Apparently pre-pubescent pedophilia is ok as long as you don't give the victim quaaludes beforehand

[TheNewGirl 1,028]

1 minute ago, Fireballer said:

It’s obvious by his posts that the more like an adult the victim looks, it lessens the severity.  

Statutory rape is when one individual is younger than the age of consent. I think we are all referring to the adult/child situation versus the 17 year old with an 18 year old boy/girl friend.  It's morally wrong for an adult to have intercourse with a child. I don't care if that child "looks" like an adult (which is what, boobz? Plenty of women have smaller breasts).  

Rape (usually two adults) is usually* done by force. Which is also morally wrong. It's also morally wrong for a man to have intercourse with a woman who cannot consent (drunk, drugs, whatever). 

Both of these situations are morally wrong.  

So he's saying that if the victim LOOKS like an adult (lets say it's a 13 year old girl that has larger breasts, is taller, and could easily be mistaken for 18) - and the 30 year old dude has intercourse with her, that it's okay that his punishment isn't as severe as the 30 year old guy who did it with a drunk 25 year old? 

This makes no sense to me. EITHER situation is NOT OKAY. Why is this even something that is debated on whether it's MORAL or not? 

 

Jeebus, some of you guys are really focked in the head. 

[Horseman 1,513]

Just now, Engorgeous George said:

That you are not worth my time is not tantamount  losing.  As for loosing I am not sure what that is.  Probably a word filter feeding dullards employ.  Are you also a clam desiring pianop lessons?

Right, when you get called out for reframing the discussion when you can't address the prime issue, taking flight is the next logical move.  

[Hardcore troubadour 12,631]

37 minutes ago, Fireballer said:

I hope Tim never stops posting here.  It’s daily affirmation of the existence of morally corrupt people and to always expect the unexpected.

Well what’s going on here is that people like Tim walk around thinking they are the morally superior ones. When I’m actuality they are just following an ideology that leads them into situations where it becomes apparent they value the ideology over any morals. And they think the other side are the lemmings. 

[The Real timschochet 2,929]

18 minutes ago, TheNewGirl said:

What is that moral difference? 

You know, you’re one of a few people here whom I really respect. Though I disagree with you a lot I always find your comments to be very thoughtful. 
 

But I’m going to stop answering questions about this. I’ve tried to defend my position but I seem to make things worse every time I do. Perhaps that’s my own fault. But in any case I’m done. 

[Horseman 1,513]

19 minutes ago, TheNewGirl said:

What is that moral difference? 

Right, they can't explain that part with out drawing arbitrary lines along ages that's different than what is socially acceptable.  Exactly what they are being called out for.  That's where their argument falls apart and everyone but Tim will evaporate out of the thread.  Tim will just keep saying he never said or did anything wrong contradicting himself over and over.  

[Fireballer 2,381]

10 minutes ago, TheNewGirl said:

Statutory rape is when one individual is younger than the age of consent. I think we are all referring to the adult/child situation versus the 17 year old with an 18 year old boy/girl friend.  It's morally wrong for an adult to have intercourse with a child. I don't care if that child "looks" like an adult (which is what, boobz? Plenty of women have smaller breasts).  

Rape (usually two adults) is usually* done by force. Which is also morally wrong. It's also morally wrong for a man to have intercourse with a woman who cannot consent (drunk, drugs, whatever). 

Both of these situations are morally wrong.  

So he's saying that if the victim LOOKS like an adult (lets say it's a 13 year old girl that has larger breasts, is taller, and could easily be mistaken for 18) - and the 30 year old dude has intercourse with her, that it's okay that his punishment isn't as severe as the 30 year old guy who did it with a drunk 25 year old? 

This makes no sense to me. EITHER situation is NOT OKAY. Why is this even something that is debated on whether it's MORAL or not? 

 

Jeebus, some of you guys are really focked in the head. 

In fairness, he’s splitting hairs in referring the severity of statutory rape.  He would view the rape of a 13 year old, who looks 20, less severe than a 13 year old who looks 13. 

[Horseman 1,513]

11 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

You know, you’re one of a few people here whom I really respect. Though I disagree with you a lot I always find your comments to be very thoughtful. 
 

But I’m going to stop answering questions about this. I’ve tried to defend my position but I seem to make things worse every time I do. Perhaps that’s my own fault. But in any case I’m done. 

I wish I had a dollar for every time you've said that over the past 10 years.  You can't help yourself, liar.  Maybe take one of your self imposed breaks, or do that thing where you make a thread about yourself and stop posting in all the others?

[Engorgeous George 1,162]

14 minutes ago, Horseman said:

Right, when you get called out for reframing the discussion when you can't address the prime issue, taking flight is the next logical move.  

You are confirmation of Lincoln's adage.  You like to open your mouth and remove all doubt.

[Horseman 1,513]

1 minute ago, Engorgeous George said:

You are confirmation of Lincoln's adage.  You like to open your mouth and remove all doubt.

Ad hominem     

[Casual Observer 597]

15 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

You know, you’re one of a few people here whom I really respect. Though I disagree with you a lot I always find your comments to be very thoughtful. 
 

