Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
First of all, this thread is kind of mind numbing and sad and so I may not stick around to debate, but here goes...
I am not trying to derail this thread. On this forum, and in person, I will argue to the verbal death anyone who feels that pedophilia might not be a serious and very disturbing offense. From your posts, I did interpret you as one of these people. You've explained your position a lot on this thread and some people seem to agree with you, more don't. Whatever. I have never felt personal attacked on any thread even when people lashed out at me lame or a "liberal." So if you feel personally attacked, that's all on you. I personally think I have a great debating style and your opinion doesn't count at all, as I'm sure my opinion of you is irrelevant in your world.
All that said- when it comes to a child who has been abused on any level, no, they might not register it as something criminal or horrendous after the act. Children are pretty resilient. But, facts do show (as do countless social work programs, rehabilitation centers and therapy) that these "acts" do lodge in a child's psyche....causing disturbance later on (not because society demands that they realize the horror and "get mad" but because when they grow up and look back, these memories hurt just as much as the act). The fact that many people who molest children were once molested themselves attests to the extreme danger that this whole cycle poses. Abused individuals often later become abusers.
A child does not have to know that sexual abuse is dirty to feel horrible when it happens to them. There are families who live with generations of abuse and quietly allow it to happen and these kids are often not very well adapted at all. There is also research to show the extremely damaging physical changes that happen to girls who are abused.
The "stigma of such abuse" exists for a really good reason. That stigma needs to remain in place and be strengthened.
I agree 100% its mind numbing and since we both agree on that point let me also clarify where I sand on the other issues as this will probably be my last post here.
First we all strayed of topic and that OP topic question was pedophiles be either chipped or castrated and I already said I am against both as this won’t stop their behavior and I am for stopping the behavior. I also stated I think if these people have to be chipped or GPs they are too dangerous to be in society and should remain in jail.
I feel I have made my positions very clear here in this thread and I think they are in line with most of the people here with the exception I don’t feel killing anyone is a solution.
I have never supported such offenders or am being partial to them, and if being honest that certain solutions do not work that seem to be favoring these offenders this doesn’t automatically mean I am supporting the offender.
I am against living restrictions and question the effectiveness of the entire registration not to mention feel it’s unconstitutional, but saying that doesn’t mean I am supporting the offender or siding with them. I never have said that, what I always argued and asked the question that if these things are not working, what is the solution?
I have also never said sex offenses were not something that was serious or disturbing, I have always called them what they are, a mental disability. That is a politically correct way of saying the person is off their rocker or disturbed.
I did point out that a person can be a pedophile and never act on their urges or fantasies and only sex offenders are those who actually acted out which are two different scenarios. I also defined what a pedophile was by definition as is written in the DSMIV which is not a person who has sex with a 15 year old but rather a pedophile is a person who has 6 months reoccurring fantasies, urges and compulsions to have sex or sexual contact with prepubescent children. That is the definition of pedophile / pedophilia in the DSMIV and if you or others disagree, well it’s not me who is offering this as my personal opinion I am citing the medical definition as the source for my argument.
I also agree with you that these acts permanently scar a child into adulthood and never once said otherwise, I simply said that more psychological damage occurs after the actual trigger act itself. So while the act is horrendous the lingering effects are very damaging. I think we can both agree on this as well and I stated this through this thread.
If someone comes here to such a thread arguing that a 35 year old guy having sex with a 14 – 15 year is a pedophile I might ague he is sick but he isn’t a pedophile by definition as I did diplomatically with the one poster who said such a guy was. I referenced the definition as not to come across as supporting such a person but whenever you try to argue reason with anyone using facts over opinion sometimes arguments arise.
I also agree with you on many other points you raise and in regards to strengthening the stigma of such abuse, I might agree that it can be reinforced but I think it needs to be done in a way that is more productive, what that way is I am not sure.
So in closing I will say you and I agree on 99% of the subtopics that have been discussed in this thread, the only one I do not agree with is killing a child abuser as a means of punishment or way to solve the situation. Others here clearly disagree and feel murder is justified and they have the have that right to their opinions.
So while the debate he on such a sensitive and difficult topic I think if you or anyone really takes the time and goes back to all of my posts you will see what I have clarified here in this post is the same thing I have been pointing out throughout.
That was a rhetorical question but since you felt the need to answer it,
I agree it needs to be thwarted/punished/eliminated as well, I just don’t agree with your solution that a bullet to the head is going to solve it. Sure it will prevent that one person from ever acting again but it still won’t solve the problem.
Well your literal question solicited an exaggerated answer. We've not shot any pedophiles in the head just yet. Let us have our passion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by W James III
What will you do when the family of the sex offender retaliates against the family who killed their son?
Castrated or microchipped, remember?
Quote:
Originally Posted by W James III
Two wrongs don’t make a right, and the fact you’re promoting the murder of anyone clearly defines you as a person.
Gaslighting.
Quote:
Originally Posted by W James III
I never said it was, my point which you clearly missed was that Down Syndromes is a hereditary and generic disorder, therefore
Extra chromosome. It's more of a random occurance than hereditary. Don't you dare imply that pedophilia is hereditary here. That will not fly here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by W James III
My argument was the same applies to pedophiles. You could lock them lock up all the people who were known pedophiles or as you promote (killing them) but
Gaslighting. You mention to me and others to go back and read your ... hmmm... anywho... but if you look at my first post and this one you're quoting here, you'll see my real stance on the issue that doesn't include putting a bullet in their spinal cord.
Quote:
Originally Posted by W James III
...but the reality is within the week another child somewhere would be born with this genetic disorder and grow up as a pedophile.
Red herring and false assumptions. You can click your heels three times and say, "I wish it was a genetic disorder, I wish it was a genetic disorder, I wish it was a genetic disorder"... doesn't make it so. If it was, we could genetically eliminate the disorder from the human race. There's a can of worms for ya.
Quote:
Originally Posted by W James III
If you would take time and go back and read an entire discussion in a thread before posting maybe you would have seen this and understand.
Back atcha bub.
Quote:
Originally Posted by W James III
Manipulation? Wow that’s news to me, so are you saying that manipulation is the real symptom of criminal behavior?
If so every politician and LEO would be criminals...
It's getting fishy in here again. Don't go throwing anymore red herrings around. Sex offender=manipulation. Pedophiles=manipulation. They are masters of it. Go find somebody such as my cousin who works with these folks for a living and ask them what pedophiles are like; they fit a pro"file". One of manipulation. Go ask the former significant other of one of these folks. Manipulation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by W James III
I’m not dismissing the fact that you have a valid point that most criminals are manipulative, I am just saying that I can point to other examples of people being highly manipulative and their behavior isn’t considered criminal so to say being manipulative is the predetermining factors is in my opinion out of line.
See above.
So far you've gone on and on about your theories about manipulation and hereditary. It's sort of boring me... personally. Anybody else?
Quote:
Originally Posted by W James III
I agree that a lot can be done but I will say that a lot isn’t being done affectively. I personally think if a sex offender has to be on a GPS bracelet they are not safe enough to be on the street, they should be in a community home or in jail.
Please tell me you're not going to discuss law with us now. If I had my way, they'd all stay locked up. But that's the whole point here. We can't keep them there. They serve their time. They comply... just enough to get probation, to get parole... the GPS system is a reality. It ain't much, but what do you suggest? Castration? Microchip? We got all night here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by W James III
I have no issue locking them all up or sending them to a special government funded community to live in that’s supported by tax dollars but tagging them like wild animals with GPS and the registration and living restrictions is all pointless to me. I mean if they are a threat regardless of where they live or if they are registered they will re-offend again.
I think my largest concern comes from the fact that if society can justify removing constitutional rights from one group of people regardless of who that group is, then it becomes a slippery slope.
False. Nobody is taking away any of their constitutional rights. They are doing things, creating consequences for themselves, and ultimately given choices. That's right. They are given choices. They are given choices and opportunities. Suicide would be a sort of an opportunity. Why couldn't they genetically altered to get suicidal when they get certain thoughts? Hmmm. Sorry. Just brainstorming out loud here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by W James III
Where is the line drawn, and I am fearful that we as a society have surrendered our freedoms for the greater good of a security that we can never be guaranteed to have. I think I am getting off topic but that’s where my real concern comes from.
Ok, I will indulge this point here with you. Took you a long time to get to this point. Maybe off topic, but a good point. I was starting to worry that you were such a pedophile sympathizer.
Good to see that you're just looking out for all of our freedoms.
Quote:
Originally Posted by W James III
I am going to use you’re argument here in reverse, you say the world is what it is and frankly its nobody’s business what you/me think about sex offenders, there are no absolutes in this world so they will do what they want to, and there is a time for everything as you say, a time to kill, a time to steal, and maybe a time for sex offenders to molest children.
No no no no. Serious gaslighting infraction and might I say... a twisting of words here.
You are the only one who has shown any sympathy whatsoever of the act of harming children here. Keep my words in their context. Don't go adding your nasty additions to them. There is a time to kill. A time to steal. A time to lie, if you will. Let's keep it there. Why would it be ok to steal? To feed your starving family. Why would it be ok to kill? To protect your family. Why would it be ok to lie? "Honey, does this dress make me look fat/old/etc?" Those are the absolutes I'm talking about. If you're a pedophile sympathizer, I don't want to hear it. I'm sickened enough by the thing already.
Quote:
Originally Posted by W James III
Do you see how faulty this thinking is?
Gaslighting. You will not discredit my thinking in this here thread. I can guarantee you that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by W James III
As for you claim how would such a thing be handled in the middle east I think it’s more acceptable in
Your next two paragraphs and the link... simple basic red herring.
Quote:
Originally Posted by W James III
...I will try to find it and post it. I am not a “Victim” type person but I at least look at any debate from all sides, and the difficulty here in such a sensitive topic is one can easily become a target for simply trying to look at all sides.
So you like to debate. Good for you. I don't so much. The thread title was compelling and I stayed away for awhile. But it was a hot thread and kept coming up so I came in to state my stance.
You, on the other hand, like to debate. I don't see that you're very good at it. No substance. You were almost onto something too, but drifted back to trying to knock your opponent down to look higher.
Quote:
Originally Posted by W James III
I think religious discussions are off limits by board rules so I think I will leave the religion aspects out of any discussion and use the term “beliefs”
Religion is man's interpretation of creation/Creator. Now... there are spiritual laws, morals, etc. that are universal to all walks of life and they can even be agreed upon to mature, open-minded individuals. If you want to keep it out of your debate, then fine. Go for it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by W James III
The FLDS in Texas where the compound was raided in 2008 is just one example of how some people’s “beliefs”
Oh brother! Red herring! Again! Now are we discussing Mormons too?
Quote:
Originally Posted by W James III
Your argument is that society is requiring all others to live at a moral standard based on certain beliefs even if that forces some to make changes to their beliefs because the greater number of others feel it is the way to live.
Gaslighting. No. Just don't break the law. If you're following your "religion" properly, you shouldn't be harming children. This includes;
Archaic societies that exploit children whether it's disguised as religion, poverty, corruption, etc.
a society that uses their beliefs (to use your word) to push the envelope of acceptable behavior
hot blonde female teacher has relationship with 14 year old boy
All these things destroy a child's current and future psychology and ability to trust others and we have frankly took it upon ourselves to form civil laws to govern ourselves. If a person's religion or culture is not in line with these laws, well ok, let Officer O' Malley and Judge Rob and Bubba take care of the rest. If you cannot obey state, local and federal laws, you gotta problem. Simple enough?
Quote:
Originally Posted by W James III
Yea it would be. It would also suck to be a black person in the south in the days of segregation, or a poor person disabled person who can’t afford a bowl of soup
Red herring!
Quote:
Originally Posted by W James III
Then we are playing God or Hitler but at least our children will be safe.
Godwin's Law! Hah! So fitting that it was at the end of your rant.
"Godwin's Law is often cited in online discussions as a deterrent against the use of arguments in the widespread reducio ad hitlerum form. The rule does not make any statement about whether any particular reference or comparison to Adolf Hitler or the Nazis might be appropriate, but only asserts that the likelihood of such a reference or comparison arising increases as the discussion progresses. It is precisely because such a comparison or reference may sometimes be appropriate, Godwin has arguedthat overuse of Nazi and Hitler comparisons should be avoided, because it robs the valid comparisons of their impact"
Did you really mean to do that on purpose? That's just... special.
Quote:
Originally Posted by W James III
You are entitled to your opinion just as eveyone else is.
I have stated mine as well and so I conclude this debate is over
No... not true either. Your debating techniques are quite over though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by W James III
I respond to every person and point that is raised in this thread that has been directed to me for a response.
No no. You responded to me out of the blue. You brought me into this debate by multi-quoting me in the first place. You started this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by W James III
So you have a life and less is more but you have time to pop in and dismiss someone who raises a valid rebuttal but you don’t have time to respond to the rebuttal in the debate.
Oh, let me fix that for you, ok? Just didn't quite have the time to do it up proper on my Droid, ya know? I was at a ball game with my wife, thankyouverymuch.
Quote:
Originally Posted by W James III
Again shows your mentality
...
Quote:
Originally Posted by W James III
You are for killing people, judging others, torture, removing constitutional rights from others who you think are less than you because they have a mental disorder, and yet you are suggesting I am the one with issues.
"If someone comes here to such a thread arguing that a 35 year old guy having sex with a 14 – 15 year is a pedophile I might ague he is sick but he isn’t a pedophile." Interesting? So your age of consent is?????
Ok, based on your responses, no microchip or castration. Does the violator go to jail or strictly counseling? Or a combination of both.
Final question to the CityData administrator. Can we de-rep people? I have about four candidates.
"If someone comes here to such a thread arguing that a 35 year old guy having sex with a 14 – 15 year is a pedophile I might ague he is sick but he isn’t a pedophile." Interesting? So your age of consent is?????
Ok, based on your responses, no microchip or castration. Does the violator go to jail or strictly counseling? Or a combination of both.
Final question to the CityData administrator. Can we de-rep people? I have about four candidates.
What is my age of consent? I don’t really have one, I have to follow the laws where I reside and that age is 16. I guess if I had to say, I think 15 would be the age, as we live in a more modern and educated world.
I am also older and married to a wonderful woman for many years who is my soul mate. I feel we will live together until the day we die, therefore although I might window shop I have no desire to touch the merchandise. If I did have such a desire I don’t see myself with anyone under 25 because for me there is also a level or maturity I would be looking for. Again this is based on my own age and the fact my younger days are well behind me.
As for no castration or chipping, and what I feel should happen to such offenders. I think it is up to a judge to decide based on the merits of each case. Time and again judges have made some really bad mistakes but that’s simply an indication of the faulty justice system that needs overhauling. I have said that I think these people need to be in jail or in a special setting so they are not a threat to the general public. Forcing them to become homeless and living under bridges without the proper supervision sure isn’t the answer.
The only way I feel they should be allowed on the street is if they can indicate they are not a threat and this is through both a certified treatment provider and the court. Once they are certified there should not be any restrictions on them regarding where they can live or not using the internet and such. Again this is if they pose no threat, if they pose a threat they should be in jail.
Well your literal question solicited an exaggerated answer. We've not shot any pedophiles in the head just yet. Let us have our passion.
In regards to letting you have your passion, I understand where you’re coming from but for me it’s disturbing when anyone has passion and desire for murder, regardless of the situation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by McGowdog
Castrated or microchipped, remember?
Yes so all these other side issues are then none issues right?
Quote:
by W James III
Two wrongs don’t make a right, and the fact you’re promoting the murder of anyone clearly defines you as a person.
Quote:
Originally Posted by McGowdog
Gaslighting.
The definition of gaslighting is
A form of intimidation or psychological abuse in which false information is presented to the victim, making them doubt their own memory and perception. Gaslighting - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
How is my statement gaslighting?
Anyone promoting murder is showing the type of person they are. This is a fact, and has nothing to do with gaslighting per the definition. Are you a victim? Am I trying to make you doubt you own memory or perception? No I was making a statement of observation not trying to destroy your perception of reality.
