World Unyielding

Who would have thought we would see the intersection of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and child abuse so soon? The Lucy Faithfull Foundation (LFF) is a UK-registered charity focused on child protection. Increasingly, the LFF helpline is contacted by confused callers who question the ethics of consuming AI-generated child abuse images. They raise doubts over whether indecent AI-generated pictures of children should be viewed. The limits of legality and morality seem to be blurred by AI-generated images. It is not unreasonable to expect the well-used defence, “There is nobody being harmed.” The charity’s advice was earnestly sought by a teacher whose partner was viewing indecent AI images of children. It only seemed illegal to the couple, so a second opinion was obtained.

AI images can serve as an accurate representation of the real world. Complex algorithms and models are continually being trained to improve photorealism. Outputs mimic reality with increasing success. This would prove fascinating in most contexts. However, the use of AI images has inevitably taken a dark turn. On the LFF helpline, a caller said that the AI images depicting child abuse are not real. But how many real images was the model trained on to produce the artificial output? Maybe it would be worth asking the IT worker who also rang the LFF helpline. He developed AI software to produce indecent images of children. Pictures generated on-demand by text input used to prompt the AI software. In this instance, there is no reason to worry. The IT worker insisted these images were not for his own illicit consumption since he is not attracted to them. He was simply intrigued by the relatively new technology. Well, that’s a relief.

It begs the question, “How did we end up here?” It took substantial social and moral change. Social beliefs have shifted, and the influence of Judeo-Christian values is at a low. The notion of accommodating the God of the Bible in everyday decision-making has become almost laughable. Upstanding contributors to society can simply discuss matters of ethics among themselves. If a situation tiptoes at the edge of social acceptability, then ring a helpline with a call handler who will hear you out and kindly remind you of the law (or at least how the law stands at present). Why the mention of social acceptability? Surely the evil of viewing indecent images of children is plain to everyone, whether those images are real or AI-generated. Evidently not; otherwise, confused callers would not be contacting the helplines seeking moral guidance.

Today, it seems statistical norms dictate morality, which then shapes ethics. If a certain behavior proves popular, then it ought to be. It is a reversal of the pattern set by God. God commands; He sets the ethics as clearly communicated in His word. God states how a person ought to be. There is the standard. God dictates the right context for sexual expression: marriage between one man and one woman. But in recent history, a certain sexual revolution took place. Thoughts introduced then have continued to this day, leading to a consistent rejection of the ethics set by God. Such rejection leaves no option but to sin. God’s word is set against a hostile world. What people ought to be is set against the backdrop of what people actually are. There is a sharp contrast, and it only gets sharper as people continue down a path leading away from God and His word. Confusion clouds collective thought, and appeals are made to the popularity of certain behaviors as a guide for moral goodness.

Remove God from the thought process, and what reason do call handlers have to tell callers on the LFF helpline that they are wrong? They may appeal to UK law, but lawmakers are struggling to pace with developments in AI-generated abusive material depicting children. Once published online, these materials have the potential to attract interest, increase viewership, and serve as a gateway to abusing children in the real world. God forbid a time when an appeal to social acceptability can no longer be made in the event of perverse persons being labeled victims. It has happened before. Unnatural relations that once belonged in a closet now are given the badge of approval in the form of a so-called marriage certificate. Past decades have exposed the grounds of social acceptability to be slippery. The moral position of the populace slips nearer to an abyss of confusion where a free-for-all for the supposed high-ground takes place. And in the midst of it all, the distinction between right and wrong is blurred.

The unchanging character of God and what He commands is the best basis to both define and contend with evil behavior. God does not struggle to keep pace with emerging technologies; He has perfect foreknowledge. Since the creation of the world, He knew what was to come. God the Father sent Jesus Christ, the Son of God, to bear witness to the truth. On a mount 2000 years ago, Jesus preached not only against deviant sexual behavior but also deviant sexual fantasy. Jesus communicated the will of God, saying, “But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart” (Matthew 5:28). See the standard of what ought to be. It involves both action and the inward disposition of the heart. What is a person attracted to? Never mind social acceptability; is it acceptable before God? Few would openly argue against the evil of sexual attraction toward children, even if it is not acted on. It is a sin. The world labels it a disorder. But has not that label been applied to other behaviors before? And those same behaviors which we once rightly frowned upon are now celebrated with vigor, now justified by new statistical norms (or so we are told). Cue the convenient findings of research from the pseudo-sciences.

Call handlers at the LFF are worthy of admiration. It takes courage to deal with situations of plain evil poorly veiled behind avowed confusion and ignorance. However, the most courageous stand against evil begins with self. Contemplate your life and consider what is. Read God’s word and consider what ought to be. It states the ultimate sexual ethic that is bound to rub people the wrong way. God commands the channeling of sexual actions and desires toward one member of the opposite sex within marriage. There exists a spectrum of ways people fall woefully short of this standard. In the spirit of self-expression, indeed all have gone astray. We have turned from God’s ethic, everyone, to his own way of living. And there we find a false sense of peace and security in the construction of our own morality.

Like the aforementioned call handlers offering reminders of UK law, the Bible offers you a reminder of God’s law to which we are all subject. There is a required ethic that exists apart from you, me, and whatever we think. In God’s word, we see an open declaration of what ought to be and the reality of what is. A penalty is incurred wherever a person’s life does not match this ethic. Though from your perspective, you may see yourself as better than somebody else, God’s impartial perspective is made clear: “There is none who does good, no, not one.” (Romans 3:12). In other words, the morality at work in each of us does not attain to the nature of God’s goodness, which is not lacking in any way. What is a good God to do with those who are neither good nor capable of doing good?

Abuse of emerging technologies only adds to the mountain of evidence pointing to the evil of human nature from which we ourselves are not excused. Reader, do you marvel at the desperately wicked imaginations of men who leverage technology for their own perverse desires? What we scowl at today may be smiled at tomorrow. If you concern yourself with what is right, side with the unchanging God and not a changing society.