Evil? Now, perhaps. Later? Not so much.

Discuss life, the universe, and everything with other members of this site. Get to know your fellow polywell enthusiasts.

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

KitemanSA
Posts: 6179
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 3:05 pm
Location: OlyPen WA

Post by KitemanSA »

zapkitty wrote:
KitemanSA wrote:
zapkitty wrote:This particular revival of the "gays = pedophiles" meme is a deliberate effort by core wingers
In what way are the left wingers using this? :lol:
To make fun of the right wingers, of course... wait... you found some left wingers?
You?

KitemanSA
Posts: 6179
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 3:05 pm
Location: OlyPen WA

Post by KitemanSA »

Diogenes wrote: But the term is contingent upon the legal definition of statutory rape. As soon as the convention of professionals gets that changed, the term will not apply any more.

Then they will just be "consenting persons."
At which point, the society crumbles and another society more in tune with reality steps in.

You see, whereas laws can be changed, and moral CODEs try but frequently fail to describe reality, there is in fact "morality", the subject of "right vs wrong". Some things are just "wrong". Involving someone in a sexual activity involuntarily is rape, and is wrong. It is also illegal, but the law just tries to codify how society will treat those who do wrong.

zapkitty
Posts: 267
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 8:13 pm

Post by zapkitty »

KitemanSA wrote:
zapkitty wrote:
KitemanSA wrote: In what way are the left wingers using this? :lol:
To make fun of the right wingers, of course... wait... you found some left wingers?
You?
That would depend on where you define the center... but right now in politics "center" is just a code phrase for Goldman Sachs...

rjaypeters
Posts: 869
Joined: Fri Aug 20, 2010 2:04 pm
Location: Summerville SC, USA

Post by rjaypeters »

It is easy for us to become accomodating to some ideas. Pedophilia as normal? I don't think so. Despite everything else, I will always go back to the lack of informed consent on the part of a child.

A sarcastic saying from another context, but it fits: "We used to be disgusted, now we are merely amused."
"Aqaba! By Land!" T. E. Lawrence

R. Peters

Giorgio
Posts: 3061
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2009 6:15 pm
Location: China, Italy

Post by Giorgio »

That's a hot topic also here, but I feel that it will never be really solved until you fix some clear definitions for pedophilia.

The way the laws are now and especially the way the kids are now makes it so that many times the laws plays against the same kids they are trying to protect.

ladajo
Posts: 6258
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 11:18 pm
Location: North East Coast

Post by ladajo »

I think the root of all this falls into the realm of the more powerful taking advantage of the weaker. Be it whomever the targeted victim, it should be fundamental that it is wrong for anyone to use an advantage be it physical/mental/positional to coerce another person(s) into acts they would not think of doing on their own. As I recall, the operative word would be respect. Why over complicate the whole thing?

Giorgio
Posts: 3061
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2009 6:15 pm
Location: China, Italy

Post by Giorgio »

ladajo wrote:I think the root of all this falls into the realm of the more powerful taking advantage of the weaker. Be it whomever the targeted victim, it should be fundamental that it is wrong for anyone to use an advantage be it physical/mental/positional to coerce another person(s) into acts they would not think of doing on their own. As I recall, the operative word would be respect. Why over complicate the whole thing?
If they will ever write laws following this principle the very first that should end up in jail are the one writing the laws ;)

Jokes apart, I second your post.

Diogenes
Posts: 6967
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 3:33 pm

Post by Diogenes »

Skipjack wrote:
And this is EXACTLY what was said about Homosexuals 50 years ago.
There is a huge difference between two consenting adults of the same sexual orientation and an adult and a child that has no chance of consenting and is never asked for its consent anyway and that does definitely not share the sexual orientation with the sexual predator.
In 50 years you will be called a "pedophobe" and possibly prosecuted for a hate crime for saying such a thing.
‘What all the wise men promised has not happened, and what all the damned fools said would happen has come to pass.’
— Lord Melbourne —

Diogenes
Posts: 6967
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 3:33 pm

Post by Diogenes »

KitemanSA wrote:
Diogenes wrote: But the term is contingent upon the legal definition of statutory rape. As soon as the convention of professionals gets that changed, the term will not apply any more.

Then they will just be "consenting persons."
At which point, the society crumbles and another society more in tune with reality steps in.


I agree. If people don't solve their problems, evolution will do it for them.

KitemanSA wrote: You see, whereas laws can be changed, and moral CODEs try but frequently fail to describe reality, there is in fact "morality", the subject of "right vs wrong". Some things are just "wrong". Involving someone in a sexual activity involuntarily is rape, and is wrong. It is also illegal, but the law just tries to codify how society will treat those who do wrong.
In the case of the pedophiles, it is not always the case that the activity is involuntary. I believe the argument of the pedophile conference is that if the stigma and illegality were removed, more underage people would voluntarily participate. Certainly they could be offered bribes and inducements, I suppose.

Give the left wing agents (Liberal Media) enough time, and this too shall be normalized.
‘What all the wise men promised has not happened, and what all the damned fools said would happen has come to pass.’
— Lord Melbourne —

Diogenes
Posts: 6967
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 3:33 pm

Post by Diogenes »

zapkitty wrote:
KitemanSA wrote:
zapkitty wrote: To make fun of the right wingers, of course... wait... you found some left wingers?
You?
That would depend on where you define the center... but right now in politics "center" is just a code phrase for Goldman Sachs...
All I know regarding this is that the people who were considered "normal Americans" in 1950 are now considered to be extreme right wing nut-jobs on the current political spectrum. The funny thing is, they didn't move. The spectrum shifted around them.
‘What all the wise men promised has not happened, and what all the damned fools said would happen has come to pass.’
— Lord Melbourne —

Diogenes
Posts: 6967
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 3:33 pm

Post by Diogenes »

rjaypeters wrote:It is easy for us to become accomodating to some ideas. Pedophilia as normal? I don't think so. Despite everything else, I will always go back to the lack of informed consent on the part of a child.

A sarcastic saying from another context, but it fits: "We used to be disgusted, now we are merely amused."
You don't think it will be normalized. I remember telling a friend back in 1980 that Homosexuality was going to be normalized and that the gays were going to try to marry each other. He told me I was nuts, and that that would never happen and was only being claimed by people pushing a political agenda. A few years ago he told me I was absolutely right about everything I had told him back in 1980.

As for the consent thing, that seems to be changing. Eventually it will get accepted.
http://www.channel4.com/programmes/body ... /episode-1

Perhaps there are too many hormones in the milk?
‘What all the wise men promised has not happened, and what all the damned fools said would happen has come to pass.’
— Lord Melbourne —

Diogenes
Posts: 6967
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 3:33 pm

Post by Diogenes »

ladajo wrote:I think the root of all this falls into the realm of the more powerful taking advantage of the weaker. Be it whomever the targeted victim, it should be fundamental that it is wrong for anyone to use an advantage be it physical/mental/positional to coerce another person(s) into acts they would not think of doing on their own. As I recall, the operative word would be respect. Why over complicate the whole thing?

I think you are overlooking the point. Many argue "consent" but do not consider what happens when there is no coercion, and therefore when consent is given. Then people say "legal consent" and that is exactly what this group wishes to change.

I merely point out that the forces of the left have already done this before. With enough media conditioning, our elite socialites will eventually adopt the morals of Caligula (seems to have already happened in Hollywood) and call them normal, and anyone that objects will be mocked and maligned, and possibly accused of a "hate crime."
‘What all the wise men promised has not happened, and what all the damned fools said would happen has come to pass.’
— Lord Melbourne —

AcesHigh
Posts: 655
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2009 3:59 am

Post by AcesHigh »

Diogenes wrote:
Skipjack wrote:
And this is EXACTLY what was said about Homosexuals 50 years ago.
There is a huge difference between two consenting adults of the same sexual orientation and an adult and a child that has no chance of consenting and is never asked for its consent anyway and that does definitely not share the sexual orientation with the sexual predator.
In 50 years you will be called a "pedophobe" and possibly prosecuted for a hate crime for saying such a thing.
blah blah blah... more stupid nonsense from the very same Diogenes.