Quote:
Originally Posted by W James III
I never said it was, my point which you clearly missed was that Down Syndromes is a hereditary and generic disorder, therefore
Quote:
Originally Posted by McGowdog
Extra chromosome. It's more of a random occurance than hereditary. Don't you dare imply that pedophilia is hereditary here. That will not fly here.
Why will this not fly here, are you saying that then pedophiles simply wake up one day and decide they will have an attraction to children? Or that a gay person will simply decide one day to be gay?
These traits and characteristics come from somewhere, so where are you suggesting the come from if they are not hereditary even in a recessive gene?
Heredity is the passing of traits to offspring (from its parent or ancestors). This is the process by which an offspring cell or organism acquires or becomes predisposed to the characteristics of its parent cell or organism. Through heredity, variations exhibited by individuals can accumulate and cause a species to evolve. The study of heredity in biology is called genetics, which includes the field of epigenetics.
[quote]Originally Posted by W James III
My argument was the same applies to pedophiles. You could lock them lock up all the people who were known pedophiles or as you promote (killing them) but[quote]
Quote:
Originally Posted by McGowdog
Gaslighting.
How is my statement gaslighting?
I am using an analogy to make a point regarding genetics, and this has nothing to do with gaslighting per the definition. Are you a victim? Am I trying to make you doubt you own memory or perception? No I was using an analogy not trying to destroy your perception of reality.
Quote:
Originally Posted by McGowdog
You mention to me and others to go back and read your ... hmmm... anywho... but if you look at my first post and this one you're quoting here, you'll see my real stance on the issue that doesn't include putting a bullet in their spinal cord.
Here is what you said on post #134
Quote:
Originally Posted by McGowdog
Like others have said on here, plenty of bullets. At very least, we'll deal with them as things manifest. In the mean time, we can sit back and say, "Wow! It sure sucks for them there pedophiles.
Quote:
Originally Posted by W James III
...but the reality is within the week another child somewhere would be born with this genetic disorder and grow up as a pedophile.
Quote:
Originally Posted by McGowdog
Red herring and false assumptions. You can click your heels three times and say, "I wish it was a genetic disorder, I wish it was a genetic disorder, I wish it was a genetic disorder"... doesn't make it so. If it was, we could genetically eliminate the disorder from the human race. There's a can of worms for ya.
If this is true then why can’t we eliminate Downs Syndrome which has been proven to be a genetic disorder with a chromosome factor? Same applies to Pedophiles, and I said when the medical technology arrives then great until that time the question remains what is to solution.
I have already responded to why it is a genetic disorder.
Quote:
Originally Posted by W James III
If you would take time and go back and read an entire discussion in a thread before posting maybe you would have seen this and understand.
Quote:
Originally Posted by McGowdog
Back atcha bub.
Ok
Quote:
Originally Posted by W James III
Manipulation? Wow that’s news to me, so are you saying that manipulation is the real symptom of criminal behavior?
If so every politician and LEO would be criminals...
Quote:
Originally Posted by McGowdog
It's getting fishy in here again. Don't go throwing anymore red herrings around. Sex offender=manipulation. Pedophiles=manipulation. They are masters of it. Go find somebody such as my cousin who works with these folks for a living and ask them what pedophiles are like; they fit a pro"file". One of manipulation. Go ask the former significant other of one of these folks. Manipulation.
I asked you a direct question, which you responded that yes you think manipulation is the real symptom.
I simply expanded on that by saying I disagreed because of so many other manipulative people who are not classified as (legally) criminal
I wasn’t throwing out a red herring and trying to divert the conversation to something different as to the definition of Red herring as an idiom, I was pointing out the flaws in your argument although I did agree with you that they are manipulative, I just don’t agree it is the determining factor.
So far you've gone on and on about your theories about manipulation and hereditary. It's sort of boring me... personally. Anybody else?
Then move along, I am simply addressing anyone who directs a comment to me and engages me in this debate.
Quote:
Originally Posted by W James III
I agree that a lot can be done but I will say that a lot isn’t being done affectively. I personally think if a sex offender has to be on a GPS bracelet they are not safe enough to be on the street, they should be in a community home or in jail.
