should peadohpiles be allowed to live ?

[Timo]

...some beer ad targeted at the more than one millions Puerto Ricans living in NYC ended up offending a lot of non-boriqua Spanish speakers.  It read:  EL BORICUA NO COGE EL BUS.  COGE LA GUAGUA.  And coger and guagua do mean different things in different places, and, well.  And one combination of those alternate meanings would be surprisingly appropriate in this thread.

Ha!  Indeed.  Makes you wonder about all those kids on their cell phones.  Were they really asking for a ride or....nah....I'm not going to make a terrible joke.

Real talk, I think that I've said this before in this very forum, but the confusion surrounding my use of the word guagua among my Mexican friends is where I trace back my reluctance to speak Spanish except when absolutely necessary.

[rickymooston]

Doesn't anyone want to know why I broke the law?

First guess: As a freedom fighter for the environment, you felt it was your duty to risk limb in order for pedestrians to be granted the right of way 100% of the time.

Second guess: you were in a hurry and realized you could get away with it.

[rickymooston]

I like this picture because there is clearly such a disconnect between the way a middle aged man who likes young girls sees himself, and they way the objects of his affection must see him. 

What do you mean here?

If 100% of these so called young girls rejected the middle aged men in question, you would have a point but then the age of consent would be mute. We would simply be discussing rape and "no means no". That is ALWAYS a crime.

The reality is, some of these girls are attracted to SOMETHING about some of these men.

I dont see how an older partner would see tge guy any differently.

I see a guy in a towel. I am not attracted to him but somebody else might be. Who knows whst they think.

For the record, i think the English law somebody mentioned is sensible. That is, i have no issues with 18+ year olds having consentual sex.

I understand Joe's 14; at one time, in another era, this probably was the norm. I know women who had sex with older men when they were 14 or younger and who claim not to have regrets. In general, i am however not comfortable with this young age being our legal age. I don't think having sex that age is in the best interest of the "child". An adult should know this and restrain themselves. I think it woukd be stuoid to jaikvsomebody there age for this but a 30 year old has no excuse. I think its wrong to misrepresent his view and pretend he said it is ok to have sex with 6 year olds.

In terns of the senator you mention. I never heard of him. I dont think it was wrong for him to have sex with a 21 year old if consent was involved. Obviously, he may hsve been cheating on a wife and that is wrong but i dont think that should be an issue for public discussion. His wife may have excellent grounds for divorce. As for the 17 year old, i do have issues as i have said.

[Mr. Blackwell]

And when he does, he is breaking the law.

Which makes him a criminal who can legally purchase a gun. This is fun!

HAL, you don't own or have access to any fire arms do you? Cause that would be...uh...illegal AND violating your constitutional rights.

If you do own fire arms and obtained them legally I sure to God hope they didn't ask you to show some I.D. But listen, if you want to coerce your girlfriend into killing the baby that's growing in her womb that's cool. It's her choice after all.

Of coarse, if she chooses not to have an abortion and you still don't want to take care of it, just give it to Joe...no paper work is needed and you can trust him to take good care of the child and not molest it till it's 14 or so...assuming neither you nor your girlfriend are asian and the child doesn't develop too early.

It's a mad mad mad world I tells ya. 

[Azdgari]

And when he does, he is breaking the law.

Which makes him a criminal who can legally purchase a gun. This is fun!

Depends on the law in question.  Traffic violations = typically not criminal offenses.  Assault/theft/etc. = typically criminal offenses.

[Mr. Blackwell]

And when he does, he is breaking the law.

Which makes him a criminal who can legally purchase a gun. This is fun!

Depends on the law in question.  Traffic violations = typically not criminal offenses.  Assault/theft/etc. = typically criminal offenses.

But how does one determine if a criminal is actually a criminal if it's a violation of his/her constitutional rights to conduct a background check into their possible prior criminal convictions?

I mean, no one conducted a criminal background check on Joe or his girlfriend when they assumed responsibility for a human. Buuuuut that IS a different country after all.

Has anyone bothered to report Joe to the proper authorities?

[Azdgari]

Apparently that was done under the table, all sneaky-like.

[joebbowers]

Mr. Blackwell doesn't care that she was abandoned on the streets by her parents, or that she is now being taken care of in a loving home, he simply wants the letter of the law to be followed regardless of who gets hurt.

Prick.

[Gnu Ordure]

Ricky,  what the f**k are you up to, sticking your nose in where it doesn't belong (as you've just done twice on IGI) ?

To this post of mine, you smote me with the comment, Intellectual dishonedty; saying his 14 years old meant 6 else.

To which I smote one of your posts with the comment, f**k off, Ricky. I didn't say "his 14 years old meant six else". So you're wrong. (And you've just sent me an unsolicited and abusive PM, accusing me of being incapable of arguing honestly, to which I say f**k off, again).

I just saw an additional comment buried in another post:

I think its wrong to misrepresent his view and pretend he said it is ok to have sex with 6 year olds.

