|
BitterTea
|
 |
October 12, 2011, 07:41:00 PM |
|
But, again, why do you believe sex is harmful?
Hawker, stop being a hypocrite and answer the question.If I believe that letting you use the internet is harmful, do I have a right to use violence to stop you? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
Hawker
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1001
|
|
October 12, 2011, 07:48:42 PM |
|
But, again, why do you believe sex is harmful?
Hawker, stop being a hypocrite and answer the question.If I believe that letting you use the internet is harmful, do I have a right to use violence to stop you? Rassah asked in an effort to change the subject. Now he has accepted that if something is harmful, society has a right to intervene, I can answer. If the victim feels harmed, they are harmed. There are 10s of 1000s of Irish victims and it clear that they feel they were damaged by giving priests blow jobs. In answer to your question, if letting someone use the Internet or a knife or a car is harmful, of course society has a right to prevent that harm. If its only you feel that way, of course you can't. |
|
|
|
|
|
BitterTea
|
|
October 12, 2011, 07:53:40 PM |
|
Rassah asked in an effort to change the subject. Bullshit. I think the master subject changer is projecting. Now he has accepted that if something is harmful, society has a right to intervene, I can answer. Who gets to determine if something is harmful? How do you define "society", and how does "society" have rights? If the victim feels harmed, they are harmed. So, by your logic, if the victim does not feel harmed, they are not harmed, and society has not right to intervene? Thus, if a 12 year old wants to have sex with a 50 year old, it's perfectly acceptable? In answer to your question, if letting someone use the Internet or a knife or a car is harmful, of course society has a right to prevent that harm. If its only you feel that way, of course you can't.
How many of us must be harmed by your obtuseness before we can use violence against you? Pretty sure I already know the answer to this, but did you ever read the blog post I linked for you? |
|
|
|
|
Hawker
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1001
|
|
October 12, 2011, 07:58:17 PM |
|
...snip... Now he has accepted that if something is harmful, society has a right to intervene, I can answer. Who gets to determine if something is harmful? How do you define "society", and how does "society" have rights? ..snip... In the UK, parliament gets to decide. I have no idea how its done where you live. Hopefully its a democracy so you get a say in these things. |
|
|
|
|
|
BitterTea
|
|
October 12, 2011, 08:08:03 PM |
|
In the UK, parliament gets to decide. I have no idea how its done where you live. Hopefully its a democracy so you get a say in these things. Ah, so it's not "society", but the State. Hmm... I live in the U.S. and I'm pretty sure it's not a democracy, but a constitutional republic. It's ok, I realize that to you "democracy" is just a magic word that invokes rainbows and unicorns. |
|
|
|
|
MoonShadow
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1708
Merit: 1007
|
|
October 12, 2011, 08:12:03 PM |
|
In the UK, parliament gets to decide. I have no idea how its done where you live. Hopefully its a democracy so you get a say in these things. Ah, so it's not "society", but the State. Hmm... I live in the U.S. and I'm pretty sure it's not a democracy, but a constitutional republic. It's ok, