North American Man/Boy Love Association

Discussion in 'Ethics, Morality, & Justice' started by otheadp, Nov 6, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. spookz Banned Banned

    Messages:
    6,390
    uhhh...perhaps some visual aids in order to hone this topic to its fullest potential?

    Boys!
    Sometimes a man just needs one (you know I need you)
    Boys!
    To love him and to hold (I just want you to touch me)
    Boys!
    And when a man is with one (mmm, mmm)
    Boys!
    Then he's in control!

    ouw!!
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Silent Beauty Registered Member

    Messages:
    27
    Meph, nice to know you're a male ^^"
    Good, your views are extreme. I dont like wishy washy anyway.

    Your points are very agreeable with me.
    These portrayals of serial killers are deceptive aren't they?
    Now do you think if people educated themselves properly, not judge the book by its cover that they could see through this before the act committed? Nah.
    Case in point, Dahmer abused animals when he was little,
    who knows what that Gacy guy did as a child. Would we know from early childhood to detect what had traumatized them to commit these acts later in life?

    Wraith, your statement of "Pedophillia always flows along an abuser/victim paradigm." and that
    "The victims of pedophillia never stop suffering."

    Exactly. And you know, as well as I do, that these victims for more than 50% of the time, turn out to be the pedophiles.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. outlandish smoki'n....... Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,033
    oh, so we excuse Mr. Ped for raping a kid because he was abused as a child??

    Nope.

    Sorry.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



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

    Messages:
    1,641
    Thanks for pointing this out. The right is so eager to equate homosexuality with pedophilia, polygomy, and beastiality they will invent evedence in thier heads for it. NAMBLA predates the modern push for homosexual rights by a fair amount of time, but without checking to see if thats so otheadp claims that one caused the other.
     
  8. Mephura Applesauce, bitch... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,065
    Re: meph:

    Ah, but that is what you are claiming. Just because a person suffers from pedophilia, doesn't mean they will act on it. The same way a person that is suicidal will not always act upon that urge.
    What you are claiming is a total lack of morals.

    From websters:
    1 a : of or relating to principles of right and wrong in behavior : ETHICAL <moral judgments> b : expressing or teaching a conception of right behavior <a moral poem> c : conforming to a standard of right behavior d : sanctioned by or operative on one's conscience or ethical judgment <a moral obligation> e : capable of right and wrong action <a moral agent>

    Now if they have now morals, they would act on whatever they felt like. Not all do. Some know that those actions are wrong, reguardless of their urges, and deny those urges. Just because you find children sexually appealing doesn't mean you are going to molest them.

    Also, if these people had no morals, they would commit a countless number of other crimes. Theft, murder, assult, etc.
    Withour morals to base right and wrong upon, you can't have a conscience.

    You are right. Advising people on what the right way to handle situations in their life is, helping them through trouble, a serving as a good example is. Until an action based upon pedophilia is brought to light, few people suspect anything because, in all other ways, many of them are upstanding members of society.

    Your boat has a hole in it. It's called reality.

    The math of morality, hmm?
    Interesting concept.
    It's easy to think of people that do things we never would as being soulless, unfeeling monsters, isn't it?
    To bad that generally isn't the case. So far all you are doing is throwing around oppinions. Why don't you actually do the work and back up something you are saying. I realize this might be hard for you, but it would be greatly appreciated.


    Christ. This is just asinine.
    That would imply that they had reason to fear being caught. If they fear being caught, then they would know what they are doing is wrong. If they know it is wrong, then they would have a conscience.
    But, since they have no morals to tell them what right and wrong is, how can they have a conscience?

    Main Entry: con·science
    Pronunciation: 'kän(t)-sh&n(t)s
    Function: noun
    Etymology: Middle English, from Old French, from Latin conscientia, from conscient-, consciens, present participle of conscire to be conscious, be conscious of guilt, from com- + scire to know -- more at SCIENCE
    Date: 13th century
    1 a : the sense or consciousness of the moral goodness or blameworthiness of one's own conduct, intentions, or character together with a feeling of obligation to do right or be good b : a faculty, power, or principle enjoining good acts

    Perhaps you shouldn't use words you don't understand.

