|
pinktricam
Oct 18, 2011, 10:20 PM
Post #1 of 25
(1222 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 7947
|
It's that "slippery slope" most of you are in denial of:
Pedophiles want same rights as homosexuals
The Greeley Gazette wrote: Using the same tactics used by “gay” rights activists, pedophiles have begun to seek similar status arguing their desire for children is a sexual orientation no different than heterosexual or homosexuals. |
|
|
|
|
blondgecko
Moderator
Oct 19, 2011, 2:20 AM
Post #2 of 25
(1158 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 2, 2004
Posts: 7666
|
pinktricam wrote: It's that "slippery slope" most of you are in denial of: Pedophiles want same rights as homosexuals The Greeley Gazette wrote: Using the same tactics used by “gay” rights activists, pedophiles have begun to seek similar status arguing their desire for children is a sexual orientation no different than heterosexual or homosexuals.
Y'know, this post says a lot about you.
It says that you consider child rape to be morally equivalent to consensual sexual activity between loving adults.
It says that to you, it doesn't matter whether or not anyone is harmed. All that matters is whether your imaginary friend says it's bad.
It suggests rather strongly that you don't care one whit about protecting innocents - you just care about control.
Honestly, that article is scraping the bottom of the barrel - even for you.
|
|
|
|
|
pinktricam
Oct 19, 2011, 2:25 AM
Post #3 of 25
(1155 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 7947
|
You really know little of that which you speak...very little.
|
|
|
|
|
blondgecko
Moderator
Oct 19, 2011, 2:43 AM
Post #4 of 25
(1150 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 2, 2004
Posts: 7666
|
Heh. I love irony. 
|
|
|
|
|
robbovius
Oct 19, 2011, 5:03 AM
Post #5 of 25
(1131 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 20, 2002
Posts: 8399
|
pinktricam wrote: It's that "slippery slope" most of you are in denial of: Pedophiles want same rights as homosexuals The Greeley Gazette wrote: Using the same tactics used by “gay” rights activists, pedophiles have begun to seek similar status arguing their desire for children is a sexual orientation no different than heterosexual or homosexuals.
Jesus thinks you're a jerk.
|
|
|
|
|
rrrADAM
Oct 19, 2011, 5:30 AM
Post #6 of 25
(1126 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 19, 1999
Posts: 17535
|
So... Mary was 13-14 when she gave birth to Jesus, meaning that either Joseph or God impregnated a 12-13 year old GIRL.
So, would that be Holy Pediphile?
Ask yourself for a moment, Eric... Do you see a problem with a 12 or 13 year old girl being impregnated, especially one who isn't even married? You do don't you, but NOT in that case.
If anything, they should argue it on religious grounds, and cite relevant scripture and history. Oh, wait, RNJ's already do this.
|
|
|
|
|
pinktricam
Oct 19, 2011, 6:07 AM
Post #7 of 25
(1123 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 7947
|
What next?
Wait for it...
Beastiality? Legalized beastiality?!?
|
|
|
|
|
lena_chita
Moderator
Oct 19, 2011, 7:12 AM
Post #8 of 25
(1115 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 27, 2006
Posts: 4877
|
pinktricam wrote: What next? Wait for it... Beastiality? Legalized beastiality?!?
You have very limited (and predictable) imagination.
Yep, homosexual --> pedophile --> bestiality. The OBVIOUS line of slippery slope progression! how could we not see it coming?!
Just curious, where is group sex orgy on that line? before or after bestiality?
|
|
|
|
|
camhead
Oct 19, 2011, 7:49 AM
Post #9 of 25
(1106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 9, 2001
Posts: 20441
|
Did anyone read the article? Nowhere did it say, "Pedophiles are demanding the right to sleep with kids."
All it says is that groups like the APA are beginning to see pedophilia as an inherent, ingrained, sexual orientation. Some people are simply attracted to kids. Duh.
Although the writer of the article is clearly intending to push buttons and make PTC think that a pedo-march on washington is right aorund the corner, and that within ten years kids are going to be getting fucked left and right, none of his facts or quotes actually indicate that.
Even at the end of the article, where he tries to make the claim that "Sex offender laws protecting children have been challenged in several states," it turns out that he's actually just referring to challenges towards laws requiring peds from living near schools.
In other words, show me in that article where Pedophile Rights activists are saying, "let us have sex with kids who can't legally or rationally give consent, NOW!"
Otherwise, STFU.
|
|
|
|
|
pinktricam
Oct 19, 2011, 7:54 AM
Post #10 of 25
(1099 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 7947
|
lena_chita wrote: pinktricam wrote: What next? Wait for it... Beastiality? Legalized beastiality?!? You have very limited (and predictable) imagination.
Really?
