WorthyNews: Think You're Safe from Predators Online? How a Supreme Court Ruling May Influence That

[Anonymous Aristotle]

Question: "What is the cause of the recent plague of child molestation incidents?"

Answer: If you have not already, please read our article on pedophilia. While the Bible does not contain a detailed ranking of the wickedness of various sins, child molestation is surely near the top of the list. There is perhaps no more cruel, perverted, and loathsome sin than child molestation. Jesus consistently expressed compassion for children and anger toward anyone who would harm them (Matthew 19:14; Luke 17:1-2). While no sin is unforgivable, the evil of child molestation can only come from a warped and debauched heart and mind.

But the question at hand is what is the cause of the recent plague of child molestation incidents. Sadly and disturbingly, it does seem that child molestation is becoming more common. Given scandals involving Roman Catholic priests, Protestant leaders, man-boy love societies, and incidents involving parents, teachers, pastors, coaches, etc., the word “plague” is an apt description. While there is no way to give a conclusive answer or find a universal cause of this child molestation plague, there are definitely biblical principles which apply.

First, modern society is increasingly accepting of behaviors that the Bible declares to be sinful, immoral, and unnatural. While there is an enormous difference between child molestation and sexual acts involving consenting adults, the fact that society accepts behavior such as homosexuality allows people to consider far worse perversions of what God intended sex to be. And that leads to another question: why is society increasingly tolerant of aberrant behavior?

Child molestation and other perversions are becoming increasingly accepted because society has, for the most part, rejected the Christian worldview. The conventional wisdom is that humanity is not created in the image of God. Rather, humanity is the result of billions of years of the random processes of evolution. God is not the objective standard of morality. Rather, God is supposedly the invention of weak-minded people who are unable to accept the fact that everything in this world is meaningless. 

There is also the possibility of demon possession as an explanation in some cases. Perhaps a sin so evil and twisted could only come from the minds of the most evil creatures, Satan and his horde of demons. Satan knows the damage that—apart from the miraculous healing of God—molestation does to a child. If Satan can destroy someone’s life during childhood, there is simply less work for him and his demons to do later. Satan desires to “devour” (1 Peter 5:8) and “steal, kill, and destroy” (John 10:10). What better way than by attacking the most vulnerable and impressionable of people?

The rejection of the Christian worldview and the acceptance of a secular, naturalistic worldview leaves us with no absolute standard by which to declare child molestation to be evil. For generations, we have told people they are nothing but animals, so we should not be surprised if they begin to act like animals. If there is no absolute moral standard, then the “boundaries” people push are imaginary ones. Ultimately, child molestation is a result of people denying God and living their lives however they want.

The Bible speaks of godless individuals who “suppress the truth,” saying, “Although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. . . . Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. They exchanged the truth about God for a lie. . . . Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. . . . They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil . . . they have no understanding, no fidelity, no love, no mercy. Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them” (Romans 1:18-32).
 

[Running Gator]

13 minutes ago, Anonymous Aristotle said:

Remember when there was a movement that wanted to lower the drinking age from 21 to 18? The argument being, 18 year olds can join the military and learn how to use military grade weapons. But they can't buy a beer after training. 

 

What I remember is the drinking age being 18, way back when I was 18 and then the federal government blackmailed states into changing it so that soon the whole country was 21.  It was all done in the name of "keeping us safe".  There is no logical reason for it to be 21 vice 18, it is all based upon emotion. 

[Guest shiloh357]

1 hour ago, Anonymous Aristotle said:

One counter to this immoral ruling is to start writing Christian political and legal activist networks, and the president himself, as well as the Republican Representatives in our home states, and behind a copy of this ruling demand that pedophilia becomes a federal offense under federal law. 

Conviction mandatory life without parole. Retroactive to repeal all parole and probation orders surrounding all released offenders. 

Meanwhile, while working on that safety avenue, those of us in those 20 states that currently prosecute the sexual predator legislation demand it be prosecuted against all pedophiles released into the public domain currently . Those on parole and probation. 

