From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Necrophilia, according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th Edition, is listed under "Other Specified Paraphiliac Disorder", 302.89, which reads "Examples of presentations that can be specified using the 'other specified' designation include, but are not limited to, recurrent and intense sexual arousal involving ... necrophilia (corpses)". Necrophiliacs often prefer corpses to be as "fresh" as possible, and as such, they have no inhibitions (and are often excited) toward luring victims to their death. Practicing Christianity under this paraphilia is impossible, and being saved virtually impossible, for obvious reasons.

Atheism and necrophilia

See also: Atheism and necrophilia and Atheism and bestiality

Joe Carter's First Things article entitled The Dangerous Mind declares concerning atheist Peter Singer:

Singer has spent a lifetime justifying the unjustifiable. He is the founding father of the animal liberation movement and advocates ending “the present speciesist bias against taking seriously the interests of nonhuman animals.” He is also a defender of killing the aged (if they have dementia), newborns (for almost any reason until they are two years old), necrophilia (assuming it’s consensual), and bestiality (also assuming it’s consensual).[1]

The abstract of a 2014 peer-reviewed study in the journal Plos One reported:

American participants intuitively judged a wide variety of immoral acts (e.g., serial murder, consensual incest, necrobestiality, cannibalism) as representative of atheists, but not of eleven other religious, ethnic, and cultural groups. Even atheist participants judged immoral acts as more representative of atheists than of other groups. These findings demonstrate a prevalent intuition that belief in God serves a necessary function in inhibiting immoral conduct, and may help explain persistent negative perceptions of atheists.[2]