BibleForums Christian Message Board
Other Categories => Controversial Issues => Topic started by: Sojourner on May 22, 2022, 03:58:06 PM
-
Most have heard about James Tubbs (now identifying as a female by the name of Hannah), who confessed to molesting a 10 year old girl in a Denny's restroom in 2014. Because he was 2 weeks shy of being 18 at the time, and due to the progressive policies of LA District Attorney George Gascon, he avoided prison, and only got 2 years in a juvenile facility. In a jailhouse phone conversation with his father, he later bragged about getting one over on the justice system, and would not having to register as a sex offender.
Well, the worm has turned, and "she" is now being held on a million dollar bond, looking at second degree murder and robbery charges in the 2019 murder of 22 year-old Michael Clark. Hopefully, now that the chickens have come home to roost, justice will be duly served this time around.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10805813/Trans-child-molester-26-sexually-assaulted-girl-charged-2019-murder-robbery.html
A transgender woman who was sentenced to just two years for molesting a 10-year-old girl in a restaurant bathroom in 2014 has now been charged with murder in connection with a robbery three years ago, it was revealed yesterday.
Hannah Tubbs, 26, formerly known as James, pleaded guilty in 2020 to sexually assaulting the young girl in a Denny's bathroom in 2014, and was also accused of molesting a four-year-old one year prior to that incident.
She was only given a lenient two-year sentence to be served in a juvenile detention center with no obligation to register as a sex offender as a result of progressive LA District Attorney George Gascon's progressive policies.
But Tubbs is now being held on a $1million bond in Kern County, California, after being charged with second-degree murder and robbery in connection with the death of 22-year-old Michael Clark.
Clark's body was found washed up in the Kern River in August 2019, after he disappeared months earlier in April.
The criminal complaint — filed by the Kern County District Attorney's Office — charged Tubbs under her birth name, James Edward Tubbs, and will see the defendant return to court on May 20 for trial after she pleaded not guilty to both counts.
Gascon meanwhile admitted in February that his directive preventing juveniles to be tried in an adult court for serious crimes, meaning Tubbs was not registered as a sex offender, may have been too lenient.
'After her sentencing in our case, I became aware of extremely troubling statements she made about her case, the resolution of it and the young girl that she harmed,' the DA, who is facing a recall vote, stated.
'If we knew about her disregard for the harm she caused, we would have handled this case differently.'
Tubbs showed no remorse for the molestation offense and even bragged to her father about the lax sentence over the jailhouse phone.
Tubbs was two weeks away from turning 18 years old when police said she walked into a women's bathroom, locked a 10-year-old girl in a stall, grabbed her by the throat, shoved her hand down the child's pants and proceeded to sexually assault her.
Tubbs only stopped when someone else walked into the restroom.
She got off with a slap-on-the-wrist sentence of just two years in a juvenile facility as per LA DA Gascon's reforms.
In calls revealed earlier this year, Tubbs openly laughed at her generous plea deal and was heard mocking her 2014 victim from her jailhouse.
She boasted to her father in the November call that she will not have to register as a sex offender, and that 'nothing' will be done to punish her for violently assaulting a 10-year-old, according to an audio recording that was obtained by Fox.
'So now they're going to put me with other trannies that have seen their cases like mine or with one tranny like me that has a case like mine,' Tubbs told her father.
'So when you come to court, make sure you address me as her.'
Tubbs got off with a slap-on-the-wrist sentence of just two years in a juvenile facility for the 2014 assault as per LA District Attorney George Gascon's reforms, although she was just days from turning 18
Tubbs got off with a slap-on-the-wrist sentence of just two years in a juvenile facility for the 2014 assault as per LA District Attorney George Gascon's reforms, although she was just days from turning 18
Tubbs also reportedly made crude and disparaging comments about the child she had abused, jokingly talking about her sexual attraction for the 10-year-old.
Tubbs' victim, now aged 18, hit out at Gascon for his handling of the case, which she described as 'insulting.'
'The things [Tubbs] did to me and made me do that day were beyond horrible for a 10-year-old girl to have to go through,' the young woman said, referring to Tubbs as a male.
'That man was very clear minded and old enough to know what he did that day was wrong and still did it anyway.
'It's something I struggle with and it's insulting that this is all he was given as punishment. And I want something done
DNA entered into a database matched Tubbs with the sexual assault at Denny's and she was brought back to California in 2019 - by which point she had already been arrested for battery, drug possession and probation violations in several states.
Tubbs was eventually brought to LA in November 2021 where she was sentenced to the two-year stretch in a juvenile detention center.
By this point, Tubbs had transitioned and was known as Hannah rather than James.
LA County Deputy District Attorney Jon Hatami, a prosecutor and supporter of the movement to recall Gascon, said earlier this year that Tubbs was too dangerous to be in the juvenile system.
'This was done with limited guidance and no concerns for public safety,' Hatami said speaking of California's system to handle violent juveniles.
'This clearly shows you the dangerous aspect of the blanket policies of George Gascon,' he said.
