To train up a child
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 2 Votes - 3 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
27-11-2013, 03:11 PM
RE: To train up a child
(27-11-2013 02:31 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  
(27-11-2013 02:18 PM)LostandInsecure Wrote:  Wtf are you comparing child abuse to consensual sexual fetish between adults?

We can argue about porn, but violent porn that debases people is an outrage and de Sade reveled in it and published and created it. Abuse can be:

*physical
*mental
*verbal
*sexual
*etc.

and the comparison is valid.

You do know de Sade was born in the 1700's, right? Have you actually read his work?

I figured as much....
Shoo fly!


God is a concept by which we measure our pain -- John Lennon

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-11-2013, 03:12 PM
RE: To train up a child
(27-11-2013 03:11 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  
(27-11-2013 02:31 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  We can argue about porn, but violent porn that debases people is an outrage and de Sade reveled in it and published and created it. Abuse can be:

*physical
*mental
*verbal
*sexual
*etc.

and the comparison is valid.

You do know de Sade was born in the 1700's, right? Have you actually read his work?

I figured as much....
Shoo fly!

Is this the same dude? http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/notor...dex_1.html

Bury me with my guns on, so when I reach the other side - I can show him what it feels like to die.
Bury me with my guns on, so when I'm cast out of the sky, I can shoot the devil right between the eyes.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-11-2013, 03:17 PM
RE: To train up a child
(27-11-2013 02:46 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  Well, on what basis does your "faith" say YOU can atone for your sins. Substitutionary atonement is found in Judaism and Christianity. Everyone else has people working to atone for their own sins.
If sin means doing the wrong thing. The amoralists (moral nihilists) are incapable of sin because they don't accept anything as being wrong.

(27-11-2013 02:46 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  Jesus had no sin and so was qualified to be a sinless lamb/sin offering.
Was Jesus an amoralist? Good for him.
(27-11-2013 02:46 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  And what are your motivations? The Bible says in Romans "Rarely someone will dare to die, even for a good person. Jesus shows His love for us in that He died for us while were yet His enemies."
I guess this means that we can assert that "someone dies for us" even if they are put to death for a crime against their will. Certainly Jesus didn't comitt suicide did he?
So if I pick an amoral person who has been put to death for a crime then I can claim that he/she died for me. It doesn't seem to be important that this person has never met or known me or be alive during my lifetime. Maybe Charles Manson, or Mao Si Tung, they died for me so that I can enjoy sin.
Although, I must say, as an amoralist myself, I am incapable of sin, so I don't need to make a claim that someone else died for my sins.
Oooh this theology thing is so cool, how it can be twisted and spun.
I now need to work out how to make money off it. Maybe publish a book on how to bring up children without spanking them.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-11-2013, 03:25 PM
RE: To train up a child
(27-11-2013 02:50 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(27-11-2013 02:40 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  When you answer like this with tiny ad hom snippets meant to degrade another man, Chas, you wonder why I Godwin you?

You accuse me of promoting a book of abuse. Some of the most vile and disgusting comments I've ever heard people say to another are all across the "thinking" forum. Have you ever told someone to reign it in at all who wasn't a theist? In any measure?

And when you did, did you employ a double standard?

It is a book that advocates abuse of children. You support it.

I have committed no ad hominem fallacy, I am simply calling you out as an advocate of an abuse manual.

Yes, I have disagreed with non-theists and told them to rein it in; there is no double standard.
It is just that the theists tend to have poor critical thinking skills and disgusting views on ethics and morality.

My views do not tolerate violence pornography. Yours do. Again, a double standard.

PS. You wrote "theists" not "fundamentalists". You've just written that 95% of the world has poor critical thinking skills and disgusting views on ethics. I hope you mistyped, Chas, and want to retract your statement.

If not, it's no wonder that Christians agree with the Bible's statements regarding the pride of atheists. You just looked down your nose at most people who've ever lived!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-11-2013, 03:27 PM
RE: To train up a child
(27-11-2013 02:53 PM)LostandInsecure Wrote:  
(27-11-2013 02:44 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  Violent pornography is inappropriate for even consenting adults. Perhaps you are unread regarding the correlation between violent and bondage pornography and violent crime and sex crime up to murder and serial rape and killing.

Again, the atheist's issue is that sin is for consenting adults only. No, it's sin. Perhaps you might masturbate to torture pornography like de Sade's. Perhaps it makes you vomit instead, like it does other thinking adults. Which are you supporting here?

And at what point do libertarian and libertine freedoms violate the moral conscience of an atheist?

I much prefer erotic books to porn and I have a limit of how much violence I can handle, but I don't judge people who like it (It's funny I have this itch in the back of my brain telling me you're the one who shouldn't be judging people). Every real study I have read says the correlation is either inconsistent or non-existent. The only places I've seen that say there is for certain a real correlation are websites that also endorse nonsensical books such as the bible or the quran.

I don't judge people, either, who are addicted to viewing bondage and violence porn. But I judge the content of what they're watching as wholly inappropriate and demeaning to all participants. In a society that tolerates bondage pornography, it's no wonder that our culture is disintegrating.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-11-2013, 03:32 PM
RE: To train up a child
(27-11-2013 02:59 PM)Anjele Wrote:  
(27-11-2013 02:49 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  Anjele, I've preached publicly for over 20 years. Mainly on college and university campuses. Each person who self-identified as a born again Christian presented themselves with class, tact, and self-respect--enough to show respect to others. The atheists all had cures words and invective and ad homs and etc.

We're far afield from the original thread topic, but I can certainly say if you watch some preaching on campus you'll learn things, even if it's how not to talk to people whether from a bitter atheist or a loony preacher-type.

