Would you buy your tween son a "Playboy"?

@Setanta,

Did you get an earful, too, Beth?

0 Replies

@Setanta,

This, from a guy who volunteered to go help those who illegally invaded a sovereign nation, trying to destroy a people who only wanted independence.

This, from a guy who volunteered to go help those who napalmed villages, spread cancer causing chemicals across the land, routinely committed war crimes.

This, from a guy who volunteered to go help those who bombed Cambodia and Laos into oblivion and set up the murderous rule of PolPot.

This, from a guy who, to this day, tries to provide justification for those evil deeds.

Can you say hypocrite, Setanta?

1 Reply

@JTT,

A love you as there is no subject of any kind that does not in some manner get back to the evil US foreign polices.

This on a thread about buying or not buying a playboy magazine.

You are amazing if mentally ill..........LOL

1 Reply

@Setanta,

Setanta wrote:

Thomas wrote:
What do you mean, "could not give consent"? There is no age of consent for nude photography. Those children could, and did, consent to the whole thing by volunteering to undress for the camera. Their parents permitted it. What did the parents do to suggest they were treating their children as property?

You know little about children if you think they are capable of resisting parental pressures, or even the pressures of unrlated adults. You think they are capable of consent in the same way as adults are? This is one of the very good reasons for laws which protect children. Really, Thomas, this is a very unfortunate case of you touting your ideology without really giving thought to the implications.

This type of talk is always what makes me regret engaging thomas....this looking at the world as if it was written in computer code.

Parents are the universe to a child, regardless if they are good parents, or bad.
The idea that simply because a child ends up complying with something indicates they are doing it voluntarily is heinous.
A child has a huge need, requirement to ultimately comply with parents wishes, to please them, because they'd feel their love will be withdrawn if they don't, out of fear of punishment and countless other reasons.

With the mindset it was voluntary, you could say that every instance of undisputed child pornography was voluntary, because why would the child voluntarily have sex with an adult, another child, animal etc if they didn't consent.

By the very nature of a child being essentially helpless, in that they cannot provide the essentials they need to themselves, the word consent is the magic password for pedophiles.

Yes, and I understand the burden of proof argument. I can agree with that when trying to prove or disproof concrete, tangible things. Not when you're dealing with emotions, this concept of consent and so forth.

Hypothetically, someone could take pictures, videos of someone having sex with a 5 year old.....the child dies of unrelated causes when they are 6.....the pictures are found a year after that.
In Thomas's world, the person who had sex with the child would be able to say "find evidence the child didn't consent, if you can't that's all I need to say the child volunteered"

1 Reply

@BillRM,

Quote:

This on a thread about buying or not buying a playboy magazine.

You apologists for US war crimes are amazing. Like your leaders, you'll lie at the drop of a hat.

Page six I believe it was, Bill. You, about German porn and another that started with "Side comment ... ". There are many posts that go off topic.

Quote:

get back to the evil US foreign polices

It is rather amazing how pervasive it is in all American lives, isn't it?

0 Replies

@chai2,

chai2 wrote:

This type of talk is always what makes me regret engaging thomas....

I'm sorry you feel regretful, but you know you're always free to stop.

0 Replies

I had never seen or heard of the book 'Show Me' and so didn't have any idea what the pictures looked like, but I DID google them and was like, 'Huh? As a parent, I might want pictures of my child like that out on the internet or hanging on my wall?

Umm, no, I wouldn't. I thought the poses were unnatural and actually quite strange in one or two instances that I saw shown.
I've worked with children all my life and have mothered two and I've never seen naked kids standing with their arms outspread ready for their photo-op or draped all over each other lying naked on a floor.
Most naked kids I've seen are running around happily oblivious to their nudity - not posing for someone's camera.

I agree with Chai. I would never have subjected my kids to this - especially not at the pre-pubescent age the models I saw were and I certainly would not have violated their privacy by having these photos published.

If that makes me prudish and American - so be it. I think it makes me respectful of my child's dignity and privacy.

1 Reply

@aidan,

Quote:

I think it makes me respectful of my child's dignity and privacy

you are making huge assumptions of the state of mind of people you do not know and who are not you. this makes you not only a prude but also judgmental and prejudiced.

again, run your own life and let others run theirs.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

I do run my own life and let others run theirs. I said, 'I would not have done this and I think it makes me thus and such.'

I didn't say that I don't think anyone else shouldn't or couldn't have done this'.

You really have problems with reading comprehension. And YOU are the one who jumps to conclusions and makes judgments about others you don't know.

I haven't labelled anyone - except you - when I called you an idiot. And I think I have ample cause and evidence to support that particular judgment.

