Actually, since you suggested that there are threads about dopers’ drug use, I thought it would help to clarify. Though to be honest my post was mostly directed to tomndebb, who doesn’t seem to understand the rules very well.
At the end of the day I don’t see how what Cesario is doing isn’t “fostering or promoting illegal activity.” I guess the mods disagree.
I suppose the only thing to do is inform the owners of this board.
I think Ed should be given some time before appealing higher up the pipe. I still have not had a response one was or the other from him.
I think Tom’s middle name is not “deb” but Pontius Pilate.
Ludovic–I have no idea what you’re getting at and I’m too tired to care.
I used to defend this place or at least stick up for it. I used to say (to myself and when asked) that you pay your money and you take your chance: it is what it is. But I am left wondering: what is it, exactly? A neat place where intelligent people can discuss topics of the day or of general interest or a place where arbitrary decisions are made, apparently by reading tea leaves or similar. We are discussing the sexual abuse of children here and one guy who really, really wants to do this and thinks it’s ok and says he knows he can get away with it. And yet I cannot post “fuck you”.
Hello? Is anyone listening? WTF is wrong with this picture?
That should read “I still have not had a response one way or the other from him.”
Inhaling and exhaling.
But the question I’d have is, why should that discussion be placed off limits? Fucking children is obviously disgusting and evil, but a person should have the right to advocate it. We should have the right to mock and scorn him for advocating it, but he should have the right to advocate it. In general, what good does banning discussion on anything do? If the idea is a good one, then we as a group benefit from its advocacy. If the idea is a bad one, then when people advocate it, we see how foolish it is. Either way, we benefit.
I’d say that you’re a bit wrong here. A 36 year old virgin is one of the most despised segments of American society? Keee-rist does EVERYONE need to have a victim angle to feel special these days?
I’d say you’re much, much more of a detestable shitbag for wanting to rape every woman you see, but everyone’s MMV.
Then what the fuck is your point? You’ve had people come in and tell you about your experiences, and then you go on and on, creating this huge strawman, exaggerating and completely making an ass of yourself.
Again, you said:
How about a cite for your theories?
Well, mine does. I’m fairly unclear on why his resistance of an urge that he knows is wrong makes him a shitbag. Perhaps we should go talk to a Jesuit.
It’s even simpler than that. We mock. He advocates.
Dude…he wants to fuck three year olds–there ARE no nuanced discussions about ethics to be had.
He wants to fuck three-year olds. What kind of expose do you want to do? It’s not like there’s a debate about it. Why do you want to give him a platform?
For the love of God, why? Why on Earth would you grant anyone the right to advocate something that is, by your own description, “evil”? Not every view point is worthy of even the minimal respect necessary to hear it out. Once you know he advocates fucking children, what else, precisely, do you need to know in order to evaluate his position? I completely and unequivocally disagree with the idea that anyone has some automatic “right” to advocate a positiion that is without a single redeeming feature. I find it an example – perhaps the only example – of tolerance and open-mindedness taken to the point of utter stupidity.
I’ve already answered this twice. (Posts 335 and 419.)
Did you need some help seeing how foolish pedophilia is? Do you feel like the respectful discussion of something so evil (to use your accurate term) has now shone a light on what a bad idea it is – a light that somehow you personally had overlooked? Of course not. But you are again making my point: By importing into the discussion the idea that anyone needs this type of discussion in order to discover what a bad idea pedophilia is, or how “foolish” it is, you too are legitimizing the topic. But your point is illusory because in reality, of course, no one needs any assistance in the “Is pedophilia a bad idea???” decision-making process. With the exception of the pedophiles themselves, everybody already knows the answer to that question.
As I already said, the very act of allowing respectful discussion, necessarily implies that the topic is one that is worthy of being discussed respectfully, which it is NOT. And I absolutely REJECT the idea of some inherent “right” to, as you put it, “advocate the disgusting and evil.” Why would you grant him that right? I sure as hell don’t.
“Don’t be a jerk”
I always liked the simplicity of that rule. I don’t post as much as I used to on here for a number of reasons. Kids, job, life in general. I did like coming in to read up on what was happening and this is usually the first place I go to for recreational info on books, movies stuff like that. I’ve also recommended it to any and all who have asked for a place to go or for information.
No longer. I can’t justify recommending this place any more. Sad in that I’ll miss a lot of it and I’ve made some dear friends here but …I don’t have the words to say how this shit makes me feel. Thanks. Ten years was a good run, but when pedophiles are given a forum to espouse their beliefs, it’s time to say enough is enough. Hiding behind pedantic parsing of “promoting” and “directly promoting” is ridiculous.
And for the record, I believe those who engage in sexual acts with >10 year olds deserve a swift and painful death.
tomndebb, I see you’ve declined to respond to my concern regarding the possible negative consequences for some young child in the future as a result of allowing a platform for this pedophile to promote acceptance for his inclination.
Apparently you are okay with it.
If I recall, you are a Roman Catholic. I’ve always wondered what you do for a living. You have so much SDMB time on your hands. You are not a lawyer, but could you be a priest ?
Have I got your attention now?
Whew! I’m glad you reported in regarding your mileage varying. I know I’m pretty silly for feeling this way, but I just can’t help thinking that a man who want to rape every woman they see because they feel so put upon for being a virgin at 36 is a nutjob shitbag. I realize we should all congratulate him on his self control and erect statues for his strong moral core, but I’ll just consider him fucking nutter from afar and call it a day. No Jesuits needed here.
But you keep on keeping on, Frank.
Because he has the right to do so.
Because then you set up the precedent of the mods and administrators of the board deciding what topics are acceptable to debate and what topics are unacceptable. And obviously, this particular example is an easy case, but eventually a topic will come along that’s not so easy, and I don’t think it’s a good idea to give the mods the responsibility or the power to decide what’s acceptable to debate.
I might be messing up my math here, but I’m pretty sure you meant <10, unless you believe people who have sex with less-than-10-year-olds to be the only ones who should be spared execution.
I’m not even going to go into the irony of condemning kiddie fucking by advocating for torture and murder.
(Disclaimer: I agree Cesario should be issued an Evil Captor cease-and-desist warning regarding constantly talking about and turning discussions into debates about pedophilia, so don’t mistake this post for advocating against that.)
Oh, but he doesn’t do so, and most child molestors AREN’T pedophiles, remember? :rolleyes:
The only reason I stick around anymore is because I like the people who post here – but the moderation and rules here have gone to shit.
Respectfully, I think the slippery slope argument is complete bullshit. The idea that we should indulge an existing thread that is manifestly without redeeming feature now, out of fear of some unknown and completely theoretical future abuse of power, is neither logical nor persuasive. And the mods ALREADY decide what topics are acceptable to debate and what topics are unacceptable; they just have declined to make that call in this case, despite the fact it is quite literally the most egregious case ever presented. If this is an easy case – and it is – they should deal with it on its merits, summarily and firmly. (Whoops! too late.) Future issues can take care of themselves.