I didn't do that.

Provide your evidence that I did.

[Edit to point out that there is nothing wrong in misrepresenting someone per se; the problem is with deliberate misrepresentation. So in order to justify your accusation, you need to prove intent on my part].

I have not lied or been intellectually dishonest anywhere in these long discussions with Joe. If you think I have, prove it. Otherwise you're just trolling.

Same to Joe, who's also keen on accusations of lying. Put up or shut up, Joe. You didn't reply to my last post to you five weeks ago (#658).  I assumed that you had abandoned the discussion, for the same reason that the other thread was closed - to protect you.

P.S. Ricky, don't send me any more PMs, either here or at IGI. Thank you.

[joebbowers]

Same to Joe, who's also keen on accusations of lying. Put up or shut up, Joe. You didn't reply to my last post to you five weeks ago (#658).  I assumed that you had abandoned the discussion, for the same reason that the other thread was closed - to protect you.

Your demonstrated inability to read clearly has lead to my having to correct you too many times, and repeat myself too many times. I'm not interested in debating someone who can't keep up.

[Gnu Ordure]

Another hardly unexpected dodge.

"Put up or shut up" is a simple proposition, Joe. Maybe you don't read no good?

I'm not interested in debating someone who can't keep up.

I can keep up. Unfortunately for you.

If you remember, you terminated the debate with me in the other thread by immediately agreeing to the mods' suggestion to close it - even though you'd objected to previous moderations of the thread.

Why? Because I was about to expose your lie about your daughter ("It's all perfectly legal").

So, you don't want to debate me, Joe?

I can understand that...

You want to call me a liar, Joe?

Go right ahead. I know what I am - and you know what you are.



I'm done here.

[screwtape]

Joe,

You've been intentionally vague and misleading.  This a form of trolling and has caused a lot of confusion and directly lead to some of the (possibly) erroneous conclusions Gnu has arrived at.  So, you own some responsibility for the persistent problems in this thread.   

Because of that, I want two things from you. 

First, I want you to explain in crystal clear and unambiguous terms exactly your position.  If you cannot do that for fear of reprisals from the totalitarian regime under which you toil, then you may send PMs to those who care enough to ask, but most definitely to Gnu. 

Second, I would like you to apologize to Gnu for the accusations of dishonesty since he was working with the information you gave him.

After that, I expect this be the final time this topic is broached by all and sundry.


Regards

[jsmacks]

do you not comprehend that i simply do not age ??? listen for a single moment. ok. i do not age anymore. doesnt happen. cant.

Let me know when you turn 60 and see if you still feel the same way (you don't age).


I am against the killing of anybody except in self defense or unless the killer is a soldier at war.


I think proper punishment is better than death. A long jail sentence would be best for child molesters. It would keep them away from children. And when the convicted gets out they should be monitored and kept away from children.  I also think the convicted needs psychiatric help.

[joebbowers]

Sorry Screwtape, I just don't care enough to waste my time.

[screwtape]

Sorry Screwtape, I just don't care enough to waste my time.

Okay, Joe, I understand.  Rather than actually have a conversation with someone, you would prefer to be a troll and then play victim after.  I cannot make you do differently.

Please understand, though, that in the future, your posts will require approval by a moderator.  If they are not sufficiently clear and complete, they will not be approved.

[joebbowers]

Sorry Screwtape, I just don't care enough to waste my time.

Okay, Joe, I understand.  Rather than actually have a conversation with someone, you would prefer to be a troll and then play victim after.  I cannot make you do differently.

Please understand, though, that in the future, your posts will require approval by a moderator.  If they are not sufficiently clear and complete, they will not be approved.

Yeah, good luck with that. I guess it's time to make a new account.

[Gnu Ordure]

Second, I would like you to apologize to Gnu for the accusations of dishonesty since he was working with the information you gave him.

I appreciate your attempt, Screwtape.

But apparently Joe doesn't think that an apology is warranted.

No surprise there.

The guy's a jerk.

And more. As we know.

[none]

my opinion NO !!!!!!!
whats yours and why ?

yes because it has left me without a family.
why?

[none]

because it destroys families.

[none]

and it leaves me without a family.
so deal with it.

[screwtape]

Yeah, good luck with that. I guess it's time to make a new account.

Joebbowers has been banned.  All socks found belonging to joe will also be banned. 

It did not have to go this way, joe.  All you had to do to remain a member with the ability to post was to follow a few easy and rather ethical rules.

[none]

Yeah, good luck with that. I guess it's time to make a new account.

Joebbowers has been banned.  All socks found belonging to joe will also be banned. 

It did not have to go this way, joe.  All you had to do to remain a member with the ability to post was to follow a few easy and rather ethical rules.

I am supportive of this decision, thank you screwtape.

[EV]

Joebbowers has been banned.  All socks found belonging to joe will also be banned.

Does this mean I'll stop getting notifications from this thread now? *looks hopeful*