6
   

Is 'liking children' wrong, if you don't harm kids?

 
 
neologist
 
  1  
Sun 3 Jun, 2007 04:44 pm
OCCOM BILL wrote:
snood wrote:
I think O'Bill is in the classic situation of taking an untenable position then clinging to it out of pride, and I think Neo's comment highlights that perfectly... When it's good ole Uncle Charlie who gets caught playing touchy-feely, all that bluster about "just go kill yourself" won't be bellowed about.
Rolling Eyes Hardly. You should know me well enough by now that 'out of pride'; I would retract my statements if I thought it appropriate. The only difference family would make; is I might do the killing myself.
Really;

What if your brother came to you and said he was having sexual feelings toward his (or better, YOUR) daughter? Would you kill him for that?

What if he touched her on the behind while she was clothed?

What if he admitted he peeked at her while she was taking a bath?

Kill him for that?

I think you are full of bluster, buster.
0 Replies
 
Chumly
 
  1  
Sun 3 Jun, 2007 05:12 pm
Even money, you wanna a piece?
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Sun 3 Jun, 2007 05:17 pm
neologist wrote:
Really;

What if your brother came to you and said he was having sexual feelings toward his (or better, YOUR) daughter? Would you kill him for that?

What if he touched her on the behind while she was clothed?

What if he admitted he peeked at her while she was taking a bath?

Kill him for that?

I think you are full of bluster, buster.
Ya, that was a bit over the top... I don't see myself killing anyone, except to save a life. However; my convictions on appropriate punishments, and suggestions of self-termination for the worst among us are independent of blood. They say things like 'you don't get to choose your family' and 'blood is thicker than water'; but it just aint so. I've walked away from people I loved for less (than child molestation), and mourned the loss as if my loved one had died... because as far as I'm concerned; they did. I am sure many, many people change their tune when hideous duplicity strikes close to home. Do not count me among them.
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Sun 3 Jun, 2007 07:00 pm
Chai wrote:
OCCOM BILL wrote:
If you know you are the deviant monster; do us all a favor and take one for the team… do it RIGHT NOW!





I'm about to leave the house on a nice 2 week vacation, and thought I'd just jump on here to see if anything interesting was happening, while Mr. Tea makes a security check.




Chai...the radio program I linked to in my first post back here....the one that revived the thread, is really interesting in my view, if you wish to listen.


If you're interested, choose the download option, since this means you can move the cursor along, and skip the previous story.



It raises some of the sensible issues discussed on the thread very well, I think.
0 Replies
 
Eorl
 
  1  
Mon 4 Jun, 2007 07:19 am
I listened dlowan, but I was already on that side of the fence. Good story though. I wonder if Bill thinks 18 year olds are "hot"...unless they are in a part of the world where that would make him a paedophile?
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Mon 4 Jun, 2007 04:35 pm
Eorl wrote:
I listened dlowan, but I was already on that side of the fence. Good story though. I wonder if Bill thinks 18 year olds are "hot"...unless they are in a part of the world where that would make him a paedophile?
Rolling Eyes Bill is 39 and has repeatedly chosen not to take advantage of 18 year olds even if they are "hot" and interested, and even interesting. Your desire to lash out at me isn't well served by such idiotic questions anyway. My problem isn't with people who find young men and women attractive; it is with people who find kids attractive. I've seen 16 year olds that look like adults and I've seen 16 year olds that look like kids. Those who find the latter attractive are the target of my disdain. This should be beyond obvious to anyone who isn't trying to insult me as a punitive response to my visceral disgust with those who are heinously, dangerously, abnormal.
0 Replies
 
Eorl
 
  1  
Mon 4 Jun, 2007 06:31 pm
So if you are on holiday in Madagascar, and you see a girl of 16 (5 years under the age of consent), and you think she's hot...you don't think the locals have a right to call you a paedophile?

Did you listen to the interview, Bill? The guy didn't just wake up one morning lusting after 10 year olds. But you don't need to worry about grey areas, you've got all the answers already.

(I have no need to lash out at you, it isn't in any way personal. It's just your opinion I find disgusting.)
0 Replies
 
Chumly
 
  1  
Mon 4 Jun, 2007 06:44 pm
Eorl = "lash out"?
Eorl = "idiotic questions"?

False.
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Mon 4 Jun, 2007 07:07 pm
Eorl wrote:
So if you are on holiday in Madagascar, and you see a girl of 16 (5 years under the age of consent), and you think she's hot...you don't think the locals have a right to call you a paedophile?
Laws and morality both require recognition. It matters little if I thought a 16 year old girl was hot, as I wouldn't be touching her regardless of the legality.

Eorl wrote:
Did you listen to the interview, Bill? The guy didn't just wake up one morning lusting after 10 year olds. But you don't need to worry about grey areas, you've got all the answers already.
No I did not, nor did I make any comment on any interview.

Eorl wrote:
(I have no need to lash out at you, it isn't in any way personal. It's just your opinion I find disgusting.)
I understand your finding, just as I do Deb's. I don't understand your attempt to draw parallels where none exist. Since you're using my name in your examples; it is, indeed, personal.
0 Replies
 
Eorl
 
  1  
Mon 4 Jun, 2007 07:17 pm
OCCOM BILL wrote:
YES! I am 100% (would be a trillion % were it possible) in favor of every c**... who would molest children, given a chance, put a bullet in his own dome instead. 100%, let there be no doubt... be a hero.... Do it. Do it now...


I'd leave Madagascar off my holiday list if I were you, Bill, just in case. You haven't left yourself much wiggle room there.
0 Replies
 
Chai
 
  1  
Mon 4 Jun, 2007 07:24 pm
OCCOM BILL wrote:
Laws and morality both require recognition. It matters little if I thought a 16 year old girl was hot, as I wouldn't be touching her regardless of the legality.






so....one might THINK a 16 year old girl (someone underage, a child) was hot (meaning attractive in a sexual way, producing sexual thoughts towards her..........but as long as one would not touch her, it matters little, meaning that would be not wrong.


