Ah, so you’re not saying it’s an unreasonable request, you just don’t think you can enforce it.
:rolleyes:
Do you read? You haven’t been talking about criminal laws against child molestation. You’ve been talking about murdering or brainwashing anyone who doesn’t share your ideas of what ought to be considered sexy. Post 42 in this thread, back on page 1 where this conversation thread started.
Once again, my side has at least 20-33% of the adult male population, in this hypotehtical fighting against an extremist minority trying to exterminate them. I think you overestimate your chances.
Concession accepted.
You’re the one who brought it up.
Just like how if you rape a woman, you must have thought she was attractive on some level, so the bitch should take it as a complement, right?
Guess you know better than the FBI sex offender experts who’s job it is to analyze these things, though…
Kind of the point. Exclusive vs. non-exclusive pedophiles has nothing to do with pedophiles versus child molesters.
And you assume (with no evidence) that I’m different from you in this regard why?
You haven’t been reading. Freudian Slit was discussing precisely that. I’m not making this shit up.
You haven’t been living in this society long, have you?
And you think my responses differ?
Please explain to me why you’re using weapons as your analogy. What possible thing can I do to someone when I have a certain kind of porno magezine versus a different kind of porno magezine? How does my posession of porn enable me to harm people?
Ah, so you assume we’re all delusional.
Seemed to be the implication of what I was quoting there.
So, Bill Gates has sex with someone, it’s automatically rape? He’s got way more power and influence than them, so obviously there’s a power imbalance.
And this experience is relevent how? Since it’s principally about a social system the child isn’t a part of, I fail to see what possible advantage it could convey.
And? What possible relevence has the motivation to do with anything? Men and women shouldn’t be allowed to form relationships since they’re acting on desires the other gender has never experienced. :rolleyes:
So you think that power issues are going to be inherently harmful to a relationship, so you only acknowledge relationships where there is an inherent power imbalance?
Thank you. Considering the persistent urge I’ve been having to beat people over the head with heavy blunt objects due to the lack of reading comprehension, I don’t think I’ve been maintaining my cool that well, but it’s nice of you to say so anyway.
Which impacts the study how?
And you can stamp on a barcode that uniquely identifies the image, so all you have to do is compare the image in the database of legitimate material the barcode refers to the image it’s stamped on. Very simple verrification.
But then, as a software developer, I resolve these kinds of issues all the time.
Not really. You’ll get more accurate information if you give one group the materials, send them home, have them live their lives, and compare their future incarceration rates to the control group.
May people are idiots who don’t know what words mean. You seem to understand the distinction.
While I have no intrinsic objection to helping those who are distressed, I have no doubt that someone would attempt to force this “cure” on unwilling subjects. That cannot be morally justified, and would justify pretty much any action taken in the name of stopping it.
And this is relevent to people’s thoughts how?
Ah, so this was on the subject of pity, not fear-mongering. My mistake.
Neither did pedophiles.
Why should we suppress it? Seems to me that only leads to psychological strain and impulse control problems making someone more likely to act out. Self-acceptance seems important in either case.
Again, with the idea that not raping people is some titanic act of self-restraint. Also:
You thought wrong. A pedophile is someone who prefers children. This need not be an exclusive orientation like heterosexuality or homosexuality. It merely describes the primary orientation. I assure you I fit the criteria for the sexual orientation (if not the definition for the paraphelia due to the lack of “marked distress or interpersonal difficulty”).
If you want to help, you should get yourself informed about the facts. I reccomend this for starters:
You are aware that emotional relationships and sex need not go along with one another, yes? That you can have celebate emotional relationships just as well as you can have meaningless sex.
I see, so you can only feel sympathy for people who have your particular views in terms of sex. Got it.
What about them?
See, that wasn’t so hard to understand, was it?
The difference is who is threatened by the violation of that unjust law. I don’t give two shits what happens to me for violating an unjust law. Indeed, I consider it a moral imperative to violate unjust laws. But in this situation, society effectively holds a gun to my would-be-lover’s head. If we go through with this, society will do everything in its power to turn that event into a rape, and said lover into a wreaked-for-life rape victim. And while I don’t accept responsibility for that evil, I also can’t bring myself to risk someone I care about in the pursuit of toppling said unjust law.
Hope that clears things up.
No, I don’t think I’ve seen that one. I assume from the title, it’s in the Pit?
Considering I spent nearly an hour the other day chatting with a very attractive four-year-old in the presence of her mother and older brother, and the only reaction was for the girl to try to get her brother to leave so she could have me to herself, yes, I do think you’ve been horribly over-reacting.
I know I have been.
Whether they like it or not, the organization was founded because a bunch of homophobic bigots were trying to use the age of consent as a weapon of discrimination against gays. You might want to look up the incident some time.