The Problem of Evil

[Non sequitur]

It would just be highly atypical for a single man not to have pornography is his recent viewing history, especially when he would likely have no moral qualms about it.

I have none in my history, nor have I deleted any (in years)

While I have no moral qualms about it, I think it can be a psychologically negative thing.

 

[abacabb3]

There is no porn in my viewing history over the last 72 hours.

Even if there had been though, what's your point?

It's an activity that is not only perverse, but it helps continue the exploitation of vulnerable young women.

 

[Dave Ellis]

It's an activity that is not only perverse, but it helps continue the exploitation of vulnerable young women.

What if everyone in the video are consenting adults and entered into it by their own will without coercion?

 

[abacabb3]

What if everyone in the video are consenting adults and entered into it by their own will without coercion?

It is an exploitative industry. That's why it is illegal to sell one's organs. Further, most of these people get caught up into a lifestyle that though they do so by their own free will, they are encouraged into negative habits that make them dependent upon the industry.

 

[Dave Ellis]

It is an exploitative industry.

Many industries are exploitative. However, like any industry that has exploitative elements, there are also legitimate and non-exploitative parts of the industry as well.

As such, the problem isn't the industry, it's the exploitation. If we can work to make that go away, would you still have a problem with the industry as a whole?

That's why it is illegal to sell one's organs.

I don't believe anyone in porn is selling their organs... I think trying to film a porn while hocking your right kidney would not work very well.

Further, most of these people get caught up into a lifestyle that though they do so by their own free will, they are encouraged into negative habits that make them dependent upon the industry.

That again is the case for many industries. Why are you making a special exemption for the porn industry?

 

[Non sequitur]

It's an activity that is not only perverse, but it helps continue the exploitation of vulnerable young women.

How is it perverse? Who says they are vulnerable? Why just women?

 

[abacabb3]

How is it perverse? Who says they are vulnerable? Why just women?

Same goes for the men. It is perverse because it is not an activity people would do in public for everyone to see, hence it is a shameful activity.

 

[Dave Ellis]

Same goes for the men. It is perverse because it is not an activity people would do in public for everyone to see, hence it is a shameful activity.

Actually, there's a fairly substantial demographic of people who have had sex in a public area at least once in their life.

 

[abacabb3]

Many industries are exploitative. However, like any industry that has exploitative elements, there are also legitimate and non-exploitative parts of the industry as well.

As such, the problem isn't the industry, it's the exploitation. If we can work to make that go away, would you still have a problem with the industry as a whole?

You are distracting from the fact that you likely partake in an activity, without vetting it, indirectly hurts people. This is what I talk about when I say you, or me, or anyone is not a good person. If you dig hard enough, there are things like this in everyone's lives. There were things that I was totally unaware of that I then realize I was in the wrong and then correct. I am sure there are things I still don't see now, which I will find and then correct.

I don't believe anyone in porn is selling their organs... I think trying to film a porn while hocking your right kidney would not work very well.

It is illegal to sell organs for the same reason pornography is immoral, because it is inherently exploitive.

I find it funny that we can disagree upon ethics on a subject that we can both understand pretty clearly. I think it proves my contention throughout this whole conversation. Whose measure is the morality that we gauge God? I find our, very human view of morality so malleable it is useless to make declarative statements about God's justice.

 

[abacabb3]

Actually, there's a fairly substantial demographic of people who have had sex in a public area at least once in their life.

Yes, and there also people who molest children and do other acts. The existence of a few people doing an activity, without any apparent shame, does not make it any less shameful.



But, let me focus the point I am getting at. Is there any activity at all that you partake in, in recent memory, that you are shamed of, even a little? If you say no, I just think you are an outright liar. I am ashamed of tons of things I did, like how I ran my business and how I related with my wife. I am ashamed when I lose my temper. These are very human, common things. If someone lies to win an argument to say they have absolutely nothing to be ashamed of, then I think it just proves my point, as there person is so ashamed of their shame, they cannot even owe up to it.

 

[Dave Ellis]

You are distracting from the fact that you likely partake in an activity, without vetting it, indirectly hurts people. This is what I talk about when I say you, or me, or anyone is not a good person. If you dig hard enough, there are things like this in everyone's lives. There were things that I was totally unaware of that I then realize I was in the wrong and then correct. I am sure there are things I still don't see now, which I will find and then correct.

The thing is that you're missing is that I would not view anything that I know to be exploiting someone. Furthermore, I believe exploitation in all its forms should not be tolerated and should be stopped.

You didn't answer my question though, if we were able to completely stop all forms of exploitation in porn, would you still have a problem with the industry?

It is illegal to sell organs for the same reason pornography is immoral, because it is inherently exploitive.

Except it's not inherently exploitative. A great deal of the industry is legitimate.

I find it funny that we can disagree upon ethics on a subject that we can both understand pretty clearly. I think it proves my contention throughout this whole conversation. Whose measure is the morality that we gauge God? I find our, very human view of morality so malleable it is useless to make declarative statements about God's justice.

The difference is you haven't supported your case as to why viewing non-exploitative porn is immoral.

I think we can both agree porn which involves people being exploited is immoral, but that's because of the exploitation.

I have a feeling though that the exploitation isn't really your major problem, since I'd be willing to bet money you'd find non-exploitative porn to be immoral as well. As a guess, your justification will probably be something along the lines of what the bible has to say, or that god says so.

