I've seen that video posted on youtube for a long time now.
Do you consider acting on homosexual impulses evil? What makes acting on child porn desires more evil than acting on homosexual desires? Just curious how you choose to set your standards.
AND
Does anybody think that a child porn/sex movement will ever increase people's rights to child porn? I realize that in many ways it is different than homosexual marriages and relationships becoming a generally accepted practice, but at the same time there are some similarities. Totally off topic, but I thought it might be better than pitying this poor guy.
I don't pity him. I'm more of the "castrate the guy and throw him in jail" type. I'm more interested in the temple recommend question being answered.
Kiddie porn is evil because it violates the social mores society builds around protecting our children from harm. Forcing children into sexual situations before they grow into them naturally violates their innocence. Society is duty-bound to protect their innocence. As long as children as viewed as valuable simply because they are children, the kiddie porn "movement" (which kinda reminds of a bowel movement) will never gain any acceptance. If we ever reach a point when children are not valued for their intrinsic innocence, then your scenario becomes a possibility. Now, it's not gonna happen.
Homosexuality is a different topic entirely from kiddie porn, and has no relationship to it.
I've seen that video posted on youtube for a long time now.
Do you consider acting on homosexual impulses evil? What makes acting on child porn desires more evil than acting on homosexual desires? Just curious how you choose to set your standards.
AND
Does anybody think that a child porn/sex movement will ever increase people's rights to child porn? I realize that in many ways it is different than homosexual marriages and relationships becoming a generally accepted practice, but at the same time there are some similarities. Totally off topic, but I thought it might be better than pitying this poor guy.
I don't pity him. I'm more of the "castrate the guy and throw him in jail" type. I'm more interested in the temple recommend question being answered.
Kiddie porn is evil because it violates the social mores society builds around protecting our children from harm. Forcing children into sexual situations before they grow into them naturally violates their innocence. Society is duty-bound to protect their innocence. As long as children as viewed as valuable simply because they are children, the kiddie porn "movement" (which kinda reminds of a bowel movement) will never gain any acceptance. If we ever reach a point when children are not valued for their intrinsic innocence, then your scenario becomes a possibility. Now, it's not gonna happen.
Homosexuality is a different topic entirely from kiddie porn, and has no relationship to it.
I'm going to add a big AMEN to this, Harmony! Particularly the part about castrating the guy.
Sorry...I have ZERO tolerance when it comes to abuse of children, and that's what kiddie porn is...no two ways about it.
I too hope that kiddie porn never becomes socially acceptable. I hope in your lifetimes it won't be. For me, I've got a long time to live if all goes well. After seeing how the public mindset has swayed so quickly to accept homosexuality (and this is not inferring anything about the badness or goodness of homosexual activity), I get a sense that if some rights movement were to build momentum, then the public mindset could easily accept what it could not before. Whether it be violence passing as art, child pornography (some kids hit puberty at 9, naturally, so should that not be considered child pornography?) passing as a means of sexual expression or any other type of inborn desire that people want to manifest.
Twas a passing thought, or sense, that didn't warrant discussion on another thread. Thanks for responding.
harmony wrote:I want to go back to the question about requirements to be in the Choir.
Is a valid current temple recommend required in order to sing in the Choir?
Yes. It also appears to be a type of "calling." The Des News account of this guy states that he has been "released" from the MoTab.
"Moving beyond apologist persuasion, LDS polemicists furiously (and often fraudulently) attack any non-traditional view of Mormonism. They don't mince words -- they mince the truth."
-- Mike Quinn, writing of the FARMSboys, in "Early Mormonism and the Magic World View," p. x (Rev. ed. 1998)
harmony wrote:I want to go back to the question about requirements to be in the Choir.
Is a valid current temple recommend required in order to sing in the Choir?
This is from the official website regarding choir auditions:
The application itself asks about your church and family background, occupation, educational background, and musical experience. Application requirements are as follows:
1. Membership in the Church.
2. Age between 25 and 55. [Mandatory retirement from the Choir is at age 60 or 20 years of service - whichever comes first. A minimum period of 5 years service is requested].
3. Good health.
4. Body size that can be accommodated by the Choir's wardrobe (exceptionally small or large sizes are limited).
5. Ability to receive a bishop's recommendation indicating temple worthiness (although a temple recommend is not required).
harmony wrote:I want to go back to the question about requirements to be in the Choir.
Is a valid current temple recommend required in order to sing in the Choir?
This is from the official website regarding choir auditions:
The application itself asks about your church and family background, occupation, educational background, and musical experience. Application requirements are as follows:
1. Membership in the Church.
2. Age between 25 and 55. [Mandatory retirement from the Choir is at age 60 or 20 years of service - whichever comes first. A minimum period of 5 years service is requested].
3. Good health.
4. Body size that can be accommodated by the Choir's wardrobe (exceptionally small or large sizes are limited).
5. Ability to receive a bishop's recommendation indicating temple worthiness (although a temple recommend is not required).
harmony wrote: Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men?
Choir members have to have a current temple recommend, right?
Only the Shadow knows !
Well, this being so public. I will bet that he will be EX'd by the church.
Anyone know what church offices/jobs he has held?
Was this a Church sponsorred camping trip? Where he photographed the boys nude.
If he is a pedephil, it seems unusual to me that there would be only a few pictures on his computer. Don't you think that's odd? I wonder, what's the rest of the story?
I've seen that video posted on youtube for a long time now.
Do you consider acting on homosexual impulses evil? What makes acting on child porn desires more evil than acting on homosexual desires? Just curious how you choose to set your standards.
AND
Does anybody think that a child porn/sex movement will ever increase people's rights to child porn? I realize that in many ways it is different than homosexual marriages and relationships becoming a generally accepted practice, but at the same time there are some similarities. Totally off topic, but I thought it might be better than pitying this poor guy.
I don't pity him. I'm more of the "castrate the guy and throw him in jail" type. I'm more interested in the temple recommend question being answered.
Kiddie porn is evil because it violates the social mores society builds around protecting our children from harm. Forcing children into sexual situations before they grow into them naturally violates their innocence. Society is duty-bound to protect their innocence. As long as children as viewed as valuable simply because they are children, the kiddie porn "movement" (which kinda reminds of a bowel movement) will never gain any acceptance. If we ever reach a point when children are not valued for their intrinsic innocence, then your scenario becomes a possibility. Now, it's not gonna happen.
Homosexuality is a different topic entirely from kiddie porn, and has no relationship to it.
Of course, it God commands it, it's perfectly ok to kill small children, especially if you covet the land their parents happen to occupy.
God . . . "who mouths morals to other people and has none himself; who frowns upon crimes, yet commits them all; who created man without invitation, . . . and finally, with altogether divine obtuseness, invites this poor, abused slave to worship him ..."