I see.
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Mon 4 Jun, 2007 07:28 pm
Eorl wrote:
OCCOM BILL wrote:
YES! I am 100% (would be a trillion % were it possible) in favor of every c**... who would molest children, given a chance, put a bullet in his own dome instead. 100%, let there be no doubt... be a hero.... Do it. Do it now...


I'd leave Madagascar off my holiday list if I were you, Bill, just in case. You haven't left yourself much wiggle room there.
Another idiotic attempt at insult. The above quote very pointedly targets those "who would molest children". Why do you people insist on attempting to take my words out of context?
0 Replies
 
Eorl
 
  1  
Mon 4 Jun, 2007 07:36 pm
It's not out of context. The point is to demonstrate that the issue is far from black and white.

Your simplistic solution holds a 50 year old man who seduces a 16 year old at no fault, while a 17 year old who fancies a 13 year old does not deserve to live.

Like I said, grey areas....
0 Replies
 
Chai
 
  1  
Mon 4 Jun, 2007 07:40 pm
what about my post above yours?

that's totally IN context.

it matters little if you think an underage girl is hot, since you won't be touching her.

but from what you said previously, it matters a LOT when someone thinks an underage girl is hot.

make up your mind.
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Mon 4 Jun, 2007 07:56 pm
Chai wrote:
what about my post above yours?

that's totally IN context.

it matters little if you think an underage girl is hot, since you won't be touching her.

but from what you said previously, it matters a LOT when someone thinks an underage girl is hot.

make up your mind.
20 pages of this sustained idiocy. Someone who thinks about children IS NOT the same as someone WHO THINKS HE WILL HARM THEM. Get that through your thick skull arleady.
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Mon 4 Jun, 2007 08:01 pm
Your reasoning is crystal clear to exactly one person, evidently - that'd be you.

So, you're saying you give a pass to those who find minors sexy, but not to those who would think of molesting them?
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Mon 4 Jun, 2007 08:03 pm
Eorl: Your hang up isn't much less idiotic. Does it strike you as at all odd that you have to resort to finding grey areas to refute my suggestion, instead of facing it head on? (no pun intended Laughing) Here; I'll make it easier for you, with this amendment: If you think you fall into a grey area; please refrain from blowing your head of until you figure it out. Otherwise, please proceed immediately.

Happy?
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Mon 4 Jun, 2007 08:04 pm
OCCOM BILL wrote:
. . . Quote from Chai acknowledged. . ..20 pages of this sustained idiocy. Someone who thinks about children IS NOT the same as someone WHO THINKS HE WILL HARM THEM. Get that through your thick skull arleady.
Bill, the fact of the matter is that one who finds an underage person sexually attractive and subsequently ruminates on his/her desire, even in a small way, has already contemplated harm.
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Mon 4 Jun, 2007 08:05 pm
snood wrote:
Your reasoning is crystal clear to exactly one person, evidently - that'd be you.

So, you're saying you give a pass to those who find minors sexy, but not to those who would think of molesting them?
Good God... not you too. NO. Seek help if you find them sexy... seek help if you think about molesting them; blow your head off if you think you WILL molest them, before seeking help.
0 Replies
 
Chai
 
  1  
Mon 4 Jun, 2007 08:10 pm
OCCOM BILL wrote:
I've seen 16 year olds that look like adults and I've seen 16 year olds that look like kids. Those who find the latter attractive are the target of my disdain. This should be beyond obvious to anyone who isn't trying to insult me as a punitive response to my visceral disgust with those who are heinously, dangerously, abnormal.


Those who find 16 year olds who look younger than their age attractive are worthy of disdain....while those who find 16 year olds who look older than their age are fine?

The 16 year old who looks older may very well be very immature, but by the grace of looking older doesn't rank as high on the pervert scale.

The 16 year old who looks younger may be very mature and emotionally stable and ready for a sexual encounter, but that is wrong because she looks too young.

Yes, it's very important how they look. Anyone can see that.

An 18 year old who looks older has probably been oogled more than a younger looking 18 year old, more likely feeling objectified. She's more likely to continue to draw interest, in the form of a kindly 39 year old man who is in no way interested in her, just wants be be friends because he finds her interesting.

the 18 year old who looks younger doesn't get the attention from the mature gentleman, because that would be wrong.

Some people must think everyone else just fell off the turnip truck.

When I was 13 I looked 18.
When I was 16 I looked 21
When I was 21 I looked 21
When I was 28 I looked 21.

My point, before I get called an idiot again, is that I AM the 13, 14, 15, 16 etc. year old...that got stared at.

You know who stared at me? Men like you bill.
No matter how much you protest, you can bullshit me. I'm a good bit older than you, and have seen you from the age of 20 to 65.

Any man who is so high and mighty and claims only good intent so strongly over and over has something off.

Fortunately, there really ARE a lot of good men out there.

Go on bill....bluff some more by calling me and anyoneone else names, and make cutting remarks.

That's all you are...bluff.

The real well meaning man doesn't need to keep restating his case.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

700 Inconsistencies in the Bible - Discussion by onevoice
Why do we deliberately fool ourselves? - Discussion by coincidence
Spirituality - Question by Miller
Oneness vs. Trinity - Discussion by Arella Mae
give you chills - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence for Evolution! - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence of God! - Discussion by Bartikus
One World Order?! - Discussion by Bartikus
God loves us all....!? - Discussion by Bartikus
The Preambles to Our States - Discussion by Charli
 
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 11/30/2022 at 04:03:55