This recent SCOTUS decision is inconsistent with SCOTUS prior ruling in  Kansas v. Hendricks, 521 U.S. 346 (1997).

Position Statement 55: Confining Sexual Predators in the Mental Health System

When SCOTUS says it is allowable to have baby rapists and child predators preying on children in social media, when those not yet convicted or known are already doing that, and are the cause for children being abducted across America as news reports and even the former TV show, "To Catch A Predator", report. And uncover in their stings with regard to the TV show, parents and child advocates have to go on the offensive to defend against those who defend demons who hunt children. 

This was one of those things that the late Judge Scalia used to call, "Stupid, but constitutional."

[Anonymous Aristotle]

6 minutes ago, shiloh357 said:

This was one of those things that the late Judge Scalia used to call, "Stupid, but constitutional."

And yet, the first amendment isn't inviolable. We can't yell a terrorist threat on an airplane. We can't scream fire in a crowded theater. We can't threaten the life of someone point blank claiming it is a first amendment speech right. 

And pedophiles should not have the right to traffic and prey in social media websites on the net, when they're not legally allowed to live next to a school. And when they have to register as a sex offender for life. 

It's contrary to logic for the law to say a pedophile has a legal right to speak on social media as an accessible hunting ground. But they're not legally allowed to walk to the fence of a school  or park playground and speak to children. 

[wingnut-]

This is an area that the Lord still has work to do on me, I have no compassion for people who prey on children or women.  To me they represent the very worst of humanity and I struggle to contain my contempt for them.  That being said, I honestly don't see this ruling as having any effect on those who are a danger to children or women, they are already prowling the internet and have been all along.  This ruling is not going to make them suddenly pursue their agenda in the open, they are sneaky and deviant about this.

The ruling though, does have some positive attributes, and by this I am referring to the labeling of sexual predators in the state of Michigan specifically.  This is an outdoorsy state, we do a lot of hunting, fishing, camping, etc.  There are not always restrooms available in these situations, and when nature calls there is no stopping it.  Here in Michigan, if one is caught relieving themselves in public by the authorities they are assigned the label of sexual predator in the system and are registered sex offenders.  There is a big difference between the two, and there are ongoing legal battles in the state currently trying to change this improper branding of certain individuals.

Since these people are not a danger to anyone this ruling is a positive thing for them, as it allows them to pursue liberties they have otherwise been denied because of legal loopholes.  So overall I don't see that this changes anything for the wicked, but it does bring something positive to at least some individuals.  That's my take on it anyway.

God bless

 

[Anonymous Aristotle]

10 minutes ago, wingnut- said:

This is an area that the Lord still has work to do on me, I have no compassion for people who prey on children or women.  To me they represent the very worst of humanity and I struggle to contain my contempt for them.  That being said, I honestly don't see this ruling as having any effect on those who are a danger to children or women, they are already prowling the internet and have been all along.  This ruling is not going to make them suddenly pursue their agenda in the open, they are sneaky and deviant about this.

The ruling though, does have some positive attributes, and by this I am referring to the labeling of sexual predators in the state of Michigan specifically.  This is an outdoorsy state, we do a lot of hunting, fishing, camping, etc.  There are not always restrooms available in these situations, and when nature calls there is no stopping it.  Here in Michigan, if one is caught relieving themselves in public by the authorities they are assigned the label of sexual predator in the system and are registered sex offenders.  There is a big difference between the two, and there are ongoing legal battles in the state currently trying to change this improper branding of certain individuals.

Since these people are not a danger to anyone this ruling is a positive thing for them, as it allows them to pursue liberties they have otherwise been denied because of legal loopholes.  So overall I don't see that this changes anything for the wicked, but it does bring something positive to at least some individuals.  That's my take on it anyway.

God bless

 

That's a bit like throwing the baby out with the bathwater. 

The law in Michigan needs to be changed concerning those persons caught relieving themselves in nature. Indecent exposure is even a over the top charge. Urinating in public as a misdemeanor would be appropriate. It perfectly describes the "offense".  

