Gotcha

Originally posted by @secondson
Of course! It's called the grace of God. No one is beyond the reach of God's grace and mercy if they have a genuine heart repentance.

What kind of moral compass can a human being possibly derive from supposed "justice" of this kind?

Originally posted by @fmf
You are here to speak in public about your current beliefs, same as me. Feel free to comment on mine, just as I will feel free to comment on anything ghastly or demented or incoherent you choose to say - in public - about the supposed fate of human beings who don't happen to have the same religious beliefs as you. If your "interest" is broadcasting your profoun ...[text shortened]... aid that I will not always be able to cooperate with that. This is a public space, after all. 😉

Based upon your current beliefs millions of child abusers who are never caught get away with it scot free so I don’t think you can really comment from a position of moral superiority.

It would be interesting to see whether FMF is able to get off his high horse and admit that the sexual abuse of children is always wrong in all circumstances for everyone and should therefore be considered a moral absolute. We all know that is in fact what he believes but for obvious reasons he won't admit that because moral absolutes are not compatible with his current atheism. If he were to say there are no moral absolutes he would have to admit that there are circumstances whereby it is morally acceptable for children to be sexually abused. That is why he always deflects when I bring this up and claims that he has already explained his moral sensibilities in the past and does not feel like repeating himself.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
It would be interesting to see whether FMF is able to get off his high horse and admit that the sexual abuse of children is always wrong in all circumstances for everyone and should therefore be considered a moral absolute. We all know that is in fact what he believes but for obvious reasons he won't admit that because moral absolutes are not compatible w ...[text shortened]... already explained his moral sensibilities in the past and does not feel like repeating himself.

Or it could be that you are just one sick puppy.

Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-duke
Or it could be that you are just one sick puppy.

Yeah, I'm the sick puppy for believing in moral absolutes and you're the cool dude for believing that all morals are relative.

I bet you cannot get yourself to admit that the sexual abuse of children is always wrong in all circumstances because your atheism doesn't allow you to even if that is what you may believe.

You my dear Sir are in the fact the ailing paltry pooch in this case.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
Yeah, I'm the sick puppy for believing in moral absolutes and you're the cool dude for believing that all morals are relative.

You're a sick puppy due to all your scenarios of moral absolutes involving the mistreatment of children.

There are some moral principles that are almost universally adopted. (Murder being wrong a good example). Entirely different civilizations with no shared history will usually come to the same moral outlook. - One could even be tempted to speak in moral absolutes, until of course, one encounters the tribe of cannibals or headhunters.

Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-duke
You're a sick puppy due to all your scenarios of moral absolutes involving the mistreatment of children.

There are some moral principles that are almost universally adopted. (Murder being wrong a good example). Entirely different civilizations with no shared history will usually come to the same moral outlook. - One could even be tempted to speak in moral absolutes, until of course, one encounters the tribe of cannibals or headhunters.

If I asked you whether there were any scenario wherein the sexual abuse of children was morally acceptable you would have to say yes unless of course you believed in moral absolutes (which you don't. The fact that you have to say yes proves that you are the sick puppy.

Originally posted by @dj2becker
If I asked you whether there were any scenario wherein the sexual abuse of children was morally acceptable you would have to say yes unless of course you believed in moral absolutes (which you don't. The fact that you have to say yes proves that you are the sick puppy.

I would say, 'stop using child mistreatment as a blunt tool to justify your warped sense of morality.'

Originally posted by @dj2becker
...the sexual abuse of children is always wrong in all circumstances for everyone and should therefore be considered a moral absolute. ...

Did you get that from the bible? Or are you waking up?

Of course you are wrong, there are no moral absolutes. What if you have to rape a kid or everything else dies and suffers horribly. Could you be more selfish.

Originally posted by @fmf
...
If he's going to air an ideology like this in public, he's got to expect some dissent.

That's fair. Have fun.

What outcome did you expect or hope for? Planting seeds is easy, nurturing the plot and being patient is harder.

Originally posted by @kellyjay
I don’t think you were ever a Christian if your understanding of the gospel leads you to think this. Whatever you were had to be very ungodly and ugly to make that leap with the background you had.

What I am putting to you is about your beliefs. I am making no "leap". A child rapist who believes in Jesus and repents is "saved" according to your understanding of the gospel. It's your belief not mine. The stuff about me supposedly being a liar is just clumsy deflection.

Originally posted by @apathist
Did you get that from the bible? Or are you waking up?

Of course you are wrong, there are no moral absolutes. What if you have to rape a kid or everything else dies and suffers horribly. Could you be more selfish.

If someone were to believe raping a child would save the world, they would be morally justified in doing so? You really are a sick puppy.

Originally posted by @apathist
Did you get that from the bible? Or are you waking up?

Of course you are wrong, there are no moral absolutes. What if you have to rape a kid or everything else dies and suffers horribly. Could you be more selfish.

You are claiming that in certain circumstances it is morally acceptable to rape a child!

I’ve seen your deleted threads in the GF on animal sex and other pretty fringe stuff. You seem pretty mixed up to me.

Originally posted by @divegeester
You are claiming that in certain circumstances it is morally acceptable to rape a child!

I’ve seen your deleted threads in the GF on animal sex and other pretty fringe stuff. You seem pretty mixed up to me.

Says the guy who has been hounding me for believing in moral absolutes.

Ghost, so if someone told you they would kill everyone alive if you don't rape a child, you would do it? I don't think you've thought this through Ghost...

It's amusing to see what hoops you would jump through to try to justify your belief that moral absolutes don't exist simply because your atheism demands it.

How is this one for you Ghost: is there ever a circumstance that would justify killing every living thing alive? Since you don't believe in moral absolutes you would have to say yes. I would love to see you justify this one.