Back to the 'all' issue again.

And are you so divinely inspired that you know for fact that those who self-identify are actually born again? You don't think that during your many, many years of preaching that not one lied to you? There was never a case of being swept up in the emotion or following the crowd. Because someone said the words you wanted to hear does that prove beyond all doubt that their words are true?

English 101 - don't use all or none. Stop into a class while on one those many campuses and refresh your memory on using absolutes where they don't belong.

No, no atheists have ever posed as born again Christians, and then been respectful and polite to me to fool me. Nor have Christians posed as atheists to come harangue and curse me and those preaching with me. There are plenty of real Christians and real atheists at each university to go around without fakers.

All. What you're missing here is that there are plenty of more polite atheists and Christians who listen silently to preaching or talk quietly nearby and watch. But the atheists who open their mouths to ask questions either start like animals or quickly denigrate there. The politest of them tend to leave with a simple, "Don't listen to this #$%^&*(." You see, they are parading their freedom--to sin.

All. If I've left preaching once, I've left it a hundred times realizing that the freedom from bitterness, guilt and etc. is an atheist myth and a Christian reality--and my kids could recognize that at a tender age.

PROVE THE BIBLE WRONG and continue to be respectful on this thread--like you've been in these recent posts.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-11-2013, 03:35 PM
RE: To train up a child
(27-11-2013 03:02 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(27-11-2013 02:44 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  Violent pornography is inappropriate for even consenting adults. Perhaps you are unread regarding the correlation between violent and bondage pornography and violent crime and sex crime up to murder and serial rape and killing.

Again, the atheist's issue is that sin is for consenting adults only. No, it's sin. Perhaps you might masturbate to torture pornography like de Sade's. Perhaps it makes you vomit instead, like it does other thinking adults. Which are you supporting here?

And at what point do libertarian and libertine freedoms violate the moral conscience of an atheist?

Correlation is not causation, so you fail there. Your lack of critical thinking skills becomes more apparent with every post.

We are not talking about 'sin' or pornography, but consent.

You advocate the use of violence to bend children to your will, to train them as you would beasts.

[Image: 887069_10152005028290155_1029341683_o.jpg]

Correlation is most certainly not causation. Very good.

But we don't give drunks drinks unless they turn over the keys because of the correlation. We don't give heroin addicts heroin, either, and we should limit the amount of sick violent rape and torture porn psychos are "free" to watch--we can do so without destroying individual freedoms by having some ethics in our publishing standards--that's one way.

You use spanking to train children as beasts may not and need not be trained, because a child's will is 100 times stronger than an animal's. Man is not a mere animal as I've written to you before but a sinful one.

No, Chas, before you ejaculate your response to me, not FULLY sinful. A child can do wonderful things--and sinful things a mere animal cannot conceive of to do... like masturbating to bondage porn.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-11-2013, 03:37 PM
RE: To train up a child
(27-11-2013 03:25 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  
(27-11-2013 02:50 PM)Chas Wrote:  It is a book that advocates abuse of children. You support it.

I have committed no ad hominem fallacy, I am simply calling you out as an advocate of an abuse manual.

Yes, I have disagreed with non-theists and told them to rein it in; there is no double standard.
It is just that the theists tend to have poor critical thinking skills and disgusting views on ethics and morality.

My views do not tolerate violence pornography. Yours do. Again, a double standard.

PS. You wrote "theists" not "fundamentalists". You've just written that 95% of the world has poor critical thinking skills and disgusting views on ethics. I hope you mistyped, Chas, and want to retract your statement.

If not, it's no wonder that Christians agree with the Bible's statements regarding the pride of atheists. You just looked down your nose at most people who've ever lived!

The world is not 95% theist. And every theist is delusional.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-11-2013, 03:38 PM
RE: To train up a child
(27-11-2013 03:11 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  
(27-11-2013 02:31 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  We can argue about porn, but violent porn that debases people is an outrage and de Sade reveled in it and published and created it. Abuse can be:

*physical
*mental
*verbal
*sexual
*etc.

and the comparison is valid.

You do know de Sade was born in the 1700's, right? Have you actually read his work?

I figured as much....
Shoo fly!

I've read a little de Sade, and a little about those of his ilk like the mass murderer Gilles de Rais. I do know that we'd find his particular brand of bondage porn tame compared with today's.

But I will note the irony that Chas is condemning me for promoting an abuse manual--without ever posting once that what he's attempting to condemn is what he would call sadism--the harming of others to promote one's pleasure.

You, too, are condemning spanking--my kind of spanking--as sadism while you have a de Sade quote on your signature? Or is it only okay for adult sadists to torture other adults for pleasure?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
27-11-2013, 03:40 PM
RE: To train up a child
(27-11-2013 03:38 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  
(27-11-2013 03:11 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  You do know de Sade was born in the 1700's, right? Have you actually read his work?

I figured as much....
Shoo fly!

I've read a little de Sade, and a little about those of his ilk like the mass murderer Gilles de Rais. I do know that we'd find his particular brand of bondage porn tame compared with today's.

But I will note the irony that Chas is condemning me for promoting an abuse manual--without ever posting once that what he's attempting to condemn is what he would call sadism--the harming of others to promote one's pleasure.

You, too, are condemning spanking--my kind of spanking--as sadism while you have a de Sade quote on your signature? Or is it only okay for adult sadists to torture other adults for pleasure?

Look here, asshole - we are not discussing sadism or pornography here. You are doing your usual dishonest, cowardly deflection routine.

Cut the crap.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: