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

[Hardcore troubadour 12,656]

2 minutes ago, Casual Observer said:

No, this has to come to an end and the low-grade tactic of distorting or changing what someone actually said to suit your degenerate needs, which is a lie in and of itself.  I admitted that you never explicitly stated that in one of your posts.  Overall however, you defended twerking by nine year old girls, thus earning you the title of Pedo Defender IV.  Just so we're clear, you earned that title through your continued defense of twerking by nine year old girls.  Like you and everybody else didn't already know that.

She was four, not nine. 

[Casual Observer 597]

Just now, Hardcore troubadour said:

She was four, not nine. 

You have a better memory than I do.  This topic brings to light the number of degenerates on this bored.  Four pedo defenders, a guy that showers with his young kids and a guy that criticizes Polanski on the grounds that he used drugs to ply the young girl, not the sexual contact itself.

[Horseman 1,514]

14 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

 

Any nuance here?

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

Like I said, you have trouble with your words.

By any sane definition a normal surgical procedure (circumcision) performed on the majority of male infants in a country wouldn't be considered "mutilation".  Especially since it provides many health benefits.  You comparing that to top and bottom surgery for tranny children is as disingenuous of an argument as you can make.  We no longer have to search for that pedo post, here it is, you did it for us. 

[GutterBoy 2,281]

1 minute ago, Horseman said:

Like I said, you have trouble with your words.

By any sane definition a normal surgical procedure (circumcision) performed on the majority of male infants in a country wouldn't be considered "mutilation".  Especially since it provides many health benefits.  You comparing that to top and bottom surgery for tranny children is as disingenuous of an argument as you can make.  We no longer have to search for that pedo post, here it is, you did it for us. 

Using the correct definition of mutilation makes someone attracted to kids?

You need to stop trying so hard, just stop already for focks sake.   Go try and bully someone else.

[Horseman 1,514]

Just now, GutterBoy said:

Using the correct definition of mutilation makes someone attracted to kids?

You need to stop trying so hard, just stop already for focks sake.   Go try and bully someone else.

I just explained why it's not the correct use of the word dummy.  You have trouble with words, that's why you're always arguing semantics with everyone, everyday.  

[Fireballer 2,383]

1 hour ago, GutterBoy said:

Actually it's quite the opposite, you trolls are told by social media that kids are oversexualized and demonize others that don't fall in line.  The rest of us just want kids to be kids and stop having these conservative freaks talk about their "sexuality" constantly.

Actually it’s quite the opposite.  Societal norms for what’s appropriate for kids is being mowed down with a Mack truck. “The rest of us” as you claim to be part of, are just watching it happen and making fun of those left with previously accepted moral standards. We’re holding stops signs, while you’r  kind is voting to raise the speed limit Like I said, useful idiot

[Horseman 1,514]

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

Quote

Polanski should have gone to jail. But do I consider this sort of crime to be the equivalent of child molestation or rape? No I do not. Do I think he should still be condemned for it, 40 years later, in such a way that he has to be a lifetime fugitive from justice? No I do not. If that makes me sick in your eyes, oh well.

 

[Hardcore troubadour 12,656]

13 minutes ago, 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

 

Liberals lack empathy. It’s psychotic. 

[Engorgeous George 1,177]

1 hour ago, GutterBoy said:

Exactly, run away like the little b1tch you are.

You certainly are passionate about the reputation of your on-line personna.

[WhiskeyCash 65]

Can someone explain why is it that bacteria on Mars is considered life yet a heartbeat isn’t life on earth? Any of you pro-abortionists that make claims they’re “just a clump of cells” got any input on it? Cause it’s nothing but hypocrisy 

[Strike 3,979]

4 hours ago, GutterBoy said:

 

 

 

 

Well here's your chance @Strike  You said I would defend Tim because I defend pedos.  I did not defend Tim in this thread, and I have never defended a pedo.  That makes you wrong.

The question is, are you man enough to admit it.  What kind of character do you have?  Are you a stand up guy, or a disgusting internet troll with no dignity.  Let's see.

ROFLMAO.  What idiot puts together a montage of quotes to prove someone wrong on a tongue in cheek comment.  Yeah, you GOT me buddy!!!!!   Good job.  I was wrong joking about you defending Tim. 

@The Real timschochet  Care to defend your disgusting comments that I quoted?  Still stick to your stance that you haven't defended Roman Polanski?   Amazing how you become very silent in threads where you make indefensible comments.

[WhiskeyCash 65]

2 minutes ago, Strike said:

ROFLMAO.  What idiot puts together a montage of quotes to prove someone wrong on a tongue in cheek comment.  Yeah, you GOT me buddy!!!!!   Good job.  I was wrong joking about you defending Tim. 

@The Real timschochet  Care to defend your disgusting comments that I quoted?  Still stick to your stance that you haven't defended Roman Polanski?   Amazing how you become very silent in threads where you make indefensible comments.

I feel like a lot of the liberals here on this board do this. Make outrageous claims, cherry pick biased articles online that support their claim, then when ACTUAL facts come out that prove them wrong they either run & hide or double down claiming your source “is wrong and lying” while their source is the one you should be trusting even though that same source has been caught lying multiple times 

[GutterBoy 2,281]

9 minutes ago, Strike said:

I was wrong

Thank you, don't let it happen again.

[Horseman 1,514]

47 minutes ago, Strike said:

ROFLMAO.  What idiot puts together a montage of quotes to prove someone wrong on a tongue in cheek comment.  Yeah, you GOT me buddy!!!!!   Good job.  I was wrong joking about you defending Tim. 

@The Real timschochet  Care to defend your disgusting comments that I quoted?  Still stick to your stance that you haven't defended Roman Polanski?   Amazing how you become very silent in threads where you make indefensible comments.

Proven LIAR.

[Horseman 1,514]

Quote

Both are crimes. Both are worthy of condemnation and jail. But the latter is far far worse than the former. Jerry Lee Lewis married his 12 year old cousin. He was lambasted (rightfully so) but managed to come back from it and have a long career afterwards. Had Jerry Lee married his 7 year old cousin, he never would have come back from it- he would have spent his remaining life in prison (rightfully so.)

Sicko

[BuckSwope 654]

2 hours ago, WhiskeyCash said:

Can someone explain why is it that bacteria on Mars is considered life yet a heartbeat isn’t life on earth? Any of you pro-abortionists that make claims they’re “just a clump of cells” got any input on it? Cause it’s nothing but hypocrisy 

Sure, the explanation is that you aren't including a piece of the argument.   

Is it human, alive, a person- that is the battle, not that it's "life" in the general sense as you posted.  

 

[The Real timschochet 2,944]

Sorry that I haven’t been around to address this thread. I’ll make 3 points: 

1. I stand by my conviction that having sex with a post-pubescent minor is wrong, illegal, and whoever does it should be punished- but it is not as wrong as having sex with a pre-pubescent minor- that’s far far worse. And if I’m to be condemned for making this distinction, so be it. 
 

2. My attitude about this is not politically motivated. So when people try to chalk it up to my supposed “leftism” they’re just being dumb. 
 

3. I don’t personally know Roman Polanski. I would assume therefore that the condemnation that is thrown around at me for my comments about him should be even stronger against those who have continued to work with him after his scandal- for instance, Harrison Ford and Adrian Brody. And, I assume, musicians like Jimmy Page, Iggy Pop, and Ted Nugent deserve shunning and condemnation as well (among scores of others.) 

[Hardcore troubadour 12,656]

14 minutes ago, BuckSwope said:

Sure, the explanation is that you aren't including a piece of the argument.   

Is it human, alive, a person- that is the battle, not that it's "life" in the general sense as you posted.  

 

 No, something is either alive or it isn’t.  Is it a baby after one month? No. But whatever you want to call it is alive and growing. So it is ending life.  

[The Real timschochet 2,944]

1 hour ago, Horseman said:

Sicko

And again, I stand by that quote. 

[crackattack 513]

And they're ok with grown men in bathrooms and locker rooms with little girls and women. It's sick.

[WhiskeyCash 65]

28 minutes ago, BuckSwope said:

Sure, the explanation is that you aren't including a piece of the argument.   

Is it human, alive, a person- that is the battle, not that it's "life" in the general sense as you posted.  

 

Thanks for proving the hypocrisy 

[BuckSwope 654]

14 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

 No, something is either alive or it isn’t.  Is it a baby after one month? No. But whatever you want to call it is alive and growing. So it is ending life.  