'Under George Gascon's ''reforms'', a 26-year-old admitted child molester is being housed with juveniles,' Hatami said.
'She may be released early, back into the community, with no sex registration. Only innocent victims and the public suffer because of George Gascon's so-called progress.
'This is not somebody who should appear in the juvenile system.'
Meanwhile, court documents from a 2013 incident show that then 16-year-old Tubbs was also accused of exposing herself and molesting a four-year-old child, Fox News Digital reported.
The alleged attack happened at a library in Bakersfield, two hours away from Los Angeles, while the child's mother was browsing books 'just a few aisles over.'
The young victim told her mother that Tubbs, who was wearing a ripped black shirt and shorts with blonde hair, cornered her near locked bathrooms and proceeded to touched her.
The little girl allegedly escaped while Tubbs tried to retrieve the bathroom keys and returned to her mother 'crying hysterically' and pointing at her mouth and private parts.
It is unclear what charges were filed against Tubbs or whether she was convicted, as her records are sealed because she was a minor at the time.
-
Has it been getting dark in here or what?
-
I think we can confidently say that James is taking the piss with the trans thing.
-
I think we can confidently say that James is taking the piss with the trans thing.
Yeah, he knew the right time to play the trans card. In the words of his victim:
“The things he did to me and made me do that day was beyond horrible for a ten-year-old girl to have to go through,” she told Fox. “I want him tried as an adult for the crimes he committed against me.”
“I’ve also heard that my attacker goes by she/them pronouns now,” she added. “I see it also unfair to try him as a woman as well, seeing how he clearly didn’t act like one on January 1st of 2014.”
-
But oh how the boys in cellblock c will like him
-
But oh how the boys in cellblock c will like him
I wouldn't shed any tears if he found himself on the receiving end for a change. Even if his transgender status gets him in a special area of prison, due to his history as a child molester, it's possible for a little street justice to find its way to him.
-
Hard to do but I have to pray for his salvation
He needs punishment. Yes
But he also really needs Jesus
-
Yeah, if Calvary paid the price even for the Jeffrey Dahmers and Charles Mansons of the world if they repent, there is always hope for this guy.
-
Just don't let him/her in church.
https://apnews.com/article/baptist-religion-sexual-abuse-by-clergy-southern-convention-bfdbe64389790630488f854c3dae3fd5
Leaders of the Southern Baptist Convention, America’s largest Protestant denomination, stonewalled and denigrated survivors of clergy sex abuse over almost two decades while seeking to protect their own reputations, according to a scathing 288-page investigative report issued Sunday.
Added: "SBC President Ed Litton, in a statement Sunday, said he is “grieved to my core” for the victims and thanked God for their work propelling the SBC to this moment. He called on Southern Baptists to lament and prepare to change the denomination’s culture and implement reforms."
Amen.
"For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God: and if it first begin at us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God?" 1PT4:17
-
Which is why I have very little -- scratch that -- absolutely zero use for any religious organization that reaches higher than the local gathering of the saints.
While I understand the concept of "the elders that teach are worthy of double honor," and Paul, although taking no money for himself, had no problem with the concept of a teaching elder being paid so that he would not have to work outside of the work of the Gospel, I do have significant problems with denominational structures that view paid clergy as untouchables or super-believers for whom there is no accountability.
This is why God planned for a multitude of elders in the local congregation, not a single elder/pastor, and certainly not an elected deacon board to govern the local congregation and to hold the elders -- including the paid minister -- accountable, financially, theologically, and in practical living.
I'd be fine with a repentant pedophile in church, but I wouldn't put in the an area isolated with children, just as I wouldn't put an alcoholic in charge of the communion wine.
-
Amen!
-
I'd be fine with a repentant pedophile in church, but I wouldn't put in the an area isolated with children...
In fact, after a paedophile was caught with children in a different church, charged, etc. etc., he showed up at the church we attended (until COVID) and as far as I know is still there, largely incognito. He's absolutely not allowed around children, but he needs Jesus like the rest of us, no matter how challenging that reality is.
-
Yes. I was attempting to be facetious. As certain large denominations reportedly harbor literally thousands of cases of abuse while sternly condemning sin in the world, sending such a one as this to church might not be beneficial to him.
I also have witnessed the complete destruction of a local church & school where an apparently repeat abuser worked as a school teacher. He recently got out of prison for this particular list of events. There was a cover up.
-
While the Roman Catholic church has been plagued with notorious sex abuse scandals for decades, it is by no means alone with regard to immorality in an ecclesiastical setting. Dozens of cases in Protestant churches and Christian entities have come to light over the years, with undoubtedly hundreds more being concealed or ongoing. We are in the last days, which the NT declares will be plagued by immorality and corruption. Paul, Peter, John, Jude and other NT writers warn of the wave of ungodliness and spiritual wickedness that will inundate the world in the latter days. We're also told this moral decay will spread throughout the church, infecting its congregations and the ministry. We're seeing it all around us today.
