Sex with "minors"

Discussion in 'Ethics, Morality, & Justice' started by boombox, Apr 14, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Padma Spankologist Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    205
    You're a jerk boom!
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. boombox scumbucket Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    156

    But I'm an individual.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. alain du hast mich Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,179
    "boombox you worthless piece of shit! How dare you post something so disgusting i can't believe you? (Moderator Edit - remove threatening content)

    Fucking hell you freaks, dont any of you care about free speach!!!

    His saying these things is not harming anyone
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 17, 2004
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. SpyMoose Secret double agent deer Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,641
    My mistake. Sometimes we non-individuals don't remember how you individuals work.
     
  8. SpyMoose Secret double agent deer Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,641
    Don't pretend you are that dense. No one is pissed off because he said "I want to rape little girls" we are pissed off because we think he might be sitting at home with the intention of raping little girls! How might we have ever gotten an idea like that. You semantic fool.
     
  9. Honey Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    80
    Regardless of whether or not boombox was trying to play a "joke," it's an interesting subject and I'm glad there were at least a few folks who could talk about it reasonably. The reactions of some people to boombox's original post are worth a study, let alone the actual issues raised. Sexual taboos are strange and interesting and frequently uncomfortable, and I suppose that's also why there are so many jokes surrounding them.
     
  10. Dr Lou Natic Unnecessary Surgeon Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,574
    I don't believe boombox was 'playing a joke' for a second. You can tell when people are serious, he was. Continue flaming.
     
  11. Fafnir665 You just got served. Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,979
    Until the united states, and recentlt, marriage and sex were consentual as soon as a woman started menstrauting. That is how it is in other parts of the world still. It is psychologically, and physiologically correct for girls to start having sex then. When they menstraute, it represnts sexual maturity, and mental maturity is not far behind.

    Thats just an argument for having sex at any age down to menstraution. That doesnt mean thats how it should be done. To lead a healthy and productive life, abstinance should be practiced till marriage. All the pre-marrital sex people have, just promotes the hedonistic lifestyle that most of the capitolist countries enjoy.

    I have to go to class.
     
  12. Padma Spankologist Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    205
    Yes Alain, we (I) care about free speach. Try to pull your head out of your silly little dream world and find the fear in the words I posted. Do you remember Danielle Van Dam (sp?) ? She lived very close to where I live. What happend to her struck fear in our community and we all still feel the pain of her family's loss. So don't call me a freak when someone like boombox posts something like he did. For the record: I don't think he was joking either.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 17, 2004
  13. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    37,892
    Mod Hat - Closure

    Mod Hat - Closure

    This was a dubious topic from the outset. However ... I'm of the opinion that we have an obligation to attempt to address pedophiles before they commit their crimes.

    For this reason--free speech does not necessarily extend to the advocacy of criminal behavior, and cannot be held as a justification--I have left this topic open to discussion.

    However, the point about "the way we play" in EM&J deserves some consideration:

    • We do not threaten each other! My sympathies to the passionate repugnance inspired by this topic, but we simply do not threaten each other. Period.

    • There is no set rule against posting topics that you "don't believe in" (as per the topic poster's renouncing of the topic post). And while people have generally chosen to be nicer than in other argumentative fora around Sciforums (much appreciated), and, furthermore, while people generally recognize the fallacy of unethical tactics in an ethical discussion, there is no rule against this either.

    Lastly, as an editorial comment from your Ethics, Morality, and Justice forum moderator:

    A cry for help is a cry for help is a cry for help;
    how we receive a cry for help speaks volumes toward the potential impact.
    To demonize those in such severe need of assistance is problematic.
    They exist in our communities; they walk along our streets.
    If we do not answer the call, they will return to hiding,
    and in those shadows, exact their atrocities.​

    Do what you will, of course. But if you leave them hungry, don't be surprised when those in need steal from your plate. And sometimes, we just can't afford to allow ourselves to be surprised.

    I will be making some adjustments throughout this topic, which is henceforth closed.
     
    Last edited: Apr 17, 2004
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page