Dragphobia on the rise...

[RumTumTugger]

Shall we revisit your Acts fiasco?

Is that the discussion where I had to lead her by the hand to read the entire context of the anni bias and saphira incident?

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

So it comes down to this: those who identify as homosexual are significantly more likely than heterosexuals to sexually molest children:

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1556756/
https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.e...press-release/

The second paper deals with violence against sexual and gender minorities.

But then one is inclined to wonder, does a man who thinks himself a heterosexual but is attracted to male children really a heterosexual, or is he more accurately classified as a homosexual? Because that would certainly have an impact on the stats.

Ah so "real men" are not paedophiles?

[Starlight]

Is that the discussion where I had to lead her by the hand to read the entire context of the anni bias and saphira incident?

I had an interesting realization about that story some years back, which I'm sure you won't like.

Any society faces the problem that there are some people who are going to try and exploit the system for their own gain, so all societies need some sort of checks to prevent this. Full-communist societies, that implement "from each according to his ability to each according to his need" to the max, are particularly susceptible to exploitation by the selfish who can either take more than they need or give less than their ability. This has typically lead to full-communist societies having overzealous and authoritarian police forces, as the society to maintain itself has a need to crack down quite heavily on the breaking of these rules, and yet despite this such full-communist societies have typically been very corrupt as even that level of policing has been unable to prevent some people at all levels acting selfishly.

In the context of the full-communist society depicted in Acts, who or what is the police force, and what is the check on corruption? The only story about such is the Ananias and Sapphiraincident where God acts as the omniscient overzealous police force, doling out the death penalty for a violation of the fundamental rules of the society. Which is what you would actually need to in such a full-communist society to stop selfish people from undermining and collapsing the system. This story then fills in the God-as-enforcer role in the utopian/dystopian full-communist society depicted in Acts, and serves a purpose as a warning to anyone in the society who was tempted to selfishness and undermining the system.

Of course, as an atheist, I have no doubt that it didn't actually work, because God doesn't exist and hence he didn't omnisciently strike down those corrupting the system. And hence the full-communist system in Acts, if it actually existed beyond the imagination of the writer of Acts, would have fairly rapidly fallen apart as all such systems are going to do due to some humans in the system being selfish and taking more than they need or giving less than their ability, and the lack of any omniscient police force to stop them. And that's one reason I'm not a communist. (Regardless of how many right-wing posters on this site assume I must be because I'm a leftist or progressive or democratic socialist, and they are incapable of understanding the difference between such things and communism)

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

I had an interesting realization about that story some years back, which I'm sure you won't like.

Any society faces the problem that there are some people who are going to try and exploit the system for their own gain, so all societies need some sort of checks to prevent this. Full-communist societies, that implement "from each according to his ability to each according to his need" to the max, are particularly susceptible to exploitation by the selfish who can either take more than they need or give less than their ability. This has typically lead to full-communist societies having overzealous and authoritarian police forces, as the society to maintain itself has a need to crack down quite heavily on the breaking of these rules, and yet despite this such full-communist societies have typically been very corrupt as even that level of policing has been unable to prevent some people at all levels acting selfishly.

In the context of the full-communist society depicted in Acts, who or what is the police force, and what is the check on corruption? The only story about such is the Ananias and Sapphiraincident where God acts as the omniscient overzealous police force, doling out the death penalty for a violation of the fundamental rules of the society. Which is what you would actually need to in such a full-communist society to stop selfish people from undermining and collapsing the system. This story then fills in the God-as-enforcer role in the utopian/dystopian full-communist society depicted in Acts, and serves a purpose as a warning to anyone in the society who was tempted to selfishness and undermining the system.

Of course, as an atheist, I have no doubt that it didn't actually work, because God doesn't exist and hence he didn't omnisciently strike down those corrupting the system. And hence the full-communist system in Acts, if it actually existed beyond the imagination of the writer of Acts, would have fairly rapidly fallen apart as all such systems are going to do due to some humans in the system being selfish and taking more than they need or giving less than their ability, and the lack of any omniscient police force to stop them. And that's one reason I'm not a communist. (Regardless of how many right-wing posters on this site assume I must be because I'm a leftist or progressive or democratic socialist, and they are incapable of understanding the difference between such things and communism)

That is an interesting interpretation of the alleged incident in Acts.