-
Moral decay and sexual perversion finds it home anywhere large groups of adult sinners are present and parents shirk their responsiblity for guarding, guiding, and educating their children.
Sports teams
Boy Scouts
Girl Scouts
public schools
private schools
orphanages
Churches filled with non-believers
Why are we surprised when sinners sin and then try to hide their sin?
-
Moral decay and sexual perversion finds it home anywhere large groups of adult sinners are present and parents shirk their responsiblity for guarding, guiding, and educating their children.
Sports teams
Boy Scouts
Girl Scouts
public schools
private schools
orphanages
Churches filled with non-believers
Why are we surprised when sinners sin and then try to hide their sin?
The sin and coverup are not surprising. But many issues could be prevented if those in authority acted responsibly. One example is the failure of church leadership in the case of a daycare volunteer who molested a 3 year-old boy. To add insult to injury, they denied responsibility. Despite claims of proper background checks, the culprit had been previously dismissed over allegations of improper behavior at two other churches. There should be some kind of blacklist database available to churches to prevent a child predator from finding new hunting grounds. Closer scrutiny and a more thorough security check could then employed. The safety and well-being of children is worth a little extra effort. In this particular case, the illicit acts, as well as others were caught on unmonitored security cameras over the course of several months. Clearly preventable. And this is one case of many.
NORTH CHARLESTON, S.C. (WCIV) — NewSpring Church is taking no responsibility over a sex abuse scandal involving one of its former church daycare volunteers and a three-year-old boy.
Responding to a lawsuit by a Berkeley County mother and 3-year-old "John Doe" over unwanted touching by former volunteer Jacop Hazlett on three occasions, NewSpring states that the incidents were beyond the church’s control.
“Such criminal act was not intended or directed by (NewSpring) and could not be foreseen by (NewSpring),” the megachurch states in its response to the lawsuit. “NewSpring performed a screening process that included a criminal background check that showed no prior records."
Hazlett, 28, was arrested Nov. 27, 2018, after authorities and church leaders received complaints of Hazlett sexually abusing a 3-year-old boy at the North Charleston mega-church campus.
Hazlett is now charged with 14 counts of first and third-degree criminal sexual conduct with a minor. Hazlett admitted to the assaults, according to North Charleston investigators.
He had been volunteering at NewSpring Church for nearly eight months when the abuse was discovered.
The lawsuit against the church states that the church failed to supervise and monitor Hazlett, leading to the abuse.
"Hazlett was able to isolate the three-year-old and sexually abuse him inside the church," the lawsuit states.
The lawsuit states the church failed to monitor some 40 video cameras that showed the abuse, adding that the church relies on volunteers to monitor the security cameras.
"The surveillance cameras from NewSpring Church recorded Hazlett's sexual abuse of John Doe on at least three occasions and recorded many other children being sexually abused over the course of many months, which gave the church and its employees and volunteers numerous opportunities to witness the abuse and to prevent it," the lawsuit states.
The church's response is that when a concern was made about Hazlett, videos from multiple rooms were immediately reviewed.
“NewSpring immediately notified law enforcement, took steps to prevent Hazlett from volunteering in any capacity, and continues to fully cooperate with law enforcement’s ongoing investigation,” the church states.
Additionally, the church states that:
Since it operates as a non-profit, its liability in this case is limited by the “South Carolina Solicitation of Charitable Funds Act.”
Since Hazlett was a volunteer, the church’s liability in this case is limited by the “Volunteer Protection Act of 1997.”
The church is not liable for punitive damages.
The lawsuit against the church sought expenses for medical treatment related to emotional distress, anxiety, as well as existing and future medical treatment for the boy until he turns 18 years old.
NewSpring was served with an additional lawsuit from seven families earlier in February.
According to the lawsuit, between 2011-2014, Hazlett volunteered at two churches in North Carolina and was asked to leave from both positions due to "concerns about his behavior around children."
"Upon information and belief, when Hazlett arrived at NewSpring, the church did not contact (either church) for a reference," that lawsuit states.
The church has not yet responded to that suit.
https://abcnews4.com/news/local/lawsuit-newspring-church-denies-all-responsibility-in-volunteer-sex-abuse-scandal
-
Churches should not be engaged in commercial activity.
And, churches should not be engaged in activity that separates a child from its parents.
If a mother is truly a single mother through no choice of her own, the church should help her find a job wherein she can work for pay at home and keep her child with her, with the church subsidizing that if necessary.
And, she should find a male believer and get married and they should raise the child together.
-
quick question, i keep seeing people talking about moral decay, do you folks think child sex abuse and such is new at this scale? Additionally, if not what is new, i mean corrected for like population/oppoutunity?
-
Nothing new under the sun.
Pervs have been perving since time immemorial... Just didn't hear of it in ancient societies because it was either completely accepted (the Greeks) or the fathers just killed the pervs and no one ever found the pieces.
Simply that with technology the dissemination of claims/reports of sin are more prevalent and more widely distributed.
