/christ/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

I suspect that most churches would consider it similar to the situation to being gay; a gay person who is Christian and is committed to celibacy would be accepted, and the analogous situation would be true here. Contrary to popular opinion, gay Christians who commit themselves to shunning sin are actually (or should be) very welcomed in the Church, as in this fellow: http://www.strangenotions.com/catholic-gay/

but people's prejudices and arguably well-founded fears would make them suspicious, because they fear for their children's safety, and might think that even people who profess to be committed to avoiding lusty desires and sin, are just lying, saying that so that they will be trusted and able to get close to children. Or that even if they sincerely believe it, that they will fall to their desires, because that's their nature. That's the fear I think some people have. So maybe there are Christian paedophiles who believe absolutely in the Church's teachings on sexual sin, but don't tell anyone so they don't freak them out.

>believe that child molestation is worse than murder, why do they continue to hold on to these falsehoods, I have never seen more anger than antis in a pedo thread.

I'm not sure, but there has been a lot of hysteria about it in the press where I live, so I think it's partly fueled by the media.

>>4546

Also, I should add, I have this prejudice too. I don't know how I would react to someone admitting to me that they were a paedophile. I suppose it's also partly because a gay can act on his desires with both parties being co-complicit in sin, while the child is always the used party, always abused, so there's a feeling you don't even want to risk it.

>>4544

> I have never seen more anger than antis in a pedo thread.

Pedophilia is one of the few truly degenerate things that society still allows us to hate without any repercussion, so any of the righteous indignation that might otherwise be healthily channeled towards homosexuality, excessive drinking, promiscuity, miscegenation or anime watching is turned exclusively to pedos.

That said, yeah they would be treated pretty much the same as homosexuals. They have a perversion within them that they must choose to wrestle into submission so they can come unto God like any of us would in that situation

I don't think they should *never* be allowed to be near children or anything like that, but one would be wise to be cautious until the individual proves himself or herself trustworthy, which I believe they may be able to.

Molesting a child is 99% worse than murder, simply because the reason behind most murders are more noble than those behind molesting a child.

People molest children for carnal pleasure. People murder people for a variety of reasons, but very rarely for pleasure alone. That makes it more morally acceptable than raping a child just so you come.

I have more respect for political murderers than I have for child rapists. The effect of being destroyed as a child will last a lifetime, and in many cases, that person can become a pedophile too and repeat the crime.

As to what I think of pedos, I have nothing against those who don't act against children and remain abstinent. If you keep it to yourself and tell no one, and don't do anything that directly or indirectly affect children, you're all right by me and I can even admire you for it.

That said, the line isn't very far for me. The "official pedo" thread on /b/ is already too much. I have spent countless hours fighting it in the beginning, shortly after the Exodus, by any means available, and the pedos won. I've subsequently abandoned /b/ for the most part. I was an extremely active anon back then. You may have come across some of my OC (including the lyrics to our version of Let It Go, that was me, though the musicians adapted it somewhat).

>>4546

>so I think it's partly fueled by the media.

Back in the day, before the media, people who raped children were quietly led deep into the woods and never came back. Just saying.

>>4648

What other groups do you dislike strongly? I'm trying to test out the theory I posted right above you, and you seem to be uncharacteristically angry towards pedophiles.

I hope one day there will be a church that goes all the way to make pedophilia (under very controlled circumstances) a sacred act. That will surely get people from all over the world joining in a hurry.

>>4689

What justification could you offer to make this valid? No church does things just "because".

>>4693

http://biblehub.com/matthew/19-14.htm

http://www.cblf.org/paraklesis/vol2iss3

>>4711

Lol, it would be a gigantic logical leap from "laying His hands" on the kids in the Biblical sense to having sex with them.

I've learned not to underestimate the power of humanity to twist, ignore and redefine Scripture in order to do whatever pleases them though.

>>4667

>I'm trying to test out the theory I posted right above you, and you seem to be uncharacteristically angry towards pedophiles.

Why am I angry at people who rape children? Is that the question I'm supposed to answer? There's nothing uncharacteristical about it. Most people will tell you the same. I specified I had no problem with abstinent pedos, even admired them for resisting the urge.

As to other groups, all rapists of any kind are people I dislike strongly.

The reason is that it's a much worse sin to rape a child than to be a practicing homo. The latter is excess of love, but nobody gets their lives destroyed by having a loving and caring relationship, no matter how homo it is, since it's not all about sex. I've known homos who were grossed about both oral and anal sex, so they didn't do any of it. I guess they just stared at each other fapping.

There's a difference between a homo relationship and raping a child. There's a difference between watching anime (for fuck's sake) and raping a child. There's a difference between excessive drinking and raping a child.

