Islam and Porn

Originally posted by Alfheim
My bad you're correct. It seems Fatima said would you leave your daughter alone with a neighbour who was addicted to porn? If I am right at would age would you leave her alone with this neighbour.

I would judge that by the same standards as I would judge anyone to take care of my daughter. If he was a good, trustworthy friend then as soon as it is reasonable to get a babysitter, I guess a few months old. If it was just a good neighbour, maybe when she is six...depends how long. it is all not that easy to judge, but his liking for porn would not matter.

Originally posted by Alfheim
Thats not the point! What if they need you to fight?

Need you to fight for what? For them? they don't have that right. There is no cause greater than your own well being that can be forced on you. If you think they need you and their cause is just and worthy of your support, then by all means fight. And so will I. But the government mustn't force it citizens to subscribe to a cause that they do not wish to pursue.

Originally posted by Alfheim
Oh dont give me that crap! My problem is I dont think you would fight for anything except yourself..which you can hardly do anyway.

I would have selfish reasons for every cause I fight for. that is true. But so would anyone else. You think that because I do not want to be forced to fight for something I wouldn't fight at all. That is erroneous. In fact I would even fight for our right to not be forced to figjht for our countries. But it is always for a cause I choose. It's called freedom. Something people seem to forget nowadays.

Originally posted by Alfheim
Dont be an idiot having sex with a woman is not perverse, anyone one who thinks it is, is stupid. Dont give me that subjective crap!

To me it is not perverted. Neither is having sex with a married woman. Neither is having sex with a girl who wants to. Neither is having sex with a man. Or with an animal. Or with more than one woman. Or with your family. Or masturbation. Or watching porn. But that is my reasoning. I am sure you are opposed to some of those, while you find others acceptable. And there are people who are opposed to even more of those some of which you agree with, which makes you a pervert in their eyes. So. Who is to decide what is perverted? You? The people that think imagining sex with women is perverted? Or I.

Originally posted by Alfheim
Well ive read it again. Lets start again.

Okay, how do you suppose we do that?

Originally posted by Alfheim
You see this is the thing. You are accusing me of not understanding you but you are doing the same as well. What if the Govt need you????? For example Nazis are going to invade you're country and start killing people????

I understand you. and I am telling you that the government doesn't have the ability to need you. the government has no rights, it has no will, it has no wish for self preservation. It is the people in power who want to make you think that your government has the right to need you. it doesn't. If you want to protect your government, do so. If you don't, do so. You have the right to choose and you are right either way.

If Nazis are invading my country, I would fight. Not because my government needs me. Not because I am forced. But because I believe that Nazis are wrong. And doing wrong. And because I want to keep my freedom, and I want to protect those I love. Those would be my reasons to fight. But my government does not have the right to force me.

Originally posted by Bardock42
I would judge that by the same standards as I would judge anyone to take care of my daughter. If he was a good, trustworthy friend then as soon as it is reasonable to get a babysitter, I guess a few months old. If it was just a good neighbour, maybe when she is six...depends how long. it is all not that easy to judge, but his liking for porn would not matter.

Need you to fight for what? For them? they don't have that right. There is no cause greater than your own well being that can be forced on you. If you think they need you and their cause is just and worthy of your support, then by all means fight. And so will I. But the government mustn't force it citizens to subscribe to a cause that they do not wish to pursue.

I would have selfish reasons for every cause I fight for. that is true. But so would anyone else. You think that because I do not want to be forced to fight for something I wouldn't fight at all. That is erroneous. In fact I would even fight for our right to not be forced to figjht for our countries. But it is always for a cause I choose. It's called freedom. Something people seem to forget nowadays.

To me it is not perverted. Neither is having sex with a married woman. Neither is having sex with a girl who wants to. Neither is having sex with a man. Or with an animal. Or with more than one woman. Or with your family. Or masturbation. Or watching porn. But that is my reasoning. I am sure you are opposed to some of those, while you find others acceptable. And there are people who are opposed to even more of those some of which you agree with, which makes you a pervert in their eyes. So. Who is to decide what is perverted? You? The people that think imagining sex with women is perverted? Or I.

Okay, how do you suppose we do that?

I understand you. and I am telling you that the government doesn't have the ability to need you. the government has no rights, it has no will, it has no wish for self preservation. It is the people in power who want to make you think that your government has the right to need you. it doesn't. If you want to protect your government, do so. If you don't, do so. You have the right to choose and you are right either way.

If Nazis are invading my country, I would fight. Not because my government needs me. Not because I am forced. But because I believe that Nazis are wrong. And doing wrong. And because I want to keep my freedom, and I want to protect those I love. Those would be my reasons to fight. But my government does not have the right to force me.

Fine we have nothing to argue about then. You seem broad-minded and I would not agree with everything you said, but I take back what I said about you before.

Originally posted by Alfheim
Fine we have nothing to argue about then. You seem broad-minded and I would not agree with everything you said, but I take back what I said about you before.

Okay. Thank you.