-
quick question, i keep seeing people talking about moral decay, do you folks think child sex abuse and such is new at this scale? Additionally, if not what is new, i mean corrected for like population/oppoutunity?
I've always taken a lot of the moral decay talk to mean decay with reference to some believed Christian standard from ~70 years ago (thinking back to 1950). The problem, of course, is that these problems existed then, but as others have said, knowledge was suppressed, church congregations, leaders, etc., abused their authority, and injustice prevailed, etc.
The difficulty with such proclamations is that you have "the West is in the throes of moral decay because of gay marriage!" paired against Catholic church sex abuse scandals, or SBC sex abuse scandals, or evangelical leaders that are involved in sex abuse scandals. There may very well be a moral decay - and I don't doubt there is, or at least, I'm not a believer in progress necessarily - but it's everywhere, and where the non-religious fixate on religious scandals, the religious gloss over it because... I don't know, they're evil and stupid (and yes, people who abuse children, or take sexually take advantage of women, are evil).
-
quick question, i keep seeing people talking about moral decay, do you folks think child sex abuse and such is new at this scale? Additionally, if not what is new, i mean corrected for like population/oppoutunity?
Immorality and crime have been around as long as mankind, and moral decay in and of itself is not new. The internet however is a game changer that has only been in widespread usage for around 40 years. In that time, bad actors have used the internet to create the online porn industry, facilitating global porn addiction (including child porn), online sex trafficking industry, targeted cyber crime, including industrial hacking, RAT's, ransomware, spoofing and phishing, the feeding of gambling addiction with online gambling websites, banking fraud, and for the communication and coordination of nefarious groups and organizations. (These are only the ones that come to mind at the moment). These industries generally pander to and exploit prurient interests and addictions to the detriment of society, and did not exist 50 years ago. So, I think it's safe to say there has been an uptick in moral decay in recent times.
-
So. I have for a long time worried more about wolves in church than I have about a transgendered sexual deviate out there in the world, which is cause for concern, but, I already know the world is evil.
-
Nothing new under the sun.
Pervs have been perving since time immemorial... Just didn't hear of it in ancient societies because it was either completely accepted (the Greeks) or the fathers just killed the pervs and no one ever found the pieces.
Simply that with technology the dissemination of claims/reports of sin are more prevalent and more widely distributed.
Interesting, So if i understand you correctly it's more that we are much more aware of the scope and scale of decay that has always existed?
-
quick question, i keep seeing people talking about moral decay, do you folks think child sex abuse and such is new at this scale? Additionally, if not what is new, i mean corrected for like population/oppoutunity?
I've always taken a lot of the moral decay talk to mean decay with reference to some believed Christian standard from ~70 years ago (thinking back to 1950). The problem, of course, is that these problems existed then, but as others have said, knowledge was suppressed, church congregations, leaders, etc., abused their authority, and injustice prevailed, etc.
The difficulty with such proclamations is that you have "the West is in the throes of moral decay because of gay marriage!" paired against Catholic church sex abuse scandals, or SBC sex abuse scandals, or evangelical leaders that are involved in sex abuse scandals. There may very well be a moral decay - and I don't doubt there is, or at least, I'm not a believer in progress necessarily - but it's everywhere, and where the non-religious fixate on religious scandals, the religious gloss over it because... I don't know, they're evil and stupid (and yes, people who abuse children, or take sexually take advantage of women, are evil).
I assume you mean you aren't a believer in moral progress necessarily? Do i understand you correctly in that you believe that non-believers are disproportionately fixated on religious scandals in comparison to say income inequality or climate change etc or just that non-religious people are less likely to ignore scandals within religious communities?
-
quick question, i keep seeing people talking about moral decay, do you folks think child sex abuse and such is new at this scale? Additionally, if not what is new, i mean corrected for like population/oppoutunity?
Immorality and crime have been around as long as mankind, and moral decay in and of itself is not new. The internet however is a game changer that has only been in widespread usage for around 40 years. In that time, bad actors have used the internet to create the online porn industry, facilitating global porn addiction (including child porn), online sex trafficking industry, targeted cyber crime, including industrial hacking, RAT's, ransomware, spoofing and phishing, the feeding of gambling addiction with online gambling websites, banking fraud, and for the communication and coordination of nefarious groups and organizations. (These are only the ones that come to mind at the moment). These industries generally pander to and exploit prurient interests and addictions to the detriment of society, and did not exist 50 years ago. So, I think it's safe to say there has been an uptick in moral decay in recent times.
Interesting, Do you believe that opportunity to engage in immoral activity with diminished risk of social stigmatization or legal punishment corrupts people? For example perhaps 50 years ago if one wanted to view pornographic films they would have had to go to a public theater and risk being seen by other members of the public. Does it matter if one behaves in a moral way due to fear legal and social repercussions as opposed to behaving morally because they wish to live and behave morally for its own sake?
-
quick question, i keep seeing people talking about moral decay, do you folks think child sex abuse and such is new at this scale? Additionally, if not what is new, i mean corrected for like population/oppoutunity?