really Diogenes, when will you start saying here that evolution is just a theory and that the Earth is 6000 years old???

you quote an article from a religious site, so really is some Bible passages to you:

And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, Avenge the children of Israel of the Midianites ... And they warred against the Midianites, as the LORD commanded Moses; and they slew all the males ... And the children of Israel took all the women of Midian captives, and their little ones ... And Moses was wroth with the officers ... And Moses said unto them, Have ye saved all the women alive? ... Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves. Numbers 31:1-18
When thou comest nigh unto a city to fight against it ... And when the LORD thy God hath delivered it into thine hands, thou shalt smite every male thereof with the edge of the sword: But the women, and the little ones, and the cattle, and all that is in the city, even all the spoil thereof, shalt thou take unto thyself. Deuteronomy 20:10-14
How shall we do for wives for them that remain, seeing we have sworn by the LORD that we will not give them of our daughters to wives? ... And the congregation sent thither twelve thousand men of the valiantest, and commanded them, saying, Go and smite the inhabitants of Jabeshgilead with the edge of the sword, with the women and the children. And this is the thing that ye shall do, Ye shall utterly destroy every male, and every woman that hath lain by man. And they found among the inhabitants of Jabeshgilead four hundred young virgins, that had known no man by lying with any male: and they brought them unto the camp to Shiloh. Judges 21:7-11
Go and lie in wait in the vineyards; And see, and, behold, if the daughters of Shiloh come out to dance in dances, then come ye out of the vineyards, and catch you every man his wife of the daughters of Shiloh ... And the children of Benjamin did so, and took them wives, according to their number, of them that danced, whom they caught. Judges 21:20-23

It's OK to sell your daughter (no mention is made of age) to a man for him to use as a sex slave.

if a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant ... If she please not her master, who hath betrothed her to himself, then shall he let her be redeemed ... If he take him another wife; her food, her raiment, and her duty of marriage, shall he not diminish. Exodus 21:7-10

AcesHigh
Posts: 655
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2009 3:59 am

Post by AcesHigh »

Diogenes wrote:
ladajo wrote:I think the root of all this falls into the realm of the more powerful taking advantage of the weaker. Be it whomever the targeted victim, it should be fundamental that it is wrong for anyone to use an advantage be it physical/mental/positional to coerce another person(s) into acts they would not think of doing on their own. As I recall, the operative word would be respect. Why over complicate the whole thing?

I think you are overlooking the point. Many argue "consent" but do not consider what happens when there is no coercion, and therefore when consent is given. Then people say "legal consent" and that is exactly what this group wishes to change.

I merely point out that the forces of the left have already done this before. With enough media conditioning, our elite socialites will eventually adopt the morals of Caligula (seems to have already happened in Hollywood) and call them normal, and anyone that objects will be mocked and maligned, and possibly accused of a "hate crime."

lets not mention that men marrying and having sex with girls as soon as they had their first blood was an habit that kept on at very religious europe until at least the 17th century...

it was illuminism, not religion, that created new definitions of "age of consent", etc.


left to religion alone, men would still be marrying 13 year old girls, and killing adult homosexuals.

Skipjack
Posts: 6805
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 2:29 pm

Post by Skipjack »

Sorry Diogenes, but I dont know anybody in their right mind, not even nutjobs from the far left, that would want to give pedophiles legal status.
This is absolutely ridiculous to assume. Again there is a huge difference between two consenting adults and an adult and a child that is in no way able to give consent or that often is not even old enough to understand the implications.
Pedophiles are sick, they have mental defect, most likely caused by a gene mutation. It is a form of psychopathy. They should be kept away from society. They can not be integrated into society, no matter how you try.
Just like a child can not give legal consent to getting certain surgery done, or is not allowed to vote, it can not give consent to having sex with an adult. It does not work and I dont think that anyone can spin this in any way. It has NOTHING in common with homosexuals who are two consenting adults.

Post Reply