...or maybe you have a very limited perception of tongue in cheek.
|
|
|
|
|
chadnsc
Oct 19, 2011, 8:29 AM
Post #11 of 25
(1083 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 24, 2003
Posts: 4408
|
I'm very disappointed in you PTC. You've done much better in the past and I feel that as of late your trolls have gotten sloppy.
|
|
|
|
|
Toast_in_the_Machine
Oct 19, 2011, 9:41 AM
Post #12 of 25
(1070 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 11, 2008
Posts: 5170
|
rrrADAM wrote: So... Mary was 13-14 when she gave birth to Jesus, meaning that either Joseph or God impregnated a 12-13 year old GIRL. So, would that be Holy Pediphile? Ask yourself for a moment, Eric... Do you see a problem with a 12 or 13 year old girl being impregnated, especially one who isn't even married? You do don't you, but NOT in that case. If anything, they should argue it on religious grounds, and cite relevant scripture and history. Oh, wait, RNJ's already do this.
Big deal, Muhammad married a 9 year old.
|
|
|
|
|
petsfed
Oct 19, 2011, 10:02 AM
Post #13 of 25
(1064 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 24, 2002
Posts: 8572
|
On the one hand, I agree that the increasing acceptance of homosexuality is challenging the notion of "deviant" sexual preference. On the other hand, rape is rape, whether its man-on-woman, man-on-horse, woman-on-child, etc.
I don't see why adults attracted to children should be any different from any other fetishist that (due to natural, human, or federal laws) can never practice their peculiar perversion. Provided that modes of sexual release that don't violate those laws still actually provide release, then there's no harm done. Hell, there are rape fetishists who can get by by imagining that their entirely consensual encounter was nothing of the sort. I would wager that there are a great many non-practicing pedophiles than we really recognize (or admit), who get by via fantasy scenarios with legal, consenting partners.
Sure its creepy, but the point is that there are legal, non-exploitative, rationally-consenting outlets for these people already. The critical difference between two women marrying and between a 35 year old man and an 8 year old girl marrying is that in the former case, both members can sign the marriage license and it becomes a binding agreement. In the latter case, no matter how much that 8 year old professes her love and willingness to marry, in the eyes of the law she is incapable of consenting to that agreement.
This is also why inter-species marriage (eg man-horse) can not exist without a massive overhaul of contract law.
|
|
|
|
|
lena_chita
Moderator
Oct 19, 2011, 10:14 AM
Post #14 of 25
(1059 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 27, 2006
Posts: 4877
|
camhead wrote: Did anyone read the article? Nowhere did it say, "Pedophiles are demanding the right to sleep with kids." All it says is that groups like the APA are beginning to see pedophilia as an inherent, ingrained, sexual orientation. Some people are simply attracted to kids. Duh. Although the writer of the article is clearly intending to push buttons and make PTC think that a pedo-march on washington is right aorund the corner, and that within ten years kids are going to be getting fucked left and right, none of his facts or quotes actually indicate that. Even at the end of the article, where he tries to make the claim that "Sex offender laws protecting children have been challenged in several states," it turns out that he's actually just referring to challenges towards laws requiring peds from living near schools. In other words, show me in that article where Pedophile Rights activists are saying, "let us have sex with kids who can't legally or rationally give consent, NOW!" Otherwise, STFU.
Yeah, I did read it. It just seemed like too much trouble to make a reasoned response to such nonsense. You did it well though.
|
|
|
|
|
rrrADAM
Oct 19, 2011, 11:29 AM
Post #15 of 25
(1045 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 19, 1999
Posts: 17535
|
Toast_in_the_Machine wrote: rrrADAM wrote: So... Mary was 13-14 when she gave birth to Jesus, meaning that either Joseph or God impregnated a 12-13 year old GIRL. So, would that be Holy Pediphile? Ask yourself for a moment, Eric... Do you see a problem with a 12 or 13 year old girl being impregnated, especially one who isn't even married? You do don't you, but NOT in that case. If anything, they should argue it on religious grounds, and cite relevant scripture and history. Oh, wait, RNJ's already do this. Big deal, Muhammad married a 9 year old.
True, but he didn't consumate it until much later.
|
|
|
|
|
macherry
Oct 19, 2011, 11:43 AM
Post #16 of 25
(1038 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 10, 2003
Posts: 15549
|
pinktricam wrote: What next? Wait for it... Beastiality? Legalized beastiality?!?
oh for fuck sakes
|
|
|
|
|
macherry
Oct 19, 2011, 11:45 AM
Post #17 of 25
(1037 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 10, 2003
Posts: 15549
|
lena_chita wrote: camhead wrote: Did anyone read the article? Nowhere did it say, "Pedophiles are demanding the right to sleep with kids." All it says is that groups like the APA are beginning to see pedophilia as an inherent, ingrained, sexual orientation. Some people are simply attracted to kids. Duh. Although the writer of the article is clearly intending to push buttons and make PTC think that a pedo-march on washington is right aorund the corner, and that within ten years kids are going to be getting fucked left and right, none of his facts or quotes actually indicate that. Even at the end of the article, where he tries to make the claim that "Sex offender laws protecting children have been challenged in several states," it turns out that he's actually just referring to challenges towards laws requiring peds from living near schools. In other words, show me in that article where Pedophile Rights activists are saying, "let us have sex with kids who can't legally or rationally give consent, NOW!" Otherwise, STFU. Yeah, I did read it. It just seemed like too much trouble to make a reasoned response to such nonsense. You did it well though.