    See that little word I put in bold for you? There is the flaw in your argument. Without moral, you can't know right and wrong. If you don't know right and wrong, you can't have a conscience.

    Quit arguing with emotions and use that lump of grey shit between your ears.
     
  9. The Marquis Only want the best for Nigel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,562
    And here we are back at the argument for/against absolute morality again. Gets a little circular around here after a while.
     
  10. Mephura Applesauce, bitch... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,065
    Again with the arguments that make no sense.
    So if there if it isn't society that is judging the person, who exactly is it?If a person isn't respectable because he is judged to be so by society, then what makes him so?

    From this (really bad) logic, we could say a person is respectable/ not respectable is they were the only one left alive on the planet.
    If that is the case, who's respect is he going to be worthy of?
    The only way your statement works is from a religious standpoint. If you are one of those people...*sigh*

    Perhaps you are one of those. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. ESL perhaps?

    It's pretty simple when you get down to it. Good and evil, right and wrong; These are subjective ideas. In a society, the majority's percieved idea of what is wrong and evil is what is wrong or evil in that society.
    Murder isn't wrong in all societies. It is in ours.
    The only way your statement is going to make any sense what so ever is if you can objectively define wrong and evil.
     
  11. Mephura Applesauce, bitch... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,065
    I can see that. I feel like I'm back in junior high arguing against the bible thumpers who always revert to "the bible says so" as their only argument.

    Folks,
    just because you believe something to be right or wrong doesn't mean that everyone will agree with you or that it is. Personal beliefs and oppinions do not a convining argument make.
     
  12. Silent Beauty Registered Member

    Messages:
    27
    OOOhhhh so you want to wrassle about it huh?
    Don't be sorry. I'll take your sorry though ^^
    For your information, darling Wraith, I DO NOT condone this! It's disgusting and inexusable. But however, one must stop the process. Therefore, I had in my earlier post included the notion of a rehabilitation of sorts. Although, because it would have to be in America, there's going to be ALOT of red tape and loopholes. Plus not to mention the total left wing and right wing thinkers...and religious onslaughts that would follow. O_O

    As for you, Meph, wow.....
     
  13. outlandish smoki'n....... Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,033
    read this shit through again moron, untill you figure out what a twat you are.

    doesn't even deserve an answer. Have you been at the reefer again?

    Dipshit, again you equate morality...ok lets scrap that word since it immeadiately conjours up western euro-centric ideas/imagery/notions of morality within a heaven/hell context.......roman Catholic/Baptists to you, or as you like to call them Bible bashers, which by the way is your method of saying "talk to the hand" since what your doing is shooting down anyone who talks of morality as a "bible basher" hence lacking logic hence clouded by emotion thus dodging the whole debate yourself.
    I am neither a Romcath, Bap, prot, or Bible basher.
    ...now back to the debate. Let's scrap the word morality for a while and call it "Basic sense of right and wrong" BSWR in short for you poodle.
    Now your above quotes show you equate BSRW with the opinions and perceptions of other people. By that skewed logic the most popular people would be the most virtuous.
    If X is in truth basically a decent person, it doesn't matter if the whole world thinks he's a shit.


    which religion? define that religion? define religion? which people?
    you can't even perceive something which you think you've defined in some mish mash sort of way in your thick skull, then you project that false perception onto wha you think I may or not even be!!!
    Assumption is the mother of all fuck ups mofo.

    you sir are an idiot.
     