[quote=McGowdog;13285567] Please tell me you're not going to discuss law with us now. If I had my way, they'd all stay locked up. But that's the whole point here. We can't keep them there. They serve their time. They comply... just enough to get probation, to get parole... the GPS system is a reality. It ain't much, but what do you suggest? Castration? Microchip? We got all night here.[quote]
Why can’t we keep them locked up? We can if we want to, or at least put up the resources needed to solve this problem. My idea would be creating a special city for them to all live in, all funded by tax dollars then once it’s up and running the residents then pay the tax to keep it a self run community.
Quote:
Originally Posted by W James III
Where is the line drawn, and I am fearful that we as a society have surrendered our freedoms for the greater good of a security that we can never be guaranteed to have. I think I am getting off topic but that’s where my real concern comes from.
Quote:
Originally Posted by McGowdog
Ok, I will indulge this point here with you. Took you a long time to get to this point. Maybe off topic, but a good point. I was starting to worry that you were such a pedophile sympathizer.
Good to see that you're just looking out for all of our freedoms.
I’m concerned with my own dwindling freedoms, and if that means having to protect someone else’s freedoms and rights who I might not agree with, then why do I deserve any different when the time comes for my rights and freedoms to be removed?
Quote:
Originally Posted by W James III
I am going to use you’re argument here in reverse, you say the world is what it is and frankly its nobody’s business what you/me think about sex offenders, there are no absolutes in this world so they will do what they want to, and there is a time for everything as you say, a time to kill, a time to steal, and maybe a time for sex offenders to molest children.
Quote:
Originally Posted by McGowdog
No no no no. Serious gaslighting infraction and might I say... a twisting of words here.
I admitted up front I was using your words in a reverse (or twisted way), I wasn’t trying to deceive you, so again this isn’t gaslighting per definition.
I did this to make a point but not by deception
Quote:
Originally Posted by McGowdog
You are the only one who has shown any sympathy whatsoever of the act of harming children here. Keep my words in their context. Don't go adding your nasty additions to them. There is a time to kill. A time to steal. A time to lie, if you will. Let's keep it there. Why would it be ok to steal? To feed your starving family. Why would it be ok to kill? To protect your family. Why would it be ok to lie? "Honey, does this dress make me look fat/old/etc?" Those are the absolutes I'm talking about. If you're a pedophile sympathizer, I don't want to hear it. I'm sickened enough by the thing already.
Again I twisted your words openly to make a point which is why is it justifiable for YOU to ever lie, cheat, steal, or whatever and justify it as there is a time for everything, yet not extend the same liberty to someone else who might have their justifications?
Are we ever justified to kill children? I would argue we are not, but it happens all the time under law, are ever justified to molest a child, I would say no we are not, but under some law in some places it is justifiable.
Again I wasn’t taking sides with the molester but taking aim at what I considered your one sided justifications for a time to do whatever you feel justified to do but not extending that same ideology to others you disagree with. My apologies if you didn’t understand that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by W James III
Do you see how faulty this thinking is?
Quote:
Originally Posted by McGowdog
Gaslighting. You will not discredit my thinking in this here thread. I can guarantee you that.
Since this above quote doesn’t indicate what the reference is to, it’s impossible to properly address it and thus makes your statement seem a little one sided as if I am trying to discredit you when in fact I could have asked that question on a variety of topics and it could be relevant to such a topic.
Therefore it’s easy for this quote to be taken out of context and used in a manipulative manner. I will give you the benefit of the doubt that you were not attempting this but again until the entire reference is quoted I cannot respond.
Quote:
Originally Posted by W James III
As for you claim how would such a thing be handled in the middle east I think it’s more acceptable in
[quote=McGowdog;13285567] Your next two paragraphs and the link... simple basic red herring.]quote]
Not at all, you asked me a direct question regarding the Middle East and how they would handle it, and I provided a link to answer that question. This was again right on topic and a direct response, I wasn’t trying to change the subject or divert anything. You may not agree with how they handle it over there or the stories I linked but don’t shoot the messenger because you don’t like the message.
