In the State of Nature, Hobbes believes a man’s life in nature is “nasty, brutish, and short.” As we have noted before, Hobbes defines our natural state as “savage”. This savage man is one who exists only for himself, and will do anything to satisfy his own self-interests and to ultimately stay alive. This self-interest is therefore a singular pursuit and because he believes that all ends justify all means, there are absolutely no moral limitations and he can do anything that he wants. He has no idea of justice, morality, or personal property. Hobbes suggests that we have no inherent free will, but instead all of our actions are governed by responses to stimuli, essentially “knee-jerk” reactions over which we have no control resulting from the various impulses that are experienced by our central nervous systems .
This snippet from the Telegraph indicates that Hobbesian philosopy is alive and well:
The Catholic Archbishop of Durban, Wilfrid Fox Napier, has said that people who were abused as children and became paedophiles were not criminally responsible for their actions in the same way as somebody “who chooses to do something like that”.
Cardinal Napier, who was among the 115 cardinals in the conclave at the Vatican that elected Pope Francis earlier this week, called paedophilia a “psychological disorder” on told BBC Radio 5 live.
He said: “What do you do with disorders? You have got to try and put them right. If I as a normal being choose to break the law knowing that I am breaking the law, then I think I need to be punished.
“From my experience paedophilia is actually an illness, it is not a criminal condition, it is an illness.”
Back in January, the Guardian newspaper promoted the normalization of pedophilia as a “sexual orientation”:
Debate still rages, too, about the clinical definition of paedophilia. Down the years, the American Psychiatric Association’sDiagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders – “the psychiatrist’s bible” – has variously classified it as a sexual deviation, a sociopathic condition and a non-psychotic medical disorder. And few agree about what causes it. Is paedophilia innate or acquired? Research at the sexual behaviours clinic of Canada’s Centre for Addiction and Mental Health suggests paedophiles’ IQs are, on average, 10% lower than those of sex offenders who had abused adults, and that paedophiles are significantly less likely to be right-handed than the rest of the population, suggesting a link to brain development. MRI scans reveal a possible issue with paedophiles’ “white matter”: the signals connecting different areas of the brain. Paedophiles may be wired differently.
This is radical stuff. But there is a growing conviction, notably in Canada, that paedophilia should probably be classified as a distinct sexual orientation, like heterosexuality or homosexuality. Two eminent researchers testified to that effect to a Canadian parliamentary commission last year, and the Harvard Mental Health Letter of July 2010 stated baldly that paedophilia “is a sexual orientation” and therefore “unlikely to change”…
For Goode, though, broader, societal change is needed. “Adult sexual attraction to children is part of the continuum of human sexuality; it’s not something we can eliminate,” she says. “If we can talk about this rationally – acknowledge that yes, men do get sexually attracted to children, but no, they don’t have to act on it – we can maybe avoid the hysteria. We won’t label paedophiles monsters; it won’t be taboo to see and name what is happening in front of us.”
There is an insidious undercurrent to this rejection of morality by both church and society. It sets the stage for totalitarian government – if man cannot control himself, he must be controlled by some authority…
I would note that while both the Telegraph and the Daily Mail try to tie this acceptance of pedophilia to the Catholic Church by writing that Cardinal Napier “…was among the 115 cardinals in the conclave at the Vatican that elected the new Pontiff earlier this week…”, that does not mean that there is wide support for pedophiles in the Catholic church. Napier was one of 115 who voted and we do not know if he even voted for Pope Francis I or not – this is a dishonest “journalistic” trick to tie two unrelated or unproven items together. The one statement by the Cardinal is not the issue, it is the broader championing of the behavior that is disturbing.