I've always taken a lot of the moral decay talk to mean decay with reference to some believed Christian standard from ~70 years ago (thinking back to 1950). The problem, of course, is that these problems existed then, but as others have said, knowledge was suppressed, church congregations, leaders, etc., abused their authority, and injustice prevailed, etc.
The difficulty with such proclamations is that you have "the West is in the throes of moral decay because of gay marriage!" paired against Catholic church sex abuse scandals, or SBC sex abuse scandals, or evangelical leaders that are involved in sex abuse scandals. There may very well be a moral decay - and I don't doubt there is, or at least, I'm not a believer in progress necessarily - but it's everywhere, and where the non-religious fixate on religious scandals, the religious gloss over it because... I don't know, they're evil and stupid (and yes, people who abuse children, or take sexually take advantage of women, are evil).
I assume you mean you aren't a believer in moral progress necessarily? Do i understand you correctly in that you believe that non-believers are disproportionately fixated on religious scandals in comparison to say income inequality or climate change etc or just that non-religious people are less likely to ignore scandals within religious communities?
I mean that they're more likely to keep thinking about a given religious scandal and draw conclusions from that scandal that don't follow. For example, that all priests are child molesters, that all of the Christians within a given congregation knew about the abuse and are horrible people for not saying anything, that this is definitive proof that religion is definitely evil and evil, etc.
-
quick question, i keep seeing people talking about moral decay, do you folks think child sex abuse and such is new at this scale? Additionally, if not what is new, i mean corrected for like population/oppoutunity?
I've always taken a lot of the moral decay talk to mean decay with reference to some believed Christian standard from ~70 years ago (thinking back to 1950). The problem, of course, is that these problems existed then, but as others have said, knowledge was suppressed, church congregations, leaders, etc., abused their authority, and injustice prevailed, etc.
The difficulty with such proclamations is that you have "the West is in the throes of moral decay because of gay marriage!" paired against Catholic church sex abuse scandals, or SBC sex abuse scandals, or evangelical leaders that are involved in sex abuse scandals. There may very well be a moral decay - and I don't doubt there is, or at least, I'm not a believer in progress necessarily - but it's everywhere, and where the non-religious fixate on religious scandals, the religious gloss over it because... I don't know, they're evil and stupid (and yes, people who abuse children, or take sexually take advantage of women, are evil).
I assume you mean you aren't a believer in moral progress necessarily? Do i understand you correctly in that you believe that non-believers are disproportionately fixated on religious scandals in comparison to say income inequality or climate change etc or just that non-religious people are less likely to ignore scandals within religious communities?
I mean that they're more likely to keep thinking about a given religious scandal and draw conclusions from that scandal that don't follow. For example, that all priests are child molesters, that all of the Christians within a given congregation knew about the abuse and are horrible people for not saying anything, that this is definitive proof that religion is definitely evil and evil, etc.
oh idk about that, I bet there aren't many people that believe that all priests are child molesters when pressed, maybe closer to "Many priests are child molestors, therefore any priest could be a child molester, therefore I am distrustful of priests" also doesn't quite follow or at least does especially apply to priests, but it is something I actually have seen quite a bit when I press people...rarely have I run across people that actually lump everyone into a group when pressed, and weirdly when I have its usually in the political realm.
Do you think that this effect that you have described here is due to religious people not taking these things seriously enough or non-religious people being especially critical of religion or some mix of each...iow are non religious people just as likely to draw unwarranted conclusions about science or political issues as they are about religious issues, but religious people are less likely to express warranted conclusions regarding religion so it creates a greater contrast in this area.
Huge tangent here but I've been thinking about moral decay alot, and pornography especially AI generated pornography. While I understand that lusting in one's heart is frequently the sinful aspect of pornography consumption (or at least some people seem to think so), does lusting after people/entities that do not/cannot, have never and never will exist as in the case of ai generated pornographic actors or imaginary beings made entirely of orifices change anything in your mind? That is to say is there some fight of fancy that is far enough divorced from the reality of sex that one could derive sexual pleasure from it without crossing a moral line or is it the seeking of sexual pleasure for its own sake the sin? idk you are totally free to ignore without comment this absurd thing that was floating around in my head and i'll completely understand.
-
I'll refrain from comment on the last part because I can't get my head around it either!!!
Reminds me of the scene between Sylvester Stallone and Sandra Bullock in Demolition Man! All you need is a magic helmet, I suppose!
As to the attitudes of people, and of course this is all anecdotal, but I do see an increased rise in animosity toward any religious express from non-religious folks.
And, having defended (successfully) a Catholic priest in a sexual assault civil lawsuit almost 20 years ago now, I can tell you even then that there was a vociferous, angry element of the public that believed then (and I hate to think about now) that all Catholic priests were homosexual and pedophiles.
-
I'll refrain from comment on the last part because I can't get my head around it either!!!
Reminds me of the scene between Sylvester Stallone and Sandra Bullock in Demolition Man! All you need is a magic helmet, I suppose!