Quote:
Originally Posted by W James III
...I will try to find it and post it. I am not a “Victim” type person but I at least look at any debate from all sides, and the difficulty here in such a sensitive topic is one can easily become a target for simply trying to look at all sides.
Quote:
Originally Posted by McGowdog
So you like to debate. Good for you. I don't so much. The thread title was compelling and I stayed away for awhile. But it was a hot thread and kept coming up so I came in to state my stance.
Yes this is a debate on serious subject but we don’t have to take ourselves so serious, this is a forum board where we should be able to debate in a mature manner.
[quote=McGowdog;13285567] You, on the other hand, like to debate. I don't see that you're very good at it. No substance. You were almost onto something too, but drifted back to trying to knock your opponent down to look higher.[quote]
I have always tried to stay on topic and only nock on an opponent when they are trying to use questionable tactics.
I have called you out accusing me of Galslighting,and red herring but I am not trying to knock you to make myself look better, but rather simply to clear the debate waters.
Quote:
Originally Posted by W James III
I think religious discussions are off limits by board rules so I think I will leave the religion aspects out of any discussion and use the term “beliefs”
Quote:
Originally Posted by McGowdog
Religion is man's interpretation of creation/Creator. Now... there are spiritual laws, morals, etc. that are universal to all walks of life and they can even be agreed upon to mature, open-minded individuals. If you want to keep it out of your debate, then fine. Go for it.
Apart from it being off topic my point was that I think it’s against the forum rules to discuss religion other than in the religious forums. Therefore this discussion is best reserved for another thread in a more appropriate section.
Quote:
Originally Posted by W James III
The FLDS in Texas where the compound was raided in 2008 is just one example of how some people’s “beliefs”
Quote:
Originally Posted by McGowdog
Oh brother! Red herring! Again! Now are we discussing Mormons too?
No again the link I provide was to cite an example to illustrate a point on “beliefs” and was not an attempt at distracting the conversation. I was on topic in regards to the conversation and the question you posed to me
Here you are now trying to “Red Herring” by taking my post out of context and dismiss it as a separate issue regarding Mormons.
When someone has a good argument against you it gets misrepresented between your ears, then transferred to the keyboard as something else.
Here's another definition of gaslighting;
Gaslighting Presenting false information as though it is factually correct, and basing your argument on this information; pretending what is patently obvious is not; you may have your own opinions, but not your own facts on which you base them.
I've seen your pattern and what you're really going after with your arguments and I see no need in these long back and forth posts.
You really have two or maybe three points to make, so there's no need.
By the way, consent in some states is a law set up for statutory rape where the age of consent is 18 years of age unless the other partner is 4 years or less older. Example, 17 year old gal and a 21 year old guy is ok according to the law. But daddy may have a shotgun waiting on the porch.
Pedophiles are ONLY attracted to children. With the sex offenders, they MAY be attracted to adults too, so this give something for the therapists to work with. "Oh, you're attracted to that 35 year old female? Good. That's normal behavior and something positive for you to focus on." Nothing positive for the pedophile to focus on.
Oh, they can have internet, but there's a program POs use to pull up every pic that flashed on the perp's screen and if they violate, back to jail!
Originally Posted by W James III
Your argument is that society is requiring all others to live at a moral standard based on certain beliefs even if that forces some to make changes to their beliefs because the greater number of others feel it is the way to live.
Quote:
Originally Posted by McGowdog
Gaslighting. No. Just don't break the law. If you're following your "religion" properly, you shouldn't be harming children.
The FLDS in Texas were following “Their” religion properly, and this was what I pointed out by linking that article I did. That is, their religion is not the same as most others and when you try to expect them to have the same beliefs as your religious or moral beliefs how can you claim there is freedom of religion? Again I am not arguing for underage marriages but rather I am arguing the double standard of making others conform to your beliefs regardless of the reasoning.
This is getting off topic again
Quote:
Originally Posted by McGowdog
This includes;
• Archaic societies that exploit children whether it's disguised as religion, poverty, corruption, etc.
