(Excerpts of a conversation in progress - some content removed because context can’t be provided)

“No, because rapists and murderers are not consenting, they're abusing others. Once again, you do not understand informed consent.” ----- I do understand what informed consent it. But you still haven’t cited why informed consent makes behavior moral or not.

“No, because you do not understand the concept of consent.” ---- I do. And a child can provide consent. Your hang-up is “legal” consent. If the legal system has no definition of age required for consent, is having relations with an 8 year old moral or immoral? And why?

“You fail to understand the difference between consent and abuse.” ----- You’ve shown NO connection between the two. You’ve FAILED to show why a child cannot give consent – other than “It’s the law”. So, I ask again, since slavery was legal, is slavery moral?

“If they find nothing wrong with rape or murder, yes their morals are wrong.” ----- HOW can you make this claim that their morals are wrong?

“All right, go ahead and abuse a child.” ----- Again, HOW is it abuse if (the child) consents?

“Says the law. Age of consent laws exist for a reason.” ----- So, the law is the arbiter of what is/isn’t moral? I guess slavery was moral, right? What about countries/societies that don’t have laws regarding age of consent – are relations with children moral in those instances?

“And you have elected to believe your denomination is right and the rest are wrong.” ----- Not “the rest” – just those who reject God and His word. But the same could be said of YOU, right? You reject anyone that doesn’t believe the same way you do. How is that any different than what you accuse me of doing?

“- No, I'm asserting that you have what everyone else has - an interpretation, which means you're just as wrong as everyone else and no one can agree about things because you're all so sure you've chosen the 100% correct understanding.” ----- Upon WHAT AUTHORITY can you claim that I am wrong? How can YOU be sure that YOU’VE CHOSEN the “correct” morals? You cannot even cite an authoritative source for those morals.

“You're trying to give it the answer you want, but you can't do that.” ---- I am using how words are defined.

“People don't commit murder because they believe it's acceptable...come on. They do it out of desperation in their situation and because they no longer care and have lost the ability to reason.” ----- So, now you are a psychologist and can claim to know the motivations of every murderer?

“I love the way you think any two people on earth can just make the decision to copulate and it's going to work out peachy.” ----- When did I ever assert that any behavior will “work out peachy”? Why do you insist on asserting that I’ve said things I haven’t actually said?

“Desires you feel you have the right to tell people to squash because of your religion.” ----- FALSE. All that I’ve simply stated is that homosexual behavior is immoral. People “squash” emotions and desires all of the time.

“Not confused at all. I never said our parents got everything right.” ----- Yet you DID say that you learn your morals from your parents – that your parents are your moral authority.

“We get older and our brains develop and we learn for ourselves what good morals are.” ----- “Good” based upon WHAT? You are essentially saying that YOU are your own moral authority. If someone’s morals allow for murder or rape, is that acceptable? If not, then upon WHAT AUTHORITY can one assert something is good/bad, moral/immoral?

“that as we learn to think for ourselves that we don't need a holy book to tell us what's right and wrong.” ---- Upon WHAT BASIS can you determine something to be right or wrong, moral or immoral? You haven’t answered that simple question. You keep going on and on about “learning what is right and wrong”, yet have NEVER cited a source for what is right and wrong. If someone grows up learning that murder and rape are moral, how can you say that murder and rape aren’t moral?

“This is the last time I'm going to humor you on this subject since you don't know and have no desire to know the difference between consent and abuse.” ----- Again, you continue to FAIL to cite an authoritative source for why abuse is wrong, or where not providing legal consent is a qualifier of abuse. You have FAILED to show why, in a society where there is no law regarding age of consent, it is immoral to have relations with a child who has consented.

“We take rapists and murderers out of circulation when they engage in this behavior because it's abuse and it's illegal.” ----- But WHY are those acts immoral? Why are “abuse” and “illegal behavior” immoral? WHAT AUTHORITY asserts that these acts are immoral?

“We don't do the same with homosexuals because they decide to engage in a sexual act because it's not abuse. No one gets hurt.” ----- Whether one gets hurt or not doesn’t determine morality.

“Yes. Age of consent laws aren't absolutely perfect and no two countries draw the lines in the same places, but they do the best they can.” ----- So, if a country/society define no legal age limits on consent, having relations with a 6 year old is acceptable/moral?

“The 20 year old man goes to jail. Quite rightly.” ---- What about in countries that don’t have any limits on age of consent? Is that 20 year old man having relations with a 6 year old girl moral or immoral?