+1
|
|
|
|
|
iknowfear
Oct 19, 2011, 12:19 PM
Post #18 of 25
(1028 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 8, 2004
Posts: 587
|
pinktricam wrote: What next? Wait for it... Beastiality? Legalized beastiality?!?
But of course!
SEX WITH DUCKS!
|
|
|
|
|
Toast_in_the_Machine
Oct 19, 2011, 12:29 PM
Post #19 of 25
(1025 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 11, 2008
Posts: 5170
|
rrrADAM wrote: Toast_in_the_Machine wrote: rrrADAM wrote: So... Mary was 13-14 when she gave birth to Jesus, meaning that either Joseph or God impregnated a 12-13 year old GIRL. So, would that be Holy Pediphile? Ask yourself for a moment, Eric... Do you see a problem with a 12 or 13 year old girl being impregnated, especially one who isn't even married? You do don't you, but NOT in that case. If anything, they should argue it on religious grounds, and cite relevant scripture and history. Oh, wait, RNJ's already do this. Big deal, Muhammad married a 9 year old. True, but he didn't consumate it until much later.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Toast_in_the_Machine
Oct 19, 2011, 12:54 PM
Post #21 of 25
(1014 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 11, 2008
Posts: 5170
|
macherry wrote: lena_chita wrote: camhead wrote: Did anyone read the article? Nowhere did it say, "Pedophiles are demanding the right to sleep with kids." All it says is that groups like the APA are beginning to see pedophilia as an inherent, ingrained, sexual orientation. Some people are simply attracted to kids. Duh. Although the writer of the article is clearly intending to push buttons and make PTC think that a pedo-march on washington is right aorund the corner, and that within ten years kids are going to be getting fucked left and right, none of his facts or quotes actually indicate that. Even at the end of the article, where he tries to make the claim that "Sex offender laws protecting children have been challenged in several states," it turns out that he's actually just referring to challenges towards laws requiring peds from living near schools. In other words, show me in that article where Pedophile Rights activists are saying, "let us have sex with kids who can't legally or rationally give consent, NOW!" Otherwise, STFU. Yeah, I did read it. It just seemed like too much trouble to make a reasoned response to such nonsense. You did it well though. +1
Cammie nailed it.
|
|
|
|
|
Toast_in_the_Machine
Oct 19, 2011, 1:03 PM
Post #22 of 25
(1007 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 11, 2008
Posts: 5170
|
iknowfear wrote: pinktricam wrote: What next? Wait for it... Beastiality? Legalized beastiality?!? But of course! SEX WITH DUCKS!
hew, I was afraid out was that song about anal pleasures of a large tropical drupe.
|
|
|
|
|
robbovius
Oct 19, 2011, 1:51 PM
Post #23 of 25
(998 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 20, 2002
Posts: 8399
|
iknowfear wrote: pinktricam wrote: What next? Wait for it... Beastiality? Legalized beastiality?!? But of course! SEX WITH DUCKS!
this party just took a turn for the douche.
|
|
|
|
|
dr_feelgood
Oct 30, 2011, 10:00 AM
Post #24 of 25
(835 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 6, 2004
Posts: 25371
|
blondgecko wrote: pinktricam wrote: It's that "slippery slope" most of you are in denial of: Pedophiles want same rights as homosexuals The Greeley Gazette wrote: Using the same tactics used by “gay” rights activists, pedophiles have begun to seek similar status arguing their desire for children is a sexual orientation no different than heterosexual or homosexuals. Y'know, this post says a lot about you. It says that you consider child rape to be morally equivalent to consensual sexual activity between loving adults. It says that to you, it doesn't matter whether or not anyone is harmed. All that matters is whether your imaginary friend says it's bad. It suggests rather strongly that you don't care one whit about protecting innocents - you just care about control. Honestly, that article is scraping the bottom of the barrel - even for you.
|
|
|
|
|
superchuffer
Oct 31, 2011, 7:09 AM
Post #25 of 25
(802 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 9, 2011
Posts: 294
|
lena_chita wrote: pinktricam wrote: What next? Wait for it... Beastiality? Legalized beastiality?!? You have very limited (and predictable) imagination. Yep, homosexual --> pedophile --> bestiality. The OBVIOUS line of slippery slope progression! how could we not see it coming?! Just curious, where is group sex orgy on that line? before or after bestiality?
homosexual --> pedophile --> bestiality....
..... Permadraws!
|
|
|
|
|
|