As to the attitudes of people, and of course this is all anecdotal, but I do see an increased rise in animosity toward any religious express from non-religious folks.
And, having defended (successfully) a Catholic priest in a sexual assault civil lawsuit almost 20 years ago now, I can tell you even then that there was a vociferous, angry element of the public that believed then (and I hate to think about now) that all Catholic priests were homosexual and pedophiles.
Haha, but how do the 3 shells work is the real question. Not to belabor a point that you specifically avoided, I can see the argument for sin with the helmet as it is still about interacting with another person, but we are running full speed at a future where computers will be able to simply hallucinate media where there is no other person and there never was and this is the area i'm interested in really.
I definitely saw a huge uptick in criticism of religion during the late 00's through the mid 10's sort of spearheaded by the "new atheist movement" as some people called it. Though it didn't rise up out of a vacuum and the sex abuse scandals played a huge part in that as well as the rise of evangelical influence in right wing politics, not for nothing it was in many ways a reaction to how religion was being cynically wielded by both religious and political institutions. I believe there was a high water mark, It was never a monolith (what ever is right?) but there was a splintering where folks that tended toward hyperbole seemed to have gone in one direction (usually more political) and those more susceptible to nuance another (youtube essayists lol). Even at its height though, again when really pressed I rarely found anyone that was willing to claim without exception that all christians/catholics/priests were -Insert bad thing here-. To me this makes sense because even on blatantly white supremacist forums its pretty rare to find anyone that will lump all minorities together as a monolith without exception...not that these things don't happen but its pretty rare and I suspect that many of the times that I have run across it it had more to do with people not admitting that they were holding an unsustainable view due to ego or emotion or spite.
Again though, i'm not sure this really gets at the heart of what I meant to be asking, that is do you believe that non-religious people tend towards these sorts of overgeneralizations/hyperbole of religious people more than they would some other group like police or the rich? I tend to think that you are as likely to get ACAB as you are to get "all priests are rapists" in the relevant contexts. For instance if all you ever knew about me was what i've posted to religious forums you would probably think that I'm especially focused on the failures of religion even though I've probably written hundreds of times more content on the failures of technology than anything else, but context you know? Additionally even if the non-religious are more likely to be more critical of failures of the religious is this out of proportion to religious people's tendency to minimize the failures of religion...iow once you correct for the massive influence and history of religion and how it is distributed in populations that also have freedom of speech is this just the same ratio you would expect from any other groups that have disparate beliefs/values.
As a sort of aside, do you believe that Christians or Christianity spends a disproportionate amount of time and energy on the failings of the non-religious, personally I feel like its pretty intrinsic to the kind of thing that Christianity is that it must be especially oppositional to irreligion and many other religions, but that tends to be pretty transparent to many Christians because they often think of it as "loving" or merely the "truth". Is it conceivable to you that some of the perceived special negative focus on Christianity is people merely attempting to carve out space for themselves in a culture that is predominated by Christianity...i.e many of your issues and concerns will be water related if you live in a lake?
-
I don't disagree with your last premise.
In general, I think the church has wasted centuries and trillions telling people they are sinners instead of just loving Jesus, living such remarkable lives that the non-religious ask "why are you so happy," and then sharing the reason why.
When the church beats the non-religious in the head with a stick, it is no wonder that people strike back and try to carve out a zone for themselves.
-
quick question, i keep seeing people talking about moral decay, do you folks think child sex abuse and such is new at this scale? Additionally, if not what is new, i mean corrected for like population/oppoutunity?
Immorality and crime have been around as long as mankind, and moral decay in and of itself is not new. The internet however is a game changer that has only been in widespread usage for around 40 years. In that time, bad actors have used the internet to create the online porn industry, facilitating global porn addiction (including child porn), online sex trafficking industry, targeted cyber crime, including industrial hacking, RAT's, ransomware, spoofing and phishing, the feeding of gambling addiction with online gambling websites, banking fraud, and for the communication and coordination of nefarious groups and organizations. (These are only the ones that come to mind at the moment). These industries generally pander to and exploit prurient interests and addictions to the detriment of society, and did not exist 50 years ago. So, I think it's safe to say there has been an uptick in moral decay in recent times.
Interesting, Do you believe that opportunity to engage in immoral activity with diminished risk of social stigmatization or legal punishment corrupts people? For example perhaps 50 years ago if one wanted to view pornographic films they would have had to go to a public theater and risk being seen by other members of the public. Does it matter if one behaves in a moral way due to fear legal and social repercussions as opposed to behaving morally because they wish to live and behave morally for its own sake?
Well, it's logical to think the anonymity of the internet facilitates activities that people don't want others to know about. I think however, the issue is more about the detrimental effect of increased activity due to increased availability and access. Gone are the days when one had to surreptitiously visit an adult video or book store to access porn. British authorities involved in implementing the new age verification laws found there are about 4.5 million porn websites on the internet, more than half being in the US.