You seem to be unable to help showing your ass - yes- like an idiot.

0 Replies

@Thomas,

Yes, you do that. After all, you have completely failed to sustain your inferential claim that child protection laws because adults feel squeamish about child sexuality.

0 Replies

@Setanta,

Setanta wrote:

You're an [sic] prating idiot,

Your favorite word, or maybe next after " hi - lar - ri - ous "; u use it with such ubiquitous profusion
that we r left to infer that the definition of: "idiot"
is anyone except Mr. Setanta.

Setanta wrote:

You probably understand children less than Thomas appears to do.

My understanding of childhood
comes from my REMEMBERING the first years of my life,
both in terms of my personal experience (objective & subjective)
and from my observation of relations between friends of my age
with their respective families. In truth, I feel that the kid I was
remains intact (timeless) inside me, covered over with a lot of unsightly blubber.

I judge the comments that I see b4 me (for credibility)
by the criteria of my own memories.

Setanta wrote:

You'd love to see a rapacious society in which the weak
(physically, intellectually or psychologically) go under to the strong.

Those r not my criteria.
I 'm inclined to respect the liberty of the weak to make their own choices, tho;
not to condone the liberals ramming their preferences down the throats of the weak.

The liberals believe that thay r entitled to violate the Natural Rights
of the weak IF thay insult the intelligence of their victims before perpetrating the violation.

Setanta wrote:

I'd call you a barbarian, were that not an insult to true barbarians everywhere.

I guess u think that 's clever.

David

0 Replies

If your "libertarian" wet dream actually ever cam to pass, you'd be one of the first victims, your Charles Bronson-esque fantasies not withstanding. If you don't like what i write, then don't read it, idiot. Don't bother ever responding to any of my posts, because i don't intend to waste my time on an idiot like you.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

Setanta wrote:

If your "libertarian" wet dream actually ever cam to pass,
you'd be one of the first victims,

I wonder what Mr. Setanta meant by that?? He can be vaguely incomplete in his posts, if he wants to be.
Maybe he thinks it adds an element of romantic mystery.

Setanta wrote:

your Charles Bronson-esque fantasies not withstanding.

Here, Mr. Setanta fakes a hoax that he is able
to see into my mind and that he found those fantasies!

Setanta wrote:

If you don't like what i write, then don't read it, idiot.

Now here, Mr. Setanta seems to tacitly imply
that I had ordered him to shut up; (an infraction whereof I remain innocent).
His writing can be fun to play with; its harmless, however false it may be.
In fairness, Mr. Setanta's mind is not so far gone as JTT 's.

Setanta wrote:

Don't bother ever responding to any of my posts,

Now HERE, Mr. Setanta abandons himself into his fantasy
that I recognize authority in him & that I will take orders from him. We 'll see about THAT.

Setanta wrote:

because i don't intend to waste my time on an idiot like you.

1. That does not interfere with my freedom of speech.
2. I don't believe u.
U will not be able to restrain yourself for more than a short time.
U have a short attention span.

David

1 Reply

You're an idiot. Do us all the courtesy of putting me back on igonre.

2 Replies

@Setanta,

Raamen

0 Replies

@OmSigDAVID,

OmSigDAVID wrote:

Setanta wrote:
Don't bother ever responding to any of my posts,
Now HERE, Mr. Setanta abandons himself into his fantasy
that I recognize authority in him & that I will take orders from him. We 'll see about THAT.

Setanta wrote:
because i don't intend to waste my time on an idiot like you.
1. That does not interfere with my freedom of speech.
2. I don't believe u. [ Posted at Sun 19 Aug, 2012 01:51 pm ]
U will not be able to restrain yourself for more than a short time.
U have a short attention span.

David

Setanta Sun 19 Aug, 2012 02:17 pm wrote:

You're an idiot.
Do us all the courtesy of putting me back on igonre. [sic]

OK, so Mr. Setanta has proven
my disbelief to be well justifed.
What does this tell us qua Mr. Setanta's credibility????
He was able to hold true to his word, restraining himself from
responding to my posts for a total of 26 minutes!
I 'd have thawt that he coud hold out longer; O, well.

Y not try it again, Mr. Setanta??

Remember: it is IMPERATIVE that u render another assessment
of my I.Q., re-affirming & confirming the last one. Don 't forget!

David

1 Reply

@Setanta,

Don't look now, but you broke your vow, and in less than 90 minutes.

More dishing with little taking.

2 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

Ah-hahahahahahahahaha . . .

You're pathetic, Finn . . . but we already knew that.

Would you buy your tween son a "Playboy"?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know