That a law like that which you describe concerning public urination has survived this long on the books as a sexual offense, the offender classified as a sexual predator, and a registered sex offender after conviction or plea, is ridiculous. Those laws and classifications should be changed for the public urination charge. 

This ruling thought to give those convicted of that offense more freedom is a blessing for those persons. But the ruling itself prescribes an allowance for actual sexual predators and deviants to now have a secret anonymous inroad to pursue their sinful deviant passions. That's the issue with this ruling. It itself is a sexual offense! 

How has there not been a civil rights group or activist group active in overturning the classification of public urination "offense" as prosecutable under sex offender statutes?    If someone is put in holding at a jail and that tag is found out by the inmates , too late is it to argue that offender was just caught peeing behind a tree. The sex offender tag allows others to infer that person is a rapist or pedophile. And that doesn't make for a safe time in holding or jail. 

[Running Gator]

17 minutes ago, wingnut- said:

This is an area that the Lord still has work to do on me, I have no compassion for people who prey on children or women.  To me they represent the very worst of humanity and I struggle to contain my contempt for them.  That being said, I honestly don't see this ruling as having any effect on those who are a danger to children or women, they are already prowling the internet and have been all along.  This ruling is not going to make them suddenly pursue their agenda in the open, they are sneaky and deviant about this.

Thank you for your post.  I do not think anyone here, or anyone on the SCOTUS has compassion for those who prey on children or women.  Agreeing with the legal decision is not the same as wanting children molested as has been put forth by others in this thread.    And I agree, anyone that thinks the NC law stopped any sort of predator from prowling the net is very naive. 

 

[Guest shiloh357]

Just now, Running Gator said:

 Agreeing with the legal decision is not the same as wanting children molested as has been put forth by others in this thread.   

That is another lie.  No one has said or even suggested it.  Time to start telling the truth.

[wingnut-]

1 minute ago, Anonymous Aristotle said:

That's a bit like throwing the baby out with the bathwater. 

The law in Michigan needs to be changed concerning those persons caught relieving themselves in nature. Indecent exposure is even a over the top charge. Urinating in public as a misdemeanor would be appropriate. It perfectly describes the "offense".  

That a law like that which you describe concerning public urination has survived this long on the books as a sexual offense, the offender classified as a sexual predator, and a registered sex offender after conviction or plea, is ridiculous. Those laws and classifications should be changed for the public urination charge. 

This ruling thought to give those convicted of that offense more freedom is a blessing for those persons. But the ruling itself prescribes an allowance for actual sexual predators and deviants to now have a secret anonymous inroad to pursue their sinful deviant passions. That's the issue with this ruling. It itself is a sexual offense! 

How has there not been a civil rights group or activist group active in overturning the classification of public urination "offense" as prosecutable under sex offender statutes?    If someone is put in holding at a jail and that tag is found out by the inmates , too late is it to argue that offender was just caught peeing behind a tree. The sex offender tag allows others to infer that person is a rapist or pedophile. And that doesn't make for a safe time in holding or jail. 

 

I agree, it is is a horrible law that somehow has not been ironed out here for some odd reason.  Why it wasn't or hasn't been changed to this point is indeed ridiculous, one wouldn't expect there would have to be a debate over it.  In regards to the true sexual predators out there though, I don't see this changing anything for them.  They have been on the internet all along and will continue to be, this ruling won't change how they operate in the slightest.  As I said, I have a difficult time having any compassion for them, so I am not at all happy if this somehow grants them more access, but I honestly don't see that it will.  They will continue to fly under the radar and parents need to be very careful what their children are doing on the internet, and particularly who they are talking to.  As my daughter was growing up I always was, because I have no illusions that the predators haven't been on the internet all along.

God bless

[Running Gator]

1 minute ago, shiloh357 said:

That is another lie.  No one has said or even suggested it.  Time to start telling the truth.

It has been more than just suggested.