You and Alesiter Crowley would have got on. 😛
Anyway I might debate with you on some points later.

Originally posted by Alfheim
You and Alesiter Crowley would have got on. 😛
Anyway I might debate with you on some points later.

In some cases maybe. I personally hardly derive pleasure from torturing cats though.

Originally posted by Alfheim
Oh I seeeee. Trying to move away from the point are we? It doesnt matter if Germans are not intending to invade I have asked him more than once would he fight in that situation.

P.S. Have you ever made any mistakes before xmarksthespot? Whats that..yes? Why didn't you reply...whats that...because you dont want to admit it...ok fair enough.

Bardock is German, and correlatively is from Germany.
You asked him whether he would fight if Nazi's invaded his country i.e. Germany.
To which I gibed that it's unlikely Nazi's would invade Germany.
You misunderstand my statement to mean that it's unlikely Nazi Germany is invading other countries, and respond that it doesn't matter that there are no Nazi's invading, completely missing the point.

Gold star worthy.

Originally posted by Bardock42
In some cases maybe. I personally hardly derive pleasure from torturing cats though.

Did he torture cats as well? Well I was refeing to his philsophy on following you're path and he was hedonistic as well, so I thought you would be into him.

Originally posted by Alfheim
Did he torture cats as well? Well I was refeing to his philsophy on following you're path and he was hedonistic as well, so I thought you would be into him.

I jsut heard a few accounts of him. One being that he tortured a cat. His interest into the Occult does not particularly appeal to me. But I am not a hedonistic as such, I more believe that the world is a hedonistic place. People do their deeds out of selfishness.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
Any prior perception of mistake on my part, has been attributed to your poor comprehension skills. To once again exemplify your impeccable reading comprehension skills:

Bardock is German, and correlatively is from Germany.
You asked him whether he would fight if Nazi's invaded his country i.e. Germany.
To which I gibed that it's unlikely Nazi's would invade Germany.
You misunderstand my statement to mean that it's unlikely Nazi Germany is invading other countries, and respond that it doesn't matter that there are no Nazi's invading, completely missing the point.

Gold star worthy.

You know what. What is you're point? I was creating a scenario. It didn't have to be Nazis just anybody attacking his country. I truly dont even understand what you're point is.

Originally posted by Bardock42
I more believe that the world is a hedonistic place. People do their deeds out of selfishness.

Can't disagree with that.

The philosophy of seeking the most pleasure one can and the least pain out of life is only selfish to the moral absolutist.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
The philosophy of seeking the most pleasure one can and the least pain out of life is only selfish to the moral absolutist.

Originally posted by Alfheim
"Ever heard of context strawman?" If you bothered to read my posts properly I was talking hypothetically. I know he is from Germany and I asked him what if he was in a WW type situation would he fight. Obvoulsy you lack comprehension skills as well. See you're doing it again critising me and doing the samething.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Not really. It is selfish by definition. Selfish is only bad to the moral absolutists though.

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
Your response to me implicates you failed to see my point which was essentially nothing more than a gibe about the flawed question, and really had nothing to do with your point.

Thats not my fault. It was a stupid response. Im trying to have a serious conversation and I took what you said serioulsy, nothing wrong with that. Next time I will take that into account.

Originally posted by Bardock42
By this you are assuming that the alcohol and tobacco are not wrong. I also would not have a problem to allow 12 year olds to drink and smoke.

I am not assuming, I am stating that alcohol and tobacco are not wrong. They are to be consumed if people decide to do so.

However, same with sex, carelessness leads to problems - if a person is 12 he/she is not mentaly developed enough to make decisions which can influence the rest of their lives.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
I am not assuming, I am stating that alcohol and tobacco are not wrong. They are to be consumed if people decide to do so.

However, same with sex, carelessness leads to problems - if a person is 12 he/she is not mentaly developed enough to make decisions which can influence the rest of their lives.

And I believe they are.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Not really. It is selfish by definition. Selfish is only bad to the moral absolutists though.

Errr... no... again, this horrible fuzzy confusion about how relative and absolute is that I see a lot around here.

Plenty of people will personally think being selfish is wrong, but not believe in moral absolutes. They would simply accept that other people DIDN'T think it was wrong.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
Errr... no... again, this horrible fuzzy confusion about how relative and absolute is that I see a lot around here.

Plenty of people will personally think being selfish is wrong, but not believe in moral absolutes. They would simply accept that other people DIDN'T think it was wrong.

Yes. You are right. I should have elaborated on it.

Originally posted by Bardock42
And I believe they are.

Which is ok.

The laws however do not, and if you have sex with a 12 year old you will go to jail and get on a sex offender list.

Paedophiles also believe that the love between them and a child is a consensual, but the law disagrees.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Which is ok.

The laws however do not, and if you have sex with a 12 year old you will go to jail.

Paedophiles also believe that the love between them and a child is a consensual, but the law disagrees.

Yes. Which is why I would not claim that it is lawful for a 12 year old to have sex with an "adult".

I am just saying I think it should be.