But one side of the debate largely doesn't believe this part, and that is what the crux of it is, right?    That's why for most people the debate revolves around brainwaves, and heartbeats, and viablility.   

[The Real timschochet 2,944]

@Strike deliberately lied in the title of this thread, because that’s what he does. He’s a piece of crap. 
 

I am not OK with pre-pubescent pedophilia. I am not Ok with sex with minors period- but if they’re past puberty I don’t regard it as quite as evil. Strike and others deliberately misrepresent my views in order to attack me, Fuk them.  

[Hardcore troubadour 12,656]

2 minutes ago, BuckSwope said:

But one side of the debate largely doesn't believe this part, and that is what the crux of it is, right?    That's why for most people the debate revolves around brainwaves, and heartbeats, and viablility.   

They don’t believe something growing isn’t actually alive? Well then , what can you say? They are highly educated and delusional.  Science! Is someone that is brain dead still alive until they are taken off life support? 

[BuckSwope 654]

3 minutes ago, WhiskeyCash said:

Thanks for proving the hypocrisy 

What hypocrisy?   Yes, it's life.  So is a fish, a tree, a bacteria, etc.     But we don't protect all life, right?    So whether or not it's life shouldn't be where the debate lies.  

So the battle is about if it's human, alive, viable - things like that.   I know 0 people on either side of this debate who thinks cells inside the mother = bacteria on Mars.  

[GutterBoy 2,281]

2 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

@Strike deliberately lied in the title of this thread, because that’s what he does. He’s a piece of crap. 
 

I am not OK with pre-pubescent pedophilia. I am not Ok with sex with minors period- but if they’re past puberty I don’t regard it as quite as evil. Strike and others deliberately misrepresent my views in order to attack me, Fuk them.  

@Strike is a complete piece of garbage, but you're not far behind suggesting that a grown man raping a 12 year old is any better than a grown man raping a 7 year old.  They're both disgusting and the "man" deserves to be dead or at worst in jail.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,656]

2 minutes ago, BuckSwope said:

What hypocrisy?   Yes, it's life.  So is a fish, a tree, a bacteria, etc.     But we don't protect all life, right?    So whether or not it's life shouldn't be where the debate lies.  

So the battle is about if it's human, alive, viable - things like that.   I know 0 people on either side of this debate who thinks cells inside the mother = bacteria on Mars.  

No, the battle is not over if there is life. Human, viable, yes, those can be debated. What can’t be is that it is ending a life. It is. 

[Casual Observer 597]

24 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

Sorry that I haven’t been around to address this thread. I’ll make 3 points: 

1. I stand by my conviction that having sex with a post-pubescent minor is wrong, illegal, and whoever does it should be punished- but it is not as wrong as having sex with a pre-pubescent minor- that’s far far worse. And if I’m to be condemned for making this distinction, so be it. 
 

2. My attitude about this is not politically motivated. So when people try to chalk it up to my supposed “leftism” they’re just being dumb. 
 

3. I don’t personally know Roman Polanski. I would assume therefore that the condemnation that is thrown around at me for my comments about him should be even stronger against those who have continued to work with him after his scandal- for instance, Harrison Ford and Adrian Brody. And, I assume, musicians like Jimmy Page, Iggy Pop, and Ted Nugent deserve shunning and condemnation as well (among scores of others.) 

Is 13 post-pubescent?  I hate to be the one to do this, but might a bit of ethnocentrism have been involved in your defense of Polanski?  Come to think of it, maybe H. Ford and A. Brody were motivated by ethnocentrism in working with him.  You are right that Page, I Pop, Nugent, Steven Tyler deserve condemnation, but let's not water down or distract from the critique of your position by referring to others who deserve scrutiny.

[The Real timschochet 2,944]

1 minute ago, GutterBoy said:

@Strike is a complete piece of garbage, but you're not far behind suggesting that a grown man raping a 12 year old is any better than a grown man raping a 7 year old.  They're both disgusting and the "man" deserves to be dead or at worst in jail.

I agree that any one who rapes deserves jail. That’s why I realized that my defense of Polanski was short sided and I repudiated it. Polanski deserved jail for life. 
 