Just one of them, Pornhub, reports over 100 million visits daily--33 billion over the course of 2018. That's just one of several million sites. Societal norms regarding porn are also changing. According to a 2018 Gallup poll, more than four out of ten Americans (43%) currently think pornography is morally acceptable, representing a seven percent increase from the previous year, and a vast increase from 20 years ago. Research also shows an increasing number of children accessing pornography, though that's mostly the fault of their parents. The internet, despite its many positive benefits, has a dark side that can have a detrimental effect on society.
Look at it this way: over the last 30 years or so, millions of people became addicted to pain killers--many dying from an overdose--because so many doctors were over-prescribing them. If they had been harder to get, the number of those becoming addicted would have been a fraction of what it is now, and the opioid epidemic never would have happened. In a similar manner, easy access to millions of porn sites has greatly increased the problem of porn addiction. But it's not just about porn. It's also about the vast increase in all types of cyber crime and nefarious activity made possible by technology. While a fallen human nature is the root cause of moral decay, internet porn and cyber crime are both major contributing factors.
-
So. I have for a long time worried more about wolves in church than I have about a transgendered sexual deviate out there in the world, which is cause for concern, but, I already know the world is evil.
Yep. "But now I am writing you not to associate with anyone who claims to be a brother but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or a verbal abuser, a drunkard or a swindler. With such a man do not even eat. What business of mine is it to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? God will judge those outside. “Expel the wicked man from among you.” (1 Co 5:11-13)
-
quick question, i keep seeing people talking about moral decay, do you folks think child sex abuse and such is new at this scale? Additionally, if not what is new, i mean corrected for like population/oppoutunity?
Immorality and crime have been around as long as mankind, and moral decay in and of itself is not new. The internet however is a game changer that has only been in widespread usage for around 40 years. In that time, bad actors have used the internet to create the online porn industry, facilitating global porn addiction (including child porn), online sex trafficking industry, targeted cyber crime, including industrial hacking, RAT's, ransomware, spoofing and phishing, the feeding of gambling addiction with online gambling websites, banking fraud, and for the communication and coordination of nefarious groups and organizations. (These are only the ones that come to mind at the moment). These industries generally pander to and exploit prurient interests and addictions to the detriment of society, and did not exist 50 years ago. So, I think it's safe to say there has been an uptick in moral decay in recent times.
Interesting, Do you believe that opportunity to engage in immoral activity with diminished risk of social stigmatization or legal punishment corrupts people? For example perhaps 50 years ago if one wanted to view pornographic films they would have had to go to a public theater and risk being seen by other members of the public. Does it matter if one behaves in a moral way due to fear legal and social repercussions as opposed to behaving morally because they wish to live and behave morally for its own sake?
Well, it's logical to think the anonymity of the internet facilitates activities that people don't want others to know about. I think however, the issue is more about the detrimental effect of increased activity due to increased availability and access. Gone are the days when one had to surreptitiously visit an adult video or book store to access porn. British authorities involved in implementing the new age verification laws found there are about 4.5 million porn websites on the internet, more than half being in the US.
Just one of them, Pornhub, reports over 100 million visits daily--33 billion over the course of 2018. That's just one of several million sites. Societal norms regarding porn are also changing. According to a 2018 Gallup poll, more than four out of ten Americans (43%) currently think pornography is morally acceptable, representing a seven percent increase from the previous year, and a vast increase from 20 years ago. Research also shows an increasing number of children accessing pornography, though that's mostly the fault of their parents. The internet, despite its many positive benefits, has a dark side that can have a detrimental effect on society.
Look at it this way: over the last 30 years or so, millions of people became addicted to pain killers--many dying from an overdose--because so many doctors were over-prescribing them. If they had been harder to get, the number of those becoming addicted would have been a fraction of what it is now, and the opioid epidemic never would have happened. In a similar manner, easy access to millions of porn sites has greatly increased the problem of porn addiction. But it's not just about porn. It's also about the vast increase in all types of cyber crime and nefarious activity made possible by technology. While a fallen human nature is the root cause of moral decay, internet porn and cyber crime are both major contributing factors.
Is addiction a moral failing? I mean even if it is I have to think that becoming addicted to prescribed medication is different than porn addiction as I have to assume that unless someone forced you to watch porn (which happens of course) then you made a choice to check it out, whereas a trusted medical professional prescribes drugs. These things do not seem the same to me.
-
You're missing my point. I'm comparing porn addiction to opioid addiction only in the sense that an increased availability leads to more opportunity to use and become addicted.
-
You're missing my point. I'm comparing porn addiction to opioid addiction only in the sense that an increased availability leads to more opportunity to use and become addicted.
