure.

There are so many cases of priests and altar boys that it's become a joke, for crying out loud!

Also, is this the right section for this thread?

[Justtristo]

They took advantage of me and I didn't even realise it till they were long gone.

I think this is what happened allot in those times too. ''God gave me a message, he told me to bed you so you will be safe.'' Manipulative bullshit. I'm going to keep digging and researching on this subject until I have facts that theists can't deny. This statement would be so weird; ''Oh, sure there was pedophilia, but that's all in the past and those were different times.''

Then make it a fucking commandment; *Thou shalt not sexually abuse minors. If so, burn in Hell.* Change the scriptures to make it clear that sex with children under the age of 16 is revolting. There is nothing divine about it.

Here in The Netherlands, you can have sex when you are 16. I am not sure if we have a law on statutory rape but it would be frowned upon if a mid-20 year old [guy] would have sex with a 16 year old [girl]. In my opinion 16 is still quite young, I think it should be 18.

Thank you for being open.

Well if you lived just a couple of generations ago, if you had sex with say a fourteen year old girl, very few would have frowned upon it.

It has only been a century or so since most Western nations raised the age of consent to between 14 and 18 years. Before that it was around 10 to 14 (in some places even lower). Although children could have be married off earlier than that, although the consummation of that marriage would have occurred until the onsent of puberty (around age 15-16 on average) usually.

Throughout a lot of human history, many societies especially patriarchal ones (like the one which the writers of the bible lived in) thought it was perfectible acceptable for much older men to marry and/or sexual relations with pubescent or even prepubescent children.

[Violet]

I'm starting to think that people who make these threads are cooking them up for my entertainment

---

You know, I had sex very young. That was the norm where I grew up. As an adult, I know I was ready for that, the boys were mostly around my age and it was all fun and that. However, there were also times when I had sex with older men. At the time I liked that, it made me feel special. But now, I feel physically sick at the thought of those older men. They took advantage of me and I didn't even realise it till they were long gone. I sometimes consider reporting them to the Police, but what evidence do I have now? It would be a complete waste of my time.

Weird, I don't feel physically sick at the thought of men, and some would argue I've good reason to. Curious thing, though... is that I've no male friends that aren't from this forum or who I've otherwise met online. I've been interested in why that is for a good amount of time, maybe I'll figure it out someday

I sometimes consider shooting some people in the face, but I'm not a very vengeful person these days. I've no reason to ruin another's life unless I've reasonable expectation of further interference with mine. Or maybe I'm just a ginormous pansy, that's also a possibility.

---

As revolting as pedophilia is, it's all the more so when the abuser is a priest, or some other community trusted authority figure.

Most of them are trusted authority figures. Trust, haha.

There are so many cases of priests and altar boys that it's become a joke, for crying out loud!

Also, is this the right section for this thread?

Maybe the sexual repression of the priests involved has something to do with it. Are there so many cases of black men capping yo ass that it's become a joke?

[Gilgamesh]

At the time I liked that, it made me feel special. But now, I feel physically sick at the thought of those older men. They took advantage of me and I didn't even realise it till they were long gone.

So you liked it at the time but if given the chance, would now ruin their lives? Why? Because you get all emotional at the thought of what you did - not because it was necessarily bad (you liked it), but rather because it's not seen as something socially acceptable. lel.

The definition of advantage is to 'gain', really. You gained pleasure from the experience, too. You took advantage of those older men. Fucking sicko!

[NoraBrimstone]

Funny how I have no problem with the guys who were around my own age.
You see, now I'm much older and wiser, I can look back and see how fucking creepy those men were. The way they behaved, the things they would say... it actually makes me feel sick.

[Arellius]

First I thought the pedophilia from Catholicism was because it did not say in scriptures that you couldn't defile little boys. Is that true ? If so, their ignorance is despising and sickening. If not, I think sexual oppression would be the numero uno reason. But then I read that Aisha from the Quran was between the ages of 6 and 9, then I looked up the ages of Joseph and Maria and realized Jesus must of been very confused.

Let's say Maria was 13 or 14 when she had Jesus, then he went from age 12 to 30 at some point overnight, responsibility issues and what not. So Jesus' mother would be around 25 or 26 whilst, her son...being 30 ? Rrrrrrrright...And nobody, in that time who is intelligent enough, questions this. I'm open to suggestions and will openly admit I don't know the Bible, OT or NT, all that well [yet]. Either way, I know enough to know that too many fallacies play a huge role in the book.

[littleendian]

Let's say Maria was 13 or 14 when she had Jesus, then he went from age 12 to 30 at some point overnight, responsibility issues and what not. So Jesus' mother would be around 25 or 26 whilst, her son...being 30 ? Rrrrrrrright...

IT'S A MIRACLE!!! PRAISE JEBUS!

---

At the time I liked that, it made me feel special. But now, I feel physically sick at the thought of those older men. They took advantage of me and I didn't even realise it till they were long gone.

So you liked it at the time but if given the chance, would now ruin their lives? Why? Because you get all emotional at the thought of what you did - not because it was necessarily bad (you liked it), but rather because it's not seen as something socially acceptable. lel.

The issue is that a child cannot be expected to understand the full consequences of his/her actions, including all the potential emotional baggage associated with having interecourse with older people at a young age. While it might be fun at the time, it can cause serious emotional trouble later on, a fact that the child can not be expected to understand, the older men however can be expected to understand this, and that is exactly why it must be illegal, and for very damn good reasons.