How do you not see it? And it's not like I somehow willingly not dislike these and focus all of that rage on the poor child-rapists. My dislike of pedos who rape children finds its origin solely in them. I don't deviate any other dislike.

pedo is bad op

>>4648

what about "if you break one law you break all of them", making no sin worse than others

>>4729

>what about "if you break one law you break all of them", making no sin worse than others

Breaking one law means breaking all of them because there is only one law: to love one another.

That doesn't mean there's no degree in how you fail to love your neighbour. Raping your neighbour as a child is worse than not being nice to him as an adult.

>>4727

>How do you not see it?

Relax, friend, I just wanted to hear *you* explaining it, I'm not accusing you of anything.

This is perfectly reasonable explanation, thank you.

>>4731

Sorry, I'm in defensive mode (been preaching in bad places).

>>4732

Stay out of /b/ buddy! I saw your thread there last week and felt like I was watching a man fighting bears bare-handed.

>>4732

where

>>4733

>felt like I was watching a man fighting bears bare-handed.

That's also how it feels like on my end. Sometimes it takes 30 minutes, sometimes it lasts for 5 hours or more.

I'm none too good at being a rigid reader of the law, but I'm better at talking to the non-Christians. I should probably spend more time out there than here.

>>4735

4chan

/b/ here and there

/lgbt/

other homo boards, etc

>>5405

>Pedophillia was also less of a sin a hundred years ago

The nature of sin is eternal and unchanging, unlike the fickle ways of men.

Would you consider yourself a pedophile, or simply a person who is attracted to children? If so, is there a difference?

I've asked myself this question before, that of "when is it correct for a girl to marry"? As of yet, the lowest I can find as an acceptable example would be 14, but the Scriptures seem quiet on the subject as a whole.

I will admit a certain disdain for the idea of being attracted to pre-pubescent girls, but that's because, in my interpretation, that seems to be sort of God's red line between a child and a woman.

The age of accountability is 8 years of age, but that seems awfully young for someone to engage in sexual behavior. Marriage at that age would be controversial but not completely out of the question, doctrinally speaking. That said, chruch practice sets the minimum dating age at 16.

>>5406

>The age of accountability is 8 years of age, but that seems awfully young for someone to engage in sexual behavior.

Medieval concept based on how soon a child would lead the exact same life as an adult. 6 is also used, more often, in fact. At 6, a child would work just like an adult and share everything with adults.

What humans consider sexually OK is a matter of human customs. Arbitrary limits are necessary to protect children from perverted and mentally retarded people like pedophiles.

>>5408

"Age of accountability" is something else in LDS theology, though not entirely dissimilar.

>>5405

>I think after gays and trans are accepted it can be the next issue.

The next issue after gays and trans being accepted is the apocalypse m80

>Pedophillia was also less of a sin a hundred years ago in the west and I'm not sure what changed it. In the old stories people even married and fell in love at the age of 12

Condemning pedophilia is one of the great moral achievements of Christianity. Roman and Greek Barbarians were still fine with it, true.

But what you are talking about is not pedophilia actually. 12 year old girls are usually already women and able to reproduce and have at least signs of a female derriere and bossom, structure and form in general body.

This is perfectly valid and a man that likes, say 15 year old girls is no pedophile.

>>5406

Yes.

>>5429

Yes to which one? All of them?

>>5446

>Yes to which one? All of them?

It was less of an answer, but a mention that I generally agree with your post.

I do not think that it is bad if girls younger than 16 "date" boys for instance, they will naturally be interested in the other sex in this age.

>>5448

>I do not think that it is bad if girls younger than 16 "date" boys for instance, they will naturally be interested in the other sex in this age.

I would agree with that, and I personally "dated" (as in, literally went on dates, not had active sexual relationships) when I was as young as 12. 16 is just the Church's policy to try and stem the tide of adolescent pregnancy and degenerate behavior that is so common with the youth. In the 50's, some LDS girls married and started families as young as 14 or 15, but after the 60's this had to be rectified when Professor Leibowitz from Feminism 101 started encouraging all females of the country to drop the marriage bit and go straight for the sex and children part.

Doctrinally, again, I'm not sure what the line is. Helen Marr Kimball married Joseph Smith at 14/15, so as of yet that's my "line in the sand". We've no clue how old Mary or some of the other women in the Bible where when they became married so it might be dangerous to build one's points on this ambiguous and shaky foundation.

I personally like older women, so this isn't something I spend a lot of time worrying about.

I think child molesting is completely okay and virtuous.

>>4649

>quietly

kinda my point?

>>5406

I think you are conflating my attraction to 2D drawings with the real thing. When I was younger I was more attracted to girls my own age though, so I could have the latent potential. As I age my tastes have tended to age with me, for better or worse.

