EU Courts: Defaming Muhammad is not Allowed

loveofourlord said in post #57:

no one is sayin marries age had to do with pedophilia . . .

Click to expand...

Why not?

For otherwise, what could prevent the future legalization of pedophilia-with-consent, just as some states already allow minors to consent to marriage? For if they can consent to marriage, then why not to pedophilia?

As an example, imagine that a man is brought before a municipal court on charges of pedophilia with a thirteen-year-old boy. The defendant's counsel brings the boy to the stand to testify.

"Can you say whether you have been harmed by the defendant?"

"No, sir. I have been in no way harmed, but only loved. Preciously loved, like I have never known before."

"Then he did not force himself upon you?"

"No, in no way. He has loved me tenderly from the start. He fills me up with his love. He is my lover. My man. I cannot imagine living without him."

At this point, the defendant's upper lip begins to quiver. And in the jury, a woman's eyes well up with tears. She dabs them with a tissue.

Then the defendant's counsel brings a respected psychiatrist to the stand to testify. The defendant's counsel tells the judge:

"Your honor, the next witness is an advocate for homosexuality and transgenderism, who has proven in peer-reviewed articles in top psychiatric journals that neither homosexuality nor transgenderism per se requires any mental illness whatsoever. To reject her testimony would be to reject these normal expressions of human sexuality, just as I hope to show the court that pedophilia can also be a normal expression of human sexuality."

Judge: "Proceed".

Defendant's counsel to the psychiatrist: "Has the defendant abused the child mentally?"

"Not at all. He has shown the child only gentleness, kindness, and love. I have thoroughly examined the child psychiatrically, and he is in perfect mental and emotional health. It would be a total crime to separate him from his lover."

The judge shifts in his seat. For his municipal jurisdiction has clearly outlawed pedophilia.

But at the end of the trial, the jury goes to deliberations and uses "jury nullification" to declare the pedophile innocent. (Jury nullification allows a jury to declare a defendant innocent regardless of the law or the facts in a case.)

The prosecutor appeals to state court, which agrees with him that the law has been broken. But the defendant appeals to federal district court, which agrees with him that no harm, and so no crime, has been committed. The prosecutor appeals to federal circuit court, which agrees with him, saying that the local jurisdiction had the right to outlaw pedophilia in every case. But the defendant appeals to the Supreme Court, which rules that pedophilia is lawful in every case where the child's consent and mental health have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

And so pedophilia joins homosexuality and transgenderism as a normal, lawful expression of human sexuality. Pedophilia becomes just another natural, "sexual orientation". Pedophiles become simply "lovers of children", the literal meaning of the word "pedo-phile".

And then the SPLC begins to persecute as "hate groups" and "pedophobic" any Biblical Christian groups who continue to say that pedophilia is a sin.

ThatRobGuy said in post #58:

. . . would it not mean that this "Muhammad was a pedophile" rant was nothing more than a way to provoke the other side considering there were prominent people in the Christian bible engaging in those same actives.

Click to expand...

What Bible verses are you thinking of?

ThatRobGuy said in post #58:

If according to the biblical account, Mary was both married to Joseph, and impregnated (immaculate conception story or otherwise) somewhere between the ages of 10-14 (depending on which writing/account you go with), it would stand to reason that the God of the Bible thought that it was acceptable for a 10-14 year old to be in that situation.

Click to expand...

Note that nothing in the Bible says or requires that Mary was 10-14 when she was married or impregnated.

ThatRobGuy said in post #58:

I'd say that if someone from the left-wing went on a public tangent claiming "Joseph was a sex predator" or "The Christian God advocates underage relations",...or further more, making reference to any number of accounts of incest from the Bible, conservative evangelicals would start up with the "IT'S A WAR ON CHRISTIANITY" talking points.

Click to expand...

Regarding the charge of "incest", in the sense of saying that it's not wrong, what Bible verses are you thinking of?

ThatRobGuy said in post #58:

Yet, when they're making (basically) the same claim about someone else's religion, they call it "telling it like it is" and misrepresent the backlash against it as some sort of proof of an "anti-Christian agenda"

Click to expand...

The anti-Biblical-Christian agenda is focused more on opposing the Biblical teaching that homosexuality is a sin (Romans 1:26-27), by calling it "hate speech" and "homophobia".

Also, the anti-Biblical-Christian agenda is focused on silencing pro-life pages and posts on social media, by calling them "anti-choice" and "hate speech".

But the Bible shows that even unborn children have consciousness (Luke 1:41), and can be filled with God's Holy Spirit (Luke 1:15).

So how dare anyone murder such a one as these, and for mere convenience?

*******

ThatRobGuy said in post #59:

[Re: The SPLC "hate group" list]

I've yet to see a single group make the list simply because they have the stance that "Homosexuality is a sin", there's always some sort of other action or statement they've made that's landed them on that list.

If it were that basic, 75% of the Christian churches in the US would be on their list.

Click to expand...

The only reason they aren't is out of fear of a huge backlash against the SPLC, which does view them as "hate groups" and "homophobic", based on the SPLC's swallowing-whole of all of the lies of "political correctness".

ThatRobGuy said in post #59:

[Re: The SPLC "hate group" list]

The reason why groups like FRC (and similar groups) make the list is because they go well above and beyond that and make dishonest claims about the groups they don't like...and affiliate themselves with other hate groups.

