toldailytopic: Internet bullying - where do you draw the line?

[CabinetMaker]

That is the law of the land. Who are we to question it? That is why pedophiles that aren't executed have to register where they go. They need to be labeled as perverts so parents know he is in the neighborhood to protect their child. Why we don't invoke justice in these cases is the real head scratcher.

But labeling them correctly is name calling.

Calling a pedophile a pedophile is not name calling. Calling them a pervert, though crude, is an equally applicable label. But as Christian's, our behavior should always reflect the fruits of the spirit in our life. People should know we our Christians by our love, not by our calls for killing the sinners.

 

[Traditio]

So's the job market.

I disagree.

 

[Traditio]

Apparently not! Often the exposure of one's private moments is not voluntary. Rather some perverted sadists get their jollies by posting other person's private behavior on the internet without permission. They obtain this information through stealth and spying on others, often, on person's who consider them to be friends.
I consider this disgusting behavior to be, at the least, a form of aggravated assault.

But this has nothing to do with so called "internet bullying." The crime was the trespass. They went into the guy's bedroom, planted a video camera, and then dessiminated his likeness without his permission. Even had they not dessminated it, the act would have been criminal nonetheless.

The only difference between them laughing about the recording amongst themselves and spreading it on the internet, or spreading around copies of the video and spreading it on the internet, is the medium employed.

The fact that the internet was used was inconsequential.

 

[Traditio]

It was a joke, Trad. However, just because someone is on the internet does not necessitate that they should be the object of derision.

The mere presence of unhealthy food in the grocery store isn't an indication that fat people should eat it to excess. Therefore...fat people should be imprisoned!

Wait...yeah, I guess that doesn't follow at all.

Unless there's a transgression against a right, there should be no legal action. Don't get me wrong, there is such a transgression in this case, but it has nothing to do with the internet.

 

[Lighthouse]

Calling a pedophile a pedophile is not name calling. Calling them a pervert, though crude, is an equally applicable label. But as Christian's, our behavior should always reflect the fruits of the spirit in our life. People should know we our Christians by our love, not by our calls for killing the sinners.

I call for the execution of pedophiles because I love them, and their victims.

 

[Persephone66]

Calling a pedophile a pedophile is not name calling. Calling them a pervert, though crude, is an equally applicable label. But as Christian's, our behavior should always reflect the fruits of the spirit in our life. People should know we our Christians by our love, not by our calls for killing the sinners.

Hey I get called a pedophile all the time, and while I am a lot of things, that's one thing I'm not.

 

[Nick M]

I have not changed my stance.

You have defended sicko perverts like homos here in the past. Since when do you care what God says is moral over man? I am glad you think that, if you didn't know.

Calling a pedophile a pedophile is not name calling. Calling them a pervert, though crude, is an equally applicable label.

It certainly is name calling. Calling a jerk a "jerk" is labeling, and name calling.

But as Christian's, our behavior should always reflect the fruits of the spirit in our life.

Ecclesiastes 3:8

8 A time to love, And a time to hate; A time of war, And a time of peace.

Standing firm against the assembly of evildoers always seems to be a trouble spot for you.

 

[chrysostom]

just ignore them
and
they will go away

why do you even respond to them?

 

[kmoney]

Prove it.:smokie:

The proof is in the pudding. Which is all over TOL. :chew: Unless you got Knight to purge it all.

 

[CabinetMaker]

I call for the execution of pedophiles because I love them, and their victims.

Do you have any idea how stupid that sounds? Any idea at all?

 

[CabinetMaker]

You have defended sicko perverts like homos here in the past. Since when do you care what God says is moral over man? I am glad you think that, if you didn't know.

I have not and will not defend their behavior. The sexually immoral will not inherit the Kingdom and I will make sure they know that. I will defend them against zealots calling for their death because of some miss-guided sense of moral superiority.

It certainly is name calling. Calling a jerk a "jerk" is labeling, and name calling.

Calling a jerk a jerk is not name calling. What you will do (and have done in the past) to me will be name calling. You will be calling me a moron and unsaved simply because I do not agree with you. That is the difference between name calling and calling a jerk a jerk.

Ecclesiastes 3:8

8 A time to love, And a time to hate; A time of war, And a time of peace.

Standing firm against the assembly of evildoers always seems to be a trouble spot for you.

I kind of like to deal with people in the New Covenant rather than the Old Covenant that you so frequently quote from. What did Jesus do with the sinners? He ate dinner with them. He told them to go and sin no more. It is easier to kill them cause then you don't need to deal with them. It is much more difficult to do as Jesus did and actually love them enough to go to dinner with them and talk.

 

[Lighthouse]

Do you have any idea how stupid that sounds? Any idea at all?

I have an idea how stupid you are for not recognizing reality.

 

[CabinetMaker]

I have an idea how stupid you are for not recognizing reality.

The reality is that Christ came and died that their sins would be forgiven and you want to kill them and call it love. I note that Jesus nor the Apostles never called for anyone's death. They noted we are all deserving of death but they never once called for the death of a sinner. I bet that you and several other "Christians" I have met over the years would have gladly thrown the first stone when Jesus asked.

 

[MrDeets]

What did Jesus do with the sinners? He ate dinner with them. He told them to go and sin no more. It is easier to kill them cause then you don't need to deal with them. It is much more difficult to do as Jesus did and actually love them enough to go to dinner with them and talk.

I agree with some of your post, but not all. So using your logic, we should release from prison all rapists, gangbangers, pedophiles, murderers, and tax evaders and tell them sin no more?