  14. Mystech Adult Supervision Required Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,938
    If you can't see an important distinction between sexual activity between two mutually consenting adults, and the sexual abuse of a minor who is in someone else’s custody, and unequipped to understand or rightly be a part of any sort of sexual interaction, by an adult taking advantage of their innocence and confusion, then it may very well be time for a reality check. Barring that, if your own sense of right and wrong is really this screwed up it may just be best if you stop trying to think all together, it'll only bring you greif.
     
  15. Mephura Applesauce, bitch... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,065
    If you can't read what the hell I post, don't reply.

    " I was speaking in a more rhetorical sense. The question was why is pedophilia always associated with homosexuality. My answer was that it isn't so much a relation of the two in practice but rather aan implied threat to the moral conservatives. If homosexuality is allowed, they (the MC) see other acts/life styles/practices as coming shortly there after. "

    That is from the second post I put in this thread (8 down from the one you quoted). I already replied to this line of questioning/acusations once. Try to keep up and not make me have to explain things twice like wriath is doing.
     
  16. Mephura Applesauce, bitch... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,065
    Man, your shit gets tired fast. Let's recap here, so that maybe you say somthing that makes sense.

    you say:
    A person is not evil/immoral etc because he is perceived to be so by society.
    and simillarly:
    A person is not respectable/moral etc because he is perceived to be so by society.


    That would mean that being evil and immoral or respectable/moral are things that exist independantly outside of society. If this is the case, then who is judging our subject to have any of these qualities?
    That being the case, I aksed:

    So if there if it isn't society that is judging the person, who exactly is it?If a person isn't respectable because he is judged to be so by society, then what makes him so?

    It's really not hard to keep up. Please try.
    You made the claim. Back it up.

    Hey, you are the one claiming those qualities/judgements are made independant of society. If you can't back up your shit, just shut your hole. One liners don't win an argument.

    Oh, nice assumption, but so very WRONG!
    Morality doesn't need any religous basis. You are the one making claims that seem to rely on a god, or at the very least concepts of good and evil existing independant of society and human perception.

    I do? Funny I thought I said bible thumpers. The two terms have very distinct and different meanings. If you are going to quote me, at least get it right, "dipshit".


    OH, so close but WRONG again.
    See, I have had many conversations on religion, morality and other things by people who believe in a god, be it christian, wiccan whatever. The difference between them and bible thumpers (not bashers, wraith, thumpers) is that thumpers don't think things through. They make a claim and when asked how they support that claim, they fall back on " 'cause that's what it says in the bible". The reason the term bible thumpers(hopefully if i keep repeating it you will catch on.) got brought up, in a comment not even aimed at you or this debate mind you, is because you have yet to show any form of reasoning or support for your claims. You've just pulled them out and said that is how it is, much like a bible thumper.

    Good to know, but you are the one not answering questions, not me. Nice try on the distraction, but you really are going to have to support this house of cards you've built if you don't want it to fall down.

    Sorry, the poodle is Spookz. I'm the messiah. Get the names right.
    Anyway, your BSWR sounds familiar. Oh yeah... Its a fucking conscience. You know what it takes to have one of those??
    Come on. It isn't hard. I've all ready given you the definitions..
    That's right..MORALS.

    Get with the program, jackass.

    Perhaps by your skewed lagin that is how they would relate, but not mine. It is pretty simple.
    Most moral codes are based on how we interact with other people. If no other people exist, who is there to kill, steel from, rape, lie to, etc? If there is no one to do these things to, and no one to get upset by them happening, then they don't really exist.

    Similaly, these morals aren't universal from culture to culture. Is killing your first born just because she is female wrong? Is it immoral? In our society, yes. In others, maybe not.

    If the while world thinks he's a shit, then who is deciding that it's true that he is a good person? In other words, who decides this truth? (especially, a moral truth)

    I should have known that would be too much for you to understand. You are claiming an absolute right and wrong that exists outside of human/societal perception. Which religion? Any.