 

[Dave Ellis]

Yes, and there also people who molest children and do other acts. The existence of a few people doing an activity, without any apparent shame, does not make it any less shameful.

You're equating two young lovers getting in on in the back seat of a car to child molestation?

Really?

But, let me focus the point I am getting at. Is there any activity at all that you partake in, in recent memory, that you are shamed of, even a little? If you say no, I just think you are an outright liar.

The answer is no. I tend to avoid doing things I will regret doing later on.

Now justify your claim about me being a liar.

I am ashamed of tons of things I did, like how I ran my business and how I related with my wife. I am ashamed when I lose my temper. These are very human, common things. If someone lies to win an argument to say they have absolutely nothing to be ashamed of, then I think it just proves my point, as there person is so ashamed of their shame, they cannot even owe up to it.

Well, I feel sorry for you that you can't live up to a reasonable ethical standard, despite supposedly adhering to a religion which apparently teaches you divine wisdom when it comes to ethics (i.e. the teachings of Jesus).

However, just because you carry yourself in a way that makes you feel ashamed of yourself, does not mean that everyone else does.

I started a new job in September and have been working my butt off ever since, and I haven't done anything I feel shame or guilt over. In fact, I'm quite proud of the job I've done since I started here.

As for personal relations with people, I can't recall the last thing I did which I feel shame over. Not to say it's never happened, obviously I've made mistakes along the line, but I can't think of anything in the recent past.

But again, as I said earlier, I put a pretty conscious effort into not doing things that would cause me to feel shame or regret later on. If you treat people well, you generally have nothing to feel ashamed about.

 

[abacabb3]

As for personal relations with people, I can't recall the last thing I did which I feel shame over. Not to say it's never happened, obviously I've made mistakes along the line, but I can't think of anything in the recent past.

But again, as I said earlier, I put a pretty conscious effort into not doing things that would cause me to feel shame or regret later on. If you treat people well, you generally have nothing to feel ashamed about.

The point is, you admit you have done things that you are shamed of, that can be constituted as "evil" to some degree? Of course not every single thing you have done is overtly evil, but my point is that you have done evil things before and will do so again.

Being that an evil person is someone who does evil things, why can't I accurately call you evil?

P.S. Concerning pornography, I think much we are getting at is besides the point, so I'll give you the last word for that. Further, concerning my own personal moral failings, "regrets, I have a few." For the record, I am not an antinomian. I try to be very vigilant in ridding sin from my life.

 

[Dave Ellis]

The point is, you admit you have done things that you are shamed of, that can be constituted as "evil" to some degree? Of course not every single thing you have done is overtly evil, but my point is that you have done evil things before and will do so again.

Being that an evil person is someone who does evil things, why can't I accurately call you evil?

Well, I don't think I've ever done anything to anyone that could be accurately described as evil. But that's beside the point. What you're getting at is Ray Comfort stuff, and it's a horribly flawed viewpoint... here's why:

Even if (for the sake of argument) I grant you that I carried out minor evils, it's also true that I have carried out minor goods, and major goods.

So, if committing a minor evil gives you reason to call me an evil person, you also have to call me a good person, or very good person based on the good things I've done for people in the past as well.

I'm sure you've also done good things for people in the past as well, as such, if you call yourself evil based on having done some evil things, you also have to call yourself good for having done good things.



So basically, what it comes down to is a sliding scale. I have done far, far more good things that I can be proud of in my life than bad things that I feel ashamed over. Hence, I consider myself a good person, albeit not a perfect one.

 

[abacabb3]

What you are saying is that you did more bad than good, and that excuses you. But who is the judge that you did more bad more than good? Yourself?

It appears your view of justice is egocentric. I am not saying that as an insult, but a plain statement of fact.

 

[Dave Ellis]

What you are saying is that you did more bad than good, and that excuses you. But who is the judge that you did more bad more than good? Yourself?

It appears your view of justice is egocentric. I am not saying that as an insult, but a plain statement of fact.

No, what I'm saying is that I've done far more good than bad, and that qualifies me as a good person on the whole, but not a perfect person.

And who said anything about a view of justice? I never brought anything like that up.

 

[abacabb3]

No, what I'm saying is that I've done far more good than bad, and that qualifies me as a good person on the whole, but not a perfect person.

And who said anything about a view of justice? I never brought anything like that up.

Because you just declared yourself good, but based upon what criteria? Where is it written in stone that doing more good than bad makes someone good?

 

[Dave Ellis]

Because you just declared yourself good, but based upon what criteria? Where is it written in stone that doing more good than bad makes someone good?

Because if say, 95% of the things you do are good and the other 5% are bad, it's only reasonable to call that person good.

What's your justification for saying otherwise?

 

[Jeremy E Walker]

Because if say, 95% of the things you do are good and the other 5% are bad, it's only reasonable to call that person good.

What's your justification for saying otherwise?

God's assessment that all our "righteousness" is as filthy rags.

God's assessment that there is none who is good, no not one.

There is none who seeks after God, they have altogether become corrupt.

And again, all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God.

That is our justification.

Why?

Because we are Christians not followers of Dave Ellis.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

God's assessment that all our "righteousness" is as filthy rags.

God's assessment that there is none who is good, no not one.

This is one of the perverse things about religious morality. It shifts the focus of morality from the wellbeing of humans and centres it instead on the purported desires of a deity.