I'm not quite as cavalier in the way I state my belief that murderers and pedophiles should be executed, but I do. I can't even try to say that its because I love them. Its because I want every single perverted pedophilic sodomite/rapist that gets caught OFF the street. Pedophilic behavior isn't something that just gets dropped or let go. It tends to be the culminating phase in a long history of events and perversions that lead up to said pedophilic act(s). I have 2 sons, and right or wrong, if someone EVER hurts them sexually, I truly believe I would put a .40 hollow point square between their eyeballs. Smiling while I did it:chuckle:. I know thats not what Christ would want, but I'm just a man and I don't think I'd be very rational in such a situation.

 

[CabinetMaker]

I agree with some of your post, but not all. So using your logic, we should release from prison all rapists, gangbangers, pedophiles, murderers, and tax evaders and tell them sin no more?

I'm not quite as cavalier in the way I state my belief that murderers and pedophiles should be executed, but I do. I can't even try to say that its because I love them. Its because I want every single perverted pedophilic sodomite/rapist that gets caught OFF the street. Pedophilic behavior isn't something that just gets dropped or let go. It tends to be the culminating phase in a long history of events and perversions that lead up to said pedophilic act(s). I have 2 sons, and right or wrong, if someone EVER hurts them sexually, I truly believe I would put a .40 hollow point square between their eyeballs. Smiling while I did it:chuckle:. I know thats not what Christ would want, but I'm just a man and I don't think I'd be very rational in such a situation.

You read more into my post than is is there. We ARE supposed to take care of prisoners but we can do that while they are in prison. Other immorality is not illegal such as homosexuality and adultery. Instead of stoning these people as the OLD COVENANT requires, we should deal with them under the NEW COVENANT. We hold them accountable for their sinful acts but we don't need to kill them to do that.

 

[MrDeets]

You read more into my post than is is there. We ARE supposed to take care of prisoners but we can do that while they are in prison.

Roger that!

Other immorality is not illegal such as homosexuality and adultery. Instead of stoning these people as the OLD COVENANT requires, we should deal with them under the NEW COVENANT. We hold them accountable for their sinful acts but we don't need to kill them to do that.

I agree partly. What then, do you suggest we do with pedophiles?

 

[aSeattleConserv]

I have 2 sons, and right or wrong, if someone EVER hurts them sexually, I truly believe I would put a .40 hollow point square between their eyeballs. Smiling while I did it:chuckle:. I know thats not what Christ would want, but I'm just a man and I don't think I'd be very rational in such a situation.

I often times reference the Founding Fathers of our great Christian nation, men who were predominately good Christian men, many of them members of the clergy, when it comes to punishment.

Let's see how they dealt with the crime of "buggery".

"Because of the nature of the crime, the penalties for the act of sodomy were often severe. For example, Thomas Jefferson indicated that in his home state of Virginia, "dismemberment" of the offensive organ was the penalty for sodomy. In fact, Jefferson himself authored a bill penalizing sodomy by castration. The laws of the other states showed similar or even more severe penalties:..."
http://lasalettejourney.blogspot.com/2009/07/founding-fathers-and-homosexuality.html

I'm kinda sorta thinking that they didn't have "gay pride parades" back then, let alone homosexuals running around molesting innocent children.

 

[MrDeets]

I often times reference the Founding Fathers of our great Christian nation, men who were predominately good Christian men, many of them members of the clergy, when it comes to punishment.

Let's see how they dealt with the crime of "buggery".

"Because of the nature of the crime, the penalties for the act of sodomy were often severe. For example, Thomas Jefferson indicated that in his home state of Virginia, "dismemberment" of the offensive organ was the penalty for sodomy. In fact, Jefferson himself authored a bill penalizing sodomy by castration. The laws of the other states showed similar or even more severe penalties:..."
http://lasalettejourney.blogspot.com/2009/07/founding-fathers-and-homosexuality.html

I'm kinda sorta thinking that they didn't have "gay pride parades" back then, let alone homosexuals running around molesting innocent children.

I bet there were pedophiles, but there was no NAMBLA, and there weren't people defending sodomites with such fervor(not saying anything about anyone on TOL, yet). And I bet that things got dealt with swiftly and severely. Wish that the law would go back to those times!

 

[aSeattleConserv]

I bet there were pedophiles, but there was no NAMBLA, and there weren't people defending sodomites with such fervor(not saying anything about anyone on TOL, yet). And I bet that things got dealt with swiftly and severely. Wish that the law would go back to those times!

There have always been pedophiles my friend, and unfortunately, always will be.

However, keep in mind that back in the days of the Founding Fathers the Christian standards of the community and the punishment that reflected those standards were well known.

If a man (or woman) molested a child, if swift punishment wasn't carried out in a timely manner (no 20 year waiting period with 15 appeals), the culprit often times just "disappeared" off the face of the earth.

"What happened to Joe Smith the child molester?"

"Ummm, I dunno, I guess he just left town."

 

[MrRadish]

There have always been pedophiles my friend, and unfortunately, always will be.

However, keep in mind that back in the days of the Founding Fathers the Christian standards of the community and the punishment that reflected those standards were well known.

If a man (or woman) molested a child, if swift punishment wasn't carried out in a timely manner (no 20 year waiting period with 15 appeals), the culprit often times just "disappeared" off the face of the earth.

"What happened to Joe Smith the child molester?"

"Ummm, I dunno, I guess he just left town."

So in other words, you encourage vigilantism, lynch mobs, and denying people a fair trial. Always good to know our police force is committed to justice and upholding the law, eh?