I don't look at CP, but if I did I would probably be more physically attracted to hebes, not children or toddlers, as is the norm. If I were attracted to someone younger than me, I would be prepared to admit it to myself and feel no guilt, even if I refused to act on it.

I suppose, meeting a desirable in person might cause me to question my values someday. I am used to the safety of drawings that hold a superstimulus, and if I met a someone beautiful, risque and flirtatious, unknown latent desires might emerge. Some people are attracted to immaturity and femininity, others to maturer and more self-reliant personas, and I resent neither. I have also met kids I liked, and kids I disliked, but when they run around with a playful sense of innocence its hard to feel any lasting sexual attraction. There is a mental and emotional separation from age, on top of the ingrained cultural taboos, and the desire to protect usually trumps any closeted attraction or thirst for the forbidden. I do wish I had more forbidden fetishes, so that every day I would encounter more beauty and inspiration.

If there were no laws and no ethical problems, and there were a mutual spark, I might be open to the possibility of trying sex with anyone regardless of age or gender. That goes for animals too, except all of this is hypothetical since my fetishes aren't that extreme or demanding.

>>5514

I'm simply asking you questions here, not passing judgement. If you had told me your fetish was drawings of argonians having sex, I would not have necessarily made further assumptions, but the fact remains that 2D child pornography is, by its very nature, attempting to depict and reflect the reality of the world in which we live in. Which is to day, its not unreasonable to suggest someone who enjoys anime child pornography might have interest in actual children as well, especially if its the more "abstract" themes in it they find arousing (innocence, playfulness, naivete, etc.)

> do wish I had more forbidden fetishes, so that every day I would encounter more beauty and inspiration.

I've never even imagined that someone could wish more depravity unto themselves and find beauty in it, its very interesting; coming from somebody who would extract his mind-filth with an ice-cream scoop and throw it in the cancer-bin if I could.

>If there were no laws and no ethical problems,

Do you find that there are legitimate moral reasons why consensual sex between a child of 10 and a grown man of 18 plus years of age, or are you purely limited by legalistic concerns?

>>5520

>Do you find that there are legitimate moral reasons why consensual sex between a child of 10 and a grown man of 18 plus years of age, or are you purely limited by legalistic concerns?

At the moment only legal concerns are an issue, and how it would affect someone when there is a strong social stigma. I haven't seen evidence that consensual sex involving minors is inherently harmful, and in a closed environment, behind closed doors, I wouldn't condemn it. I don't hold sex, virginity, or innocence as sacred treasures these days, and consider knowledge, wisdom and experience worth trading for.

>>5521

Buddy, I don't want to get too much into this, but just practical concerns regarding size differences and maturity levels make me feel really iffy about the whole thing. How young are we talking about here, because anything younger than like 14 I would say is pushing it.

>I don't hold sex, virginity, or innocence as sacred treasures these days,

Ok, yeah, that'd be a pretty big difference between not only you and I, but between yourself and most others here. I'd consider it an invaluable treasure *especially* in these dark days,

>>5514

I see where you're coming from. I like shotacon too, just wouldn't diddle with kids.

>>5555

>shotacon

Surely pornography is sinful, is it not?

>>5557

>Surely pornography is sinful, is it not?

Yes, it is sinful.

>>5555

How do you justify that?

One day we will have our own church that views it as a sacrament.

>>5555 (checked)

>>5569

Isn't faggotry sinful too

Non-exclusive pedophile here.

Grew up in church my whole life and I'm still a devout Christian. When I was 15, it was like something just kinda clicked inside of me and I've been attracted to kids ever since. I hate it. It's pulled me to the brink of suicide more times than I can count. It's resulted in me having to throw my dreams away. It's taken everything I have. I've never touched a kid, nor was I touched as one. From time to time, I get the urge to look at CP, and I've fallen in more times than I'd like to admit. I usually end up vomiting in disgust of myself. The only people that know about it are my parents, my therapist, my senior pastor and my leaders at church.

The reason child molesters are regarded as lower than murderers is not because child molestation is worse than murder (it's not) but because of the character of the perpetrator.

A child molester is somebody who takes pleasure in doing things to children that ought not be done. They are a threat to children by their very nature.

Murder is different. There are many reasons to kill somebody. Some can be sympathized with. Some can even be outright celebrated. It is natural to occasionally want to or need to take another human's life. So a murderer could be anything from the sickest serial killer to an honest man who killed a home invader in self-defense but was jailed on a technicality. They could be a scumbag mugger or an idealogical extremist. They could be a madman that went for the high score or a mafio who only killed a rival. Being a murderer says little about the character of the person so it's hard to judge, but every single child molester is somebody that hurts kids for no reason other than it makes their thingy feel good.

