On Thu, 18 Sep 2008 22:28:23 +0000 (UTC), Naughty Boy <naughtynaughty>
wrote:
>Vlad-The-Impaler <me-again@wombledown.net> wrote in
>news:thi1d4t2edbfd0hl607djijauflrc8phee@4ax.com:
>
>> On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 01:50:50 +0200 (CEST), jeanpauljesus
>> <jeanpauljesus@heaven.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Have to agree with Vlad there.
>>>
>>>I'm always amazed how otherwise rational people cannot see that resources
>>>devoted to chasing what should be low priority bogies are resources that
>>>cannot be spent on truly high priority issues.
>>>
>>>The reason they cannot see this is because their claims to "protect"
>>>children in this way are - whether they are aware of this or not, usually
>>>not - actually come from their arbitrary morality and terror about sex
>>>and sexuality, and not so much from rational analysis of actual risks to
>>>children, especially in the case of boys. Yet pedophiles are the ones
>>>who are supposed to exhibit "cognitive distortion" (!).
>>>
>>>And of course, we have seen research that questions the assumptions and
>>>claims of the CA industry censured and its authors professionally
>>>ostracized - that's where such research isn't outright buried to begin
>>>with, that is. Why bother listening to that which you don't agree with?
>>>
>>>The assumption that photographing a child nude will "harm" children is a
>>>case in point. That assumption has been extended by the CA Industry to
>>>include a whole range of images that, until a few years ago, were never
>>>seen as "indecent" at all. It's arbitrary, and entirely culturally
>>>determined.
>>>
>>>But you're wasting your time Vlad on NB - he's just a troll and just
>>>spews whatever. I never read his posts.
>>>
>>>
>> Aye, jpj, he's an ineffectual jackanapes, to be sure. inordinately
>> impressed with his own inadaquacies, so insignificant that his
>> significance no longer signifies A village somewhere has clearly
>> mislaid its resident idiot. But amuses me, watching him squawking away
>> on his bouncy ball. Does he pass this way often, or is he just out on
>> day release, like?
>
>So why did you snip this?
>
>"I said you are a bunch of fucking hypocrites who profess to love and
>presumably respect boys yet keep posting and downloading their pics
>without their informed consent."
>
>No answer on that yet, huh? No doubt you will keep ignoring.
Not only is your line impotent,
It's old.
Get a new one jackspew.
Law that is Unjust is not Law.
|
| Follow-ups: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
|