Is Forrest Gump's Mum Going to Hell?

[Purple Knight]

There's a scene in Forrest Gump where his mum trades sexual favours with the principal of the school in exchange for her mentally handicapped (by only 5 IQ points under the required 80) son to be able to attend normal classes. I've never believed in anything really and when I saw the film at a young age, I thought, how horrible a thing, what a disgusting thing that she would do, so her son can have a better chance at a normal life. I considered her a hero. I even thought, I would not do such a thing in that position. Just too gross.

Biblically, however, sex is pretty well sacred.

Question for Debate: Is sacrificing your own body in a sexual way, but entirely for the selfless good of someone else, a heroic or an evil act?

(The thread title was intentionally sensational. I understand that in Christianity, doing something wrong or even evil does not automatically mean you burn in Hell. I quite understand about forgiveness. My question is whether this is something she needs to be forgiven for.)

[1213]

...The question is why the act is wrong. It didn't hurt anybody but her. ....
...You'd feel differently if it was her arm, right? What if, instead of sex, the principal had wanted her to chop off her arm and give it to him? What if it was her severed arm and not her vagina? Then it's a selfless and heroic act, not a sinful one?...

I think, if it hurts her, it is bad enough. But, even when I think it is wrong, I think it can be forgiven. I can understand why someone would do so, even if I think there are better ways to arrange things.

One problem with this is, I think it is the lazy and easy solution what she chose. And to me that makes it bad and worse.

[Purple Knight]

I think, if it hurts her, it is bad enough.

The whole body is sacred then, in this "don't sell yourself" way. Not just the vagina. In other words, God didn't give you two arms so you could lop one off to trade for bread or a better life for your child. Do I have you correct here? I know there's a sect that believes this, and they not only don't like organ donation, they don't like vaccines either. Now I'm not judging them as wrong, in fact to a point I agree with them, and furthermore you don't have to go that far.

I can understand why someone would do so, even if I think there are better ways to arrange things.

One problem with this is, I think it is the lazy and easy solution what she chose. And to me that makes it bad and worse.

Well yes, if there's another solution that requires more effort for the same or better result, the prostitution option is the lazy one. One could even say, well, if the only way I see to get my son into regular classes is to sell my body to the lusty principal, maybe God wants my son in the learning disabled classes.

[1213]

The whole body is sacred then, in this "don't sell yourself" way. Not just the vagina. In other words, God didn't give you two arms so you could lop one off to trade for bread or a better life for your child. Do I have you correct here?...

Yes, I don’t think it would be good and I think it would be evil to require someone to do so.

[nobspeople]

The whole body is sacred then, in this "don't sell yourself" way. Not just the vagina. In other words, God didn't give you two arms so you could lop one off to trade for bread or a better life for your child. Do I have you correct here?...

Yes, I don’t think it would be good and I think it would be evil to require someone to do so.

Would it still be evil if one wasn't required to do so?

[1213]

The whole body is sacred then, in this "don't sell yourself" way. Not just the vagina. In other words, God didn't give you two arms so you could lop one off to trade for bread or a better life for your child. Do I have you correct here?...

Yes, I don’t think it would be good and I think it would be evil to require someone to do so.

Would it still be evil if one wasn't required to do so?

Not necessary evil. I think it would just be not good.

[nobspeople]

The whole body is sacred then, in this "don't sell yourself" way. Not just the vagina. In other words, God didn't give you two arms so you could lop one off to trade for bread or a better life for your child. Do I have you correct here?...

Yes, I don’t think it would be good and I think it would be evil to require someone to do so.

Would it still be evil if one wasn't required to do so?

Not necessary evil. I think it would just be not good.

What's the difference between 'evil' and 'not good'?

[JoeyKnothead]

The whole body is sacred then, in this "don't sell yourself" way. Not just the vagina. In other words, God didn't give you two arms so you could lop one off to trade for bread or a better life for your child. Do I have you correct here?...

Yes, I don’t think it would be good and I think it would be evil to require someone to do so.

Would it still be evil if one wasn't required to do so?

Not necessary evil. I think it would just be not good.

What's the difference between 'evil' and 'not good'?

Evil is the cops pouring your beer out on the ground.
Not good is cause they done caught you DUI.

[nobspeople]

The whole body is sacred then, in this "don't sell yourself" way. Not just the vagina. In other words, God didn't give you two arms so you could lop one off to trade for bread or a better life for your child. Do I have you correct here?...

Yes, I don’t think it would be good and I think it would be evil to require someone to do so.

Would it still be evil if one wasn't required to do so?

Not necessary evil. I think it would just be not good.

What's the difference between 'evil' and 'not good'?

Evil is the cops pouring your beer out on the ground.
Not good is cause they done caught you DUI.

It could be good for the one you were going to hit in your DUI stupor, though.

[1213]

...
What's the difference between 'evil' and 'not good'?

I think evil means one purposefully wants to cause harm. Not good is something that is not good for person, but it is not necessarily done with the purpose to cause harm.

[nobspeople]

...
What's the difference between 'evil' and 'not good'?

I think evil means one purposefully wants to cause harm. Not good is something that is not good for person, but it is not necessarily done with the purpose to cause harm.

So, it seems, the 'intent' is the differentiation between these terms for you, no?