More importantly though adult humans are very protective of children. They fear less for their own safety than they do for the safety of their chilluns. Since most murderers are only a threat to adults and all child molesters are a threat to kids then the kiddy diddlers get the majority of the distrust and hate. I'll bet my dick that child murderers are treated as bad if not worse than child molesters.

Can't offer you a christian perspective because I'm too enlightened, but yeah my opinion is that it's a bad thing to be a pedophille but as long as you keep it 2D then at least you're not a bad person.

Also something to think about:

http://www.gotquestions.org/Catholic-abuse.html

anyone who self-identifies as a pedophile, either in the real world or online, is probably a potential child molester, since they have taken the word pedophile as a personal badge of honor

i think the vast majority of people who occasionally have an attraction to an under 14 girl in passing, but say nothing and just carry on with their day, are perfectly fine. obviously i'm talking about occasional heterosexual pedophilic feelings here; homo pedophilia is as queer as adult homosexual attraction

>>8995

>personal badge of honor

It's more like a badge of shame for me and many others.

I'm no more likely to rape a kid than I am a woman.

>>8966

I like the explanation for why crimes against children are considered more severe, but I can't wrap my mind around why sex with children is inherently bad for the child. Especially not if we want them to grow up faster.

>>9018

Why would you want children to grow up faster? A person gets a precious few years on Earth. There is no need to rush through life. Maintaining some innocence is fine.

>>9029

Several school shooters played violent video games

Clearly violent video games cause school shootings

>>9029

> It states that those who have abnormal sexual tendencies tend to pursue priesthood for the celibacy, then in the same breath states that celibacy leads to abnormal sexual expressions.

I think you are misinterpreting. The author was talking about sexual frustration. Priests are not allowed to fap or take wives so they get pent up which in extreme cases causes the accidental summoning of sexy, sexy demons that rape the priests in their sleep. But in all seriousness you can suppress some desires but men are hard wired to want to fuck. The more you hold off blowing your load the more you'll want to do it. It doesn't lead to sexual deviancy but it does lead to sexual desire which is particularly bad if the priest took the job to suppress his pedophilia and spends allot of time with children as priests often do.

If he would instead just fap once a fortnight he would this wouldn't be an issue because his lust would have dropped to a reasonable level, and he would see that there is a way out instead of thinking that an ever-increasing lust for kids is his normal state of being.

>Giving in to lust leads to further perversions.

You are right. I can say from personal experience that you are right. But only if it is done so irresponsibly. People should avoid deviant shit out of principle and deviants should at least try to condition themselves to have more normal tastes. That's what I've been trying to do because the sort of garbage that I had been getting off to is autistic mind-poison.

>Allowing sin in one form leads to expressing it in another

For the sake of argument let's take an atheistic world view: Sin as a concept is nothing universal but rather it is going against the rules of a religion that was written to uphold a functioning society. Lust in excess is unhealthy. But if your religion calls it a sin, then you end up equating it with the other sins. So when somebody of such a religion commits lust they take that as a blow to their pride and feel that they have already crossed a line so committing another sin doesn't seem so bad/far below them.

If instead the religion taught that lust was not a sin in any concrete way but instead frowned upon being a hedonist and praised self-control, then people would be able to give into lust without thinking themselves low enough to commit other sins.

Er… Sorry I think I went off at a tangent there.

Let me rephrase: If society thinks child molestation is abhorrent and lolicon is shameful then perhaps pedos might not be willing to make that jump except for the loons that would have molested a kid either way.

>serial killers

You must understand that in this case porn is not the fire but the smoke. Serial killers are well known to often consume S&m porn at a young age, but it's not the porn that made them as they are. It's because they were fucked in the head that they took fascination with the subject: They were abused, or saw some shit or something. Most often these kids already had a fascination with the morbid before discovering porn: They would torture animals or poke around dead stuff or do other messed up shit.

Similarly with mass murderers: Most of them are losers so porn is the only way they could see a woman.

Actually, why don't the pedos that do this just castrate themselves? Why doesn't the Catholic Church castrate its priests that molest children? Jesus explicitly told his disciples to sever body parts if that's what it takes to prevent sin.

Anyone who touches a child in a sexual manner should have their hands removed.

Pedophiles should be identified and sent to mandatory psychiatric care

Or that's how it would work if I was in charge…

Realistically I think, pedophilia as a crime should receive outrageous sentences.

>>9100

Just saw this post and wanted to pop in to say that Heroin was the first drug I tried. I didn't inject it, so maybe that "doesn't count", but in any case there was no slippery slope for me. I jumped right in at the deep end.

Anyway, you're doing a good job explaining this anon, carry on.

>>4544

>i am le logical thinker XDDD *tips fedora*

why is this entire board

>muh absolute morals

>muh degeneracy