But I’m going to stop answering questions about this. I’ve tried to defend my position but I seem to make things worse every time I do. Perhaps that’s my own fault. But in any case I’m done. 

Didn't you already say this earlier today?

[Engorgeous George 1,162]

6 minutes ago, Horseman said:

Ad hominem     

Probably more Ad Molluscus, but o.k.

[Horseman 1,513]

25 minutes ago, TheNewGirl said:

Statutory rape is when one individual is younger than the age of consent. I think we are all referring to the adult/child situation versus the 17 year old with an 18 year old boy/girl friend.  It's morally wrong for an adult to have intercourse with a child. I don't care if that child "looks" like an adult (which is what, boobz? Plenty of women have smaller breasts).  

Rape (usually two adults) is usually* done by force. Which is also morally wrong. It's also morally wrong for a man to have intercourse with a woman who cannot consent (drunk, drugs, whatever). 

Both of these situations are morally wrong.  

So he's saying that if the victim LOOKS like an adult (lets say it's a 13 year old girl that has larger breasts, is taller, and could easily be mistaken for 18) - and the 30 year old dude has intercourse with her, that it's okay that his punishment isn't as severe as the 30 year old guy who did it with a drunk 25 year old? 

This makes no sense to me. EITHER situation is NOT OKAY. Why is this even something that is debated on whether it's MORAL or not? 

 

Jeebus, some of you guys are really focked in the head. 

The bold is how he tried to frame it, yes.  The problem is that the specific person he was talking about looked like this:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_pyylukR2xyI/SsJJ8xGmsKI/AAAAAAAAAMQ/MGF1S9ockLc/s1600-h/samantha+gailey+polansky+rape+1.JPG

[Hardcore troubadour 12,631]

Tim is just defending his side, like a good follower. He would never defend Ted Nugent for the same exact thing. 

[Patented Phil 823]

On 3/7/2023 at 9:16 AM, GutterBoy said:

link to my defense of creepy activities?  Link to where I said there is nothing wrong with children tipping halfnaked trannies?

You're another lying sack of sh1t.

How many sacks of are we up to?

[TheNewGirl 1,028]

2 hours ago, Fireballer said:

In fairness, he’s splitting hairs in referring the severity of statutory rape.  He would view the rape of a 13 year old, who looks 20, less severe than a 13 year old who looks 13. 

Which in itself is nauseating. 

Disgusting.

 

[Patented Phil 823]

This is one hell of a slap fight. I can’t keep track of who is fight who. 

[Horseman 1,513]

8 minutes ago, Patented Phil said:

This is one hell of a slap fight. I can’t keep track of who is fight who. 

The good guys win and the sickos that tried to minimize pedophilia lose.  That's all you need to know.  

[Strike 3,968]

3 hours ago, Casual Observer said:

Didn't you already say this earlier today?

By my count this is at least the third time Tim has said he's done with this thread.  But he does that a lot.  He never makes a commitment and follows through.  Once, when he realized everyone was sick of his sh*t and after his 30th suspension at FBG's, he actually made his own thread and promised to only post in that one thread.  That way, everyone who wanted to talk to him could go in there and do so and he wouldn't bother the rest of us.  Of course, within a couple of days he couldn't help himself and was posting away in every  thread again.  And he has no shame about it.  Just makes sh*t up as he goes along. 

[nobody 2,037]

On 3/7/2023 at 6:55 AM, GutterBoy said:

 

Any nuance here?

Shoudn't you have said "Sex Change Surgery"?  I know you just say "mutiliation" because it sounds harsher.

Only a pedo would think mutilation sounds harsher than sex change surgery. 

Then again my face already looks like it's been mutilated.

[nobody 2,037]

On 3/7/2023 at 8:07 AM, Horseman said:

On March 10, 1977, Polanski, then aged 43, faced six charges involving drugging and raping 13-year-old Samantha Jane Gailey.  That's ok by @The Real timschochet

 

Well, according to that piece of shìt, it would've been okay if he didn't drug her.  What disgusting piece of trash that guy is.

[TheNewGirl 1,028]

19 hours ago, The Real timschochet said:

You know, you’re one of a few people here whom I really respect. Though I disagree with you a lot I always find your comments to be very thoughtful. 
 

But I’m going to stop answering questions about this. I’ve tried to defend my position but I seem to make things worse every time I do. Perhaps that’s my own fault. But in any case I’m done. 

You can't defend it because both situations are WRONG 

You're justifying that it's "basically okay" for an adult to have intercourse with a CHILD that LOOKS like an adult. That's focked, dude. IDGAF how you try and defend it. 

"I didn't know she was 13...she looks 18 and told me she was 18." Yeah, you can fock right off with that noise. 

As for you respecting me, if MY position has caused you to loose respect for me, then that's fine with me. You're still attempting to justify that intercourse with a child is okay, and if your'e punished then you should get a lighter sentence because you just "didn't know" that she was a child. 

 

I still can't believe that this is an actual argument. I pray that you don't have daughters.