[Diogenes]

I had an interesting realization about that story some years back, which I'm sure you won't like.

Any society faces the problem that there are some people who are going to try and exploit the system for their own gain, so all societies need some sort of checks to prevent this. Full-communist societies, that implement "from each according to his ability to each according to his need" to the max, are particularly susceptible to exploitation by the selfish who can either take more than they need or give less than their ability. This has typically lead to full-communist societies having overzealous and authoritarian police forces, as the society to maintain itself has a need to crack down quite heavily on the breaking of these rules, and yet despite this such full-communist societies have typically been very corrupt as even that level of policing has been unable to prevent some people at all levels acting selfishly.

In the context of the full-communist society depicted in Acts, who or what is the police force, and what is the check on corruption? The only story about such is the Ananias and Sapphiraincident where God acts as the omniscient overzealous police force, doling out the death penalty for a violation of the fundamental rules of the society. Which is what you would actually need to in such a full-communist society to stop selfish people from undermining and collapsing the system. This story then fills in the God-as-enforcer role in the utopian/dystopian full-communist society depicted in Acts, and serves a purpose as a warning to anyone in the society who was tempted to selfishness and undermining the system.

Of course, as an atheist, I have no doubt that it didn't actually work, because God doesn't exist and hence he didn't omnisciently strike down those corrupting the system. And hence the full-communist system in Acts, if it actually existed beyond the imagination of the writer of Acts, would have fairly rapidly fallen apart as all such systems are going to do due to some humans in the system being selfish and taking more than they need or giving less than their ability, and the lack of any omniscient police force to stop them. And that's one reason I'm not a communist. (Regardless of how many right-wing posters on this site assume I must be because I'm a leftist or progressive or democratic socialist, and they are incapable of understanding the difference between such things and communism)

Ah yes, communist regimes have authoritarian police forces to prevent people from exploiting the system when.....checks notes....it's the New Class, nomenklatura, etc exploiting the system.

[Starlight]

Ah yes, communist regimes have authoritarian police forces to prevent people from exploiting the system when.....checks notes....it's the New Class, nomenklatura, etc exploiting the system.

I said that such enforcement doesn't succeed in stopping the undermining of the system. Because, yes, there are those in positions of power (the New Class as you refer to them), that manage to evade enforcement and corruptly exploit the system. Hence communism doesn't work. Not sure what part of that you think is funny.

Whether Capitalism ultimately fails for the same reasons seems to still be an open question. In the US, at least, those in positions of power seem to be exploiting the system pretty successfully for their own gain, and corruption is multiplying.

[Diogenes]

I said that such enforcement doesn't succeed in stopping the undermining of the system. Because, yes, there are those in positions of power (the New Class as you refer to them), that manage to evade enforcement and corruptly exploit the system. Hence communism doesn't work. Not sure what part of that you think is funny.

"There are those"...you mean practically every one. Even Marx lived off the exploitation of the proletariat.

Whether Capitalism ultimately fails for the same reasons seems to still be an open question.

It's doubtful capitalism will fail for reasons of corruption, even Cuba has moved towards the recognition of private prosperity.

In the US, at least, those in positions of power seem to be exploiting the system pretty successfully for their own gain, and corruption is multiplying.

Corruption need not be mere exploitation for financial gain. Much like in Star Wars, the masses would cheer for anti-democratic corruption should they be sufficiently conditioned. Covid provided a real life taste of power in the form of the state of exception.

[Mountain Man]

The second paper deals with violence against sexual and gender minorities.



Ah so "real men" are not paedophiles?

I apparently copied the wrong source in the second link, but that doesn't nullify the research discussed in the first link, which I notice you didn't touch.

As for your mocking followup, would you not agree that a man who thinks himself heterosexual but is attracted to other males would be more accurately classified as a homosexual, even if the other males he happens to be attracted to are children?

[Mountain Man]

I had an interesting realization about that story some years back, which I'm sure you won't like.