    Define it? OK:
    Main Entry: re·li·gion
    Pronunciation: ri-'li-j&n
    Function: noun
    Etymology: Middle English religioun, from Latin religion-, religio supernatural constraint, sanction, religious practice, perhaps from religare to restrain, tie back -- more at RELY
    Date: 13th century
    1 a : the state of a religious <a nun in her 20th year of religion> b (1) : the service and worship of God or the supernatural (2) : commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance
    2 : a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices
    3 archaic : scrupulous conformity : CONSCIENTIOUSNESS
    4 : a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith
    - re·li·gion·less adjective

    which people? Bible thumpers. People that think that their religious beliefs (especially ones concerning what is right and wrong) are universal and beyond reproach.

    :bugeye: Umm..ok.
    Tell you what is sad: You flinging around accusations of me judging you to be this or that just to try to draw attention away from the fact that you have yet to support your argument with anything other than "because I say so".
    So I have a false perseption of what you may or may not be, eh?
    Set your mind at ease, little wraith. I'll let you in on what I think of you.
    You think in circles, don't support arguments, and really have no clue what it is you are talking about at least 60% of the time. To compensate for this, you progect the same on to anyone that backs you into a corner or calls on you to support your claims. About the only other thing I might see happening with you is this childish habit you have of talking shit about people who, otherwise, would bother talking to you, just to get attention.
    To put it in a way that is easier to understand:
    You talk alot of shit, but have yet to back it up.


    If you know that, then why do you assume so much in your arguments??
    BACK THE SHIT UP.


    Perhaps compared to some, but definitely not when compared to you.
     
  17. Mephura Applesauce, bitch... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,065
    Wow what.
     
  18. spookz Banned Banned

    Messages:
    6,390
    saw a cute young twink today. am conflicted. should i? or should i not?

    meph
    you dare call me a poodle?
     
  19. Mephura Applesauce, bitch... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,065
    been your nickname for a while as far as I am concerned.
    You've even claimed it a few times if i remember correctly.
    Why, don't like it now?
     
  20. spookz Banned Banned

    Messages:
    6,390
    hmm
    you find it an apt description? if so, why?
     
  21. Mephura Applesauce, bitch... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,065
    I find it the known/accepted one.
     
  22. spookz Banned Banned

    Messages:
    6,390
    perhaps i shall ask you (again) to....."You made the claim. Back it up." (meph)
     
  23. Mephura Applesauce, bitch... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,065
    alright.

    It started here:
    http://sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=408763&highlight=poodle#post408763
    the rest:
    http://sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=421677&highlight=poodle#post421677

    http://sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=438913&highlight=poodle#post438913

    http://sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=439085&highlight=poodle#post439085

    http://sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=439316&highlight=poodle#post439316

    http://sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=440089&highlight=poodle#post440089

    http://sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=441541&highlight=poodle#post441541

    http://sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=445854&highlight=poodle#post445854

    http://sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=450759&highlight=poodle#post450759

    http://sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=451329&highlight=poodle#post451329

    http://sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=453867&highlight=poodle#post453867

    http://sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=457036&highlight=poodle#post457036

    http://sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=457589&highlight=poodle#post457589

    To which the worst you have ever said concerning the name, as far as I can tell is "try some fresh material"

    Instances of you answering to claims made about the poodle and referring to yourself as a poodle (or at lest a type of dog)
    http://sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=408858&highlight=poodle#post408858

    http://sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=445933&highlight=poodle#post445933

    http://sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=447764&highlight=poodle#post447764

    http://sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=457620&highlight=poodle#post457620

    http://sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=458453&highlight=poodle#post458453

    (the above is my favorite in which you say:
    "this poodle happens to be a super troll and he aint biting."
    or this one:

    http://sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=461058&highlight=poodle#post461058

    in which, after being asked to explain how you aren't a poodle you reply:
    "why should i? i am content with any and all labels ..."

    Proof enough, Brother Spookz?
     
    Last edited: Nov 10, 2003
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page