But CONSENSUAL sex with a minor past puberty, while also a crime, is not as bad as having sex with prepubescents. Sorry but it isn’t. 

[The Real timschochet 2,944]

Just now, Casual Observer said:

Is 13 post-pubescent?  I hate to be the one to do this, but might a bit of ethnocentrism have been involved in your defense of Polanski?  Come to think of it, maybe H. Ford and A. Brody were motivated by ethnocentrism in working with him.  You are right that Page, I Pop, Nugent, Steven Tyler deserve condemnation, but let's not water down or distract from the critique of your position by referring to others who deserve scrutiny.

I don’t think the age matters so much as the physical development. Again I have to stress- it’s all bad, it all should be punished, but one is not as bad as the other. iMO. Whether you agree or disagree with me, it is a lie to present my position as somehow pro-pedophilia. 

[GutterBoy 2,281]

3 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

But CONSENSUAL sex with a minor past puberty, while also a crime, is not as bad as having sex with prepubescents. Sorry but it isn’t. 

Yes it is, you're disgusting.

[The Real timschochet 2,944]

I mean it’s illegal in most states for a 20 year old to have sex with a 17 year old, but most of us aren’t going to condemn that in most cases are we? Are we really going to treat that situation as pedophilia, the same as Sandusky? So it’s a matter of degrees. 

[The Real timschochet 2,944]

Just now, GutterBoy said:

Yes it is, you're disgusting.

Sorry you think that way. I disagree with you. 

[BuckSwope 654]

2 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

They don’t believe something growing isn’t actually alive? Well then , what can you say? They are highly educated and delusional.  Science! Is someone that is brain dead still alive until they are taken off life support? 

IMO each side of the debate runs into these types of  questions.    

I think it's odd that people don't blink an eye about taking somebody off life support, but will say abortion is murder no matter when it happens.    But whatever - that's why I come down on my usual position of setting reasonable boundries and letting people make their choices.    

[GutterBoy 2,281]

2 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

Sorry you think that way. I disagree with you. 

If you had a daughter you would be equally outraged and upset.

[The Real timschochet 2,944]

Just now, GutterBoy said:

If you had a daughter you would be equally outraged and upset.

I have two daughters. and I love them very much. 
 

I try to base my thoughts on these issues based on reason. Obviously if something affected me personally I could easily have a different outlook but that wouldn’t make it more correct. 

[Hardcore troubadour 12,656]

6 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

Yes it is, you're disgusting.

My man! There you go! 

[Hardcore troubadour 12,656]

13 minutes ago, BuckSwope said:

IMO each side of the debate runs into these types of  questions.    

I think it's odd that people don't blink an eye about taking somebody off life support, but will say abortion is murder no matter when it happens.    But whatever - that's why I come down on my usual position of setting reasonable boundries and letting people make their choices.    

Hey, I’m not getting into the morality of it. I can see instances where it’s warranted. But let’s just call it what it is. Ending a life. And if you ask me, sometimes the woman’s life is more important than the unborn life. 

[The Real timschochet 2,944]

3 minutes ago, GutterBoy said:

If you had a daughter you would be equally outraged and upset.

When my daughter was 14 she had a best friend who I later learned was having sex with an 18 year old. My daughter and her friend were freshmen in high school, the guy was a senior. I didn’t know this until years later. It still pissed me off. And if I had known about it then, and if it had been my daughter, I would have likely done something about it, maybe even pressed charges. Disgusting. 
 

But if you’re telling me that there is NO moral difference between that situation and a Sandusky preying on young children- I can’t agree with you. The distinction seems obvious to me. Sorry if you think that’s disgusting. 

[GutterBoy 2,281]

2 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

When my daughter was 14 she had a best friend who I later learned was having sex with an 18 year old. My daughter and her friend were freshmen in high school, the guy was a senior. I didn’t know this until years later. It still pissed me off. And if I had known about it then, and if it had been my daughter, I would have likely done something about it, maybe even pressed charges. Disgusting. 
 

But if you’re telling me that there is NO moral difference between that situation and a Sandusky preying on young children- I can’t agree with you. The distinction seems obvious to me. Sorry if you think that’s disgusting. 

Well now you're down to 2 teenagers, but the broader point is trying to rank the horribleness of sexual assault to me is just a disgusting activity.

I'm out. Enjoy.