Any society faces the problem that there are some people who are going to try and exploit the system for their own gain, so all societies need some sort of checks to prevent this. Full-communist societies, that implement "from each according to his ability to each according to his need" to the max, are particularly susceptible to exploitation by the selfish who can either take more than they need or give less than their ability. This has typically lead to full-communist societies having overzealous and authoritarian police forces, as the society to maintain itself has a need to crack down quite heavily on the breaking of these rules, and yet despite this such full-communist societies have typically been very corrupt as even that level of policing has been unable to prevent some people at all levels acting selfishly.

In the context of the full-communist society depicted in Acts, who or what is the police force, and what is the check on corruption? The only story about such is the Ananias and Sapphiraincident where God acts as the omniscient overzealous police force, doling out the death penalty for a violation of the fundamental rules of the society. Which is what you would actually need to in such a full-communist society to stop selfish people from undermining and collapsing the system. This story then fills in the God-as-enforcer role in the utopian/dystopian full-communist society depicted in Acts, and serves a purpose as a warning to anyone in the society who was tempted to selfishness and undermining the system.

Of course, as an atheist, I have no doubt that it didn't actually work, because God doesn't exist and hence he didn't omnisciently strike down those corrupting the system. And hence the full-communist system in Acts, if it actually existed beyond the imagination of the writer of Acts, would have fairly rapidly fallen apart as all such systems are going to do due to some humans in the system being selfish and taking more than they need or giving less than their ability, and the lack of any omniscient police force to stop them. And that's one reason I'm not a communist. (Regardless of how many right-wing posters on this site assume I must be because I'm a leftist or progressive or democratic socialist, and they are incapable of understanding the difference between such things and communism)

That rather fanciful interpretation of Acts 5 doesn't work when the text makes it clear that Ananias and Sapphira were under no obligation to give their money to the community.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

I apparently copied the wrong source in the second link, but that doesn't nullify the research discussed in the first link, which I notice you didn't touch.

I read it.

As for your mocking followup, would you not agree that a man who thinks himself heterosexual but is attracted to other males would be more accurately classified as a homosexual

There was no mockery in my reply - you are either suffering from delusions or you do not understand the meaning of that word [mocking: showing ridicule, contempt, or derision].

As for being sexuallyattracted to both sexes - that is generally regarded as bi-sexuality. Ted Haggard is a good example. An [apparently] happily married man with five children who also likes young men.

However, a man who identifies as heterosexual could equally be attracted to prepubescent females. Do we agree?

[Mountain Man]

I read it.

There was no mockery in my reply - you are either suffering from delusions or you do not understand the meaning of that word [mocking: showing ridicule, contempt, or derision].

As for being sexuallyattracted to both sexes - that is generally regarded as bi-sexuality. Ted Haggard is a good example. An [apparently] happily married man with five children who also likes young men.

However, a man who identifies as heterosexual could equally be attracted to prepubescent females. Do we agree?

The point you seem intent on missing is the fact that homosexuals, whether self-identified, or identified by the nature of their sexual attractions, are considerably more likely than heterosexuals to sexually molest children.

[Cow Poke]

The point you seem intent on missing is the fact that homosexuals, whether self-identified, or identified by the nature of their sexual attractions, are considerably more likely than heterosexuals to sexually molest children.

Two words - Catholic Church.

[rogue06]

That rather fanciful interpretation of Acts 5 doesn't work when the text makes it clear that Ananias and Sapphira were under no obligation to give their money to the community.

In spite of a goodly number of posters explaining that point to her in the "go, sell all that you have and give to the poor..." thread multiple times, she is either unwilling or incapable of understanding that.

[rogue06]

The point you seem intent on missing is the fact that homosexuals, whether self-identified, or identified by the nature of their sexual attractions, are considerably more likely than heterosexuals to sexually molest children.

Wrote something about that regarding investigations by the RCC into their pedophile priest problem that discovered the same thing but can't find it now.

[Cow Poke]

In spite of a goodly number of posters explaining that point to her in the "go, sell all that you have and give to the poor..." thread multiple times, she is either unwilling or incapable of understanding that.

Kinda like a ?