• a society that uses their beliefs (to use your word) to push the envelope of acceptable behavior
• hot blonde female teacher has relationship with 14 year old boy
All these things destroy a child's current and future psychology and ability to trust others and we have frankly took it upon ourselves to form civil laws to govern ourselves. If a person's religion or culture is not in line with these laws, well ok, let Officer O' Malley and Judge Rob and Bubba take care of the rest. If you cannot obey state, local and federal laws, you gotta problem. Simple enough?
Again I am not arguing that they do not inflict damage upon the child victim I am arguing other points
Quote:
Originally Posted by W James III
Yea it would be. It would also suck to be a black person in the south in the days of segregation, or a poor person disabled person who can’t afford a bowl of soup
Quote:
Originally Posted by McGowdog
Red herring!
This was a generalization just as you were stating it must suck being a
pedophile.
Quote:
Originally Posted by W James III
Then we are playing God or Hitler but at least our children will be safe.
Quote:
Originally Posted by McGowdog
Godwin's Law! Hah! So fitting that it was at the end of your rant.
Again in context to the entire quote it fits what I was saying, and is not a fallacy in any way. if you chose to dismiss it with laughter, that’s your problem but it remains a fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by McGowdog
"Godwin's Law is often cited in online discussions as a deterrent against the use of arguments in the widespread reducio ad hitlerum form. The rule does not make any statement about whether any particular reference or comparison to Adolf Hitler or the Nazis might be appropriate, but only asserts that the likelihood of such a reference or comparison arising increases as the discussion progresses. It is precisely because such a comparison or reference may sometimes be appropriate, Godwin has arguedthat overuse of Nazi and Hitler comparisons should be avoided, because it robs the valid comparisons of their impact"
I would agree if simply throwing out Hitler’s name in a reckless blanket statement however in the context of genetic modification and medical practices to create a perfect race it is in context as that was what he was doing, playing self appointed god.
Quote:
Originally Posted by W James III
You are entitled to your opinion just as eveyone else is.
I have stated mine as well and so I conclude this debate is over
Quote:
Originally Posted by McGowdog
No... not true either. Your debating techniques are quite over though.
Yea right, good try
Quote:
Originally Posted by W James III
I respond to every person and point that is raised in this thread that has been directed to me for a response.
Quote:
Originally Posted by McGowdog
No no. You responded to me out of the blue. You brought me into this debate by multi-quoting me in the first place. You started this.
You entered the debate and conversation and participated, I didn’t bring you to the thread so again you are responsible. When you made a comment regarding something I had discussed and was in the middle of debating you in fact are responsible, so there is nothing out of the blue to it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by W James III
So you have a life and less is more but you have time to pop in and dismiss someone who raises a valid rebuttal but you don’t have time to respond to the rebuttal in the debate.
Quote:
Originally Posted by McGowdog
Oh, let me fix that for you, ok? Just didn't quite have the time to do it up proper on my Droid, ya know? I was at a ball game with my wife, thank you very much.
Thanks,
See if you had said you were enjoying a ball game with the wife but would be back later to finish the discussion this could have been avoided.
[quote] Originally Posted by W James III
You are for killing people, judging others, torture, removing constitutional rights from others who you think are less than you because they have a mental disorder, and yet you are suggesting I am the one with issues.
"If someone comes here to such a thread arguing that a 35 year old guy having sex with a 14 – 15 year is a pedophile I might ague he is sick but he isn’t a pedophile." Interesting? So your age of consent is?????
Ok, based on your responses, no microchip or castration. Does the violator go to jail or strictly counseling? Or a combination of both.
Final question to the CityData administrator. Can we de-rep people? I have about four candidates.
Looking over your post again, by not quoting my entire statement could cause it to be taken out of context in a very negative way.
Quote:
"If someone comes here to such a thread arguing that a 35 year old guy having sex with a 14 – 15 year is a pedophile I might ague he is sick but he isn’t a pedophile as defined by the DSMIV”.
Again this definition is not mine it’s the standard DSMIV
Last edited by W James III; 03-14-2010 at 12:32 PM..
Reason: add quote box
Both, with out the use of any pain killers (would have said "anesthetics" but my spelling acts up from time to time) --------- Oh wow, I almost left out floggin'.
Last edited by Dusty Rhodes; 03-14-2010 at 01:37 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