Oh okay I see. I guess what I was wondering is, if we were to set up circumstances in a world such that there were no opportunities to sin would that be a moral world or an amoral world? Does it mean anything in a moral context to have never watched porn if you never could have watched porn? I would think there are non trivial distinctions in the moral nature of 2 time periods where in 1 there were very few opportunities to be immoral and in another it took a great deal of effort to avoid immorality ....which I just realized was a major plot point on the show "The Good Place". Anyway If moral decay is really just this exponential explosion of opportunities for sin then it is really important when and where you are born when it comes to how likely it is that you are going to do something immoral, the further along you go in time the more likely you are to do something immoral even if the human predisposition toward sin remains relatively constant...I don't know that decay is what i'd describe that circumstance as people's moral fiber isn't deteriorating (which is what i've always taken it to mean) so much as there are more options....Is that biblical? Does the bible tell us that it will become increasingly more difficult to lead a moral life, like back in Jesus' time we were trying to stuff a camel through the eye of a pin but in 2022 we're trying to stuff blue whale through a transistor junction and in 100 years it will be many orders of magnitude more difficult? Seems like a raw deal for us and an even rawer deal for the daughters of our daughter's daughters.
-
You're missing my point. I'm comparing porn addiction to opioid addiction only in the sense that an increased availability leads to more opportunity to use and become addicted.
Oh okay I see. I guess what I was wondering is, if we were to set up circumstances in a world such that there were no opportunities to sin would that be a moral world or an amoral world? Does it mean anything in a moral context to have never watched porn if you never could have watched porn? I would think there are non trivial distinctions in the moral nature of 2 time periods where in 1 there were very few opportunities to be immoral and in another it took a great deal of effort to avoid immorality ....which I just realized was a major plot point on the show "The Good Place". Anyway If moral decay is really just this exponential explosion of opportunities for sin then it is really important when and where you are born when it comes to how likely it is that you are going to do something immoral, the further along you go in time the more likely you are to do something immoral even if the human predisposition toward sin remains relatively constant...I don't know that decay is what i'd describe that circumstance as people's moral fiber isn't deteriorating (which is what i've always taken it to mean) so much as there are more options....Is that biblical? Does the bible tell us that it will become increasingly more difficult to lead a moral life, like back in Jesus' time we were trying to stuff a camel through the eye of a pin but in 2022 we're trying to stuff blue whale through a transistor junction and in 100 years it will be many orders of magnitude more difficult? Seems like a raw deal for us and an even rawer deal for the daughters of our daughter's daughters.
Finding your post rambling, convoluted, and predicated on philosophical questions and hypothetical situations, let me simply cut to the chase: 1. Sin is essentially opposing one's will against God's will, irregardless of the era in which one lives, or the specific circumstances of a given scenario. Times change, but the propensity of human nature to rebel against God's will and purpose does not. 2. Moral decay occurs when a culture or society abandons previously held societal standards of godliness, morality and decency. 3. The Bible clearly foretells mankind's progressive, downward spiral into political upheaval, lawlessness and moral turpitude as the time of the Lord's return nears. That is where are now. And that's my final reply in this discussion.
-
You're missing my point. I'm comparing porn addiction to opioid addiction only in the sense that an increased availability leads to more opportunity to use and become addicted.
Oh okay I see. I guess what I was wondering is, if we were to set up circumstances in a world such that there were no opportunities to sin would that be a moral world or an amoral world? Does it mean anything in a moral context to have never watched porn if you never could have watched porn? I would think there are non trivial distinctions in the moral nature of 2 time periods where in 1 there were very few opportunities to be immoral and in another it took a great deal of effort to avoid immorality ....which I just realized was a major plot point on the show "The Good Place". Anyway If moral decay is really just this exponential explosion of opportunities for sin then it is really important when and where you are born when it comes to how likely it is that you are going to do something immoral, the further along you go in time the more likely you are to do something immoral even if the human predisposition toward sin remains relatively constant...I don't know that decay is what i'd describe that circumstance as people's moral fiber isn't deteriorating (which is what i've always taken it to mean) so much as there are more options....Is that biblical? Does the bible tell us that it will become increasingly more difficult to lead a moral life, like back in Jesus' time we were trying to stuff a camel through the eye of a pin but in 2022 we're trying to stuff blue whale through a transistor junction and in 100 years it will be many orders of magnitude more difficult? Seems like a raw deal for us and an even rawer deal for the daughters of our daughter's daughters.
Finding your post rambling, convoluted, and predicated on philosophical questions and hypothetical situations, let me simply cut to the chase: 1. Sin is essentially opposing one's will against God's will, irregardless of the era in which one lives, or the specific circumstances of a given scenario. Times change, but the propensity of human nature to rebel against God's will and purpose does not. 2. Moral decay occurs when a culture or society abandons previously held societal standards of godliness, morality and decency. 3. The Bible clearly foretells mankind's progressive, downward spiral into political upheaval, lawlessness and moral turpitude as the time of the Lord's return nears. That is where are now. And that's my final reply in this discussion.
Well, you're not wrong, my post was definitely both rambling and convoluted, additionally you nailed it when you pointed out that it was based on philosophical questions and hypothetical situations, so thanks for taking the time to answer it in spite of all of that. I'd love to ask you a few more questions but I respect that you have said your piece and thank you for your contribution.