Click to expand...

In August 2012, Floyd Lee Corkins attacked the Family Research Council headquarters, and specifically said that he used the SPLC designation of "hate group" for the FRC in making his choice of target.

This is a good example of how the enemies of the Bible are not peaceful, but show the same violent hatred for others which they wrongly accuse Biblical Christians of having. These anti-Christian groups are the real hate groups. Indeed, they are Satanic.

ThatRobGuy said in post #59:

[Re: "Transgender" people]

. . . some group decided that they were going to make up a story about them so that they could push this narrative that trans people are somehow a threat in restrooms.

Click to expand...

Whether or not they are a threat in restrooms, note that not long ago a "trans" woman in prison did become a threat to real women in that prison after being transferred there from a male prison, after suddenly "identifying" as a woman.

Also, note that in reality, there is no such thing as transgenderism, just as there is no such thing as transracialism.

As an example, imagine that a white man walks into an all-black, inner-city neighborhood, and is surrounded by some black men.

"What are you doing here, cracker?"

"I'm not a cracker. I'm a proud black man."

"No, you aren't. Look at your face. You're a white man."

"My face doesn't matter. What matters is I identify as black. So I am black."

"No, you aren't. But you are crazy. Now get out of here and leave us alone. You're scaring the children with your crazy talk."

And the man could then be escorted out of the neighborhood and told never to return.

Now imagine a different example, where a man walks naked into a girls' locker room filled with girls. They all start screaming when they see him.

"Don't scream. I'm a girl too."

"No, you aren't! Look at your... your thing. You're a man!"

"My thing doesn't matter. What matters is I identify as a girl. So I am a girl."

"Help! Help! A crazy man is here!"

The girls' coach could then rush in.

"You need to get out of here."

"But I identify as a girl."

"Sorry, mate. God has identified you as a man. Also, the police are on their way."

The man could then be arrested and thrown into jail, or into an insane asylum.

--

Someone might ask: "But what about the man's feelings that he is a girl?"

They are just a neurotic fantasy, just as it would be a neurotic fantasy for a white man to say that he is a black man. It is absurd on its face.

Also, transgenderism is a type of homosexuality: wanting to have sex with the same gender that you are, but pretending that you are of the opposite gender.

Because homosexuality is a sin (Romans 1:26-27), transgenderism is a sin.

Also, it is curious that homosexuals sometimes claim that what they do sexually is okay because it is genetic, while transgender people (who are also homosexual) claim that genetics is completely irrelevant, and even totally-counter, to their real identity.

So which is it?

--

Someone might ask: "But what about transgenderism and diversity?"

God loves diversity, which is proven by all of the different colors, heights, weights, and personalities of the people whom He has created. But diversity does not mean that a man is actually a woman just because he feels like one. He is still a man. But there can be diversity within maleness, ranging from the ultra-macho male to the ultra-effeminate male. The latter can still identify as male, for he can simply be one type of male within a diverse range. It is absurd for transgenderism to claim to be for "diversity" while it railroads people into sexual stereotypes.

SoldierOfTheKing said in post #60:

. . . pedophilia is sexual attraction towards prepubescent children . . .

Click to expand...

Pedophilia is sexual attraction towards "children" (Webster's), which can refer to any minor (i.e. under 18 years of age).

That is why many states have statutory rape laws against sex with minors, even with consent.

But because pedophilia is a "sexual orientation" toward children, pedophilia-with-consent will have to be supported by homosexuals eventually, or else their whole idea that one's "sexual orientation" is always a natural and good thing will be completely undermined.

--

Someone might ask: "But how can the sexual orientation of adult homosexuality not be a natural and good thing?"

The answer is that even adult homosexuality is "against nature" (Romans 1:26-27) because of how God created nature to work:

Matthew 19:4 And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,
5 And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?

God never intended for males to become sexually joined or married to other males, just as God never intended for females to become sexually joined or married to other females.

Homosexuality could be the result of how one was raised, that is, based on poor "nurture", rather than "nature".

For example, boys who grew up without paternal love could be more likely to become gay.

And girls who grew up without maternal love could be more likely to become lesbians.

That is, their sexual orientation is a desperate striving for the love which they never got as children.

Also, we can't trust so-called "scientific" studies today which purport that homosexuality can be nothing but "nature" instead of "nurture", because all such studies start out with the presuppositions of "political correctness". If any study's results began to undermine these presuppositions, the study would be immediately abandoned as "flawed". Otherwise, the scientists involved would have their careers completely destroyed by their universities and the media.

For the universities and the media have been swallowed whole by "political correctness".

It's a black hole which lets no light (truth) escape.

"Political correctness" is the death of truth.

Even conservative media like Fox refuse to speak any truth regarding homosexuality, and its agenda against Biblical Christianity, for fear of being boycotted by advertisers.

Just more proof that:

1 Timothy 6:10 . . . the love of money is the root of all evil . . .

So there needs to be a conservative news source which is not dependent on advertisers.

Think of an "NPR2" supported by government funds, and staffed by conservatives, just as NPR is supported by government funds and staffed by leftists, who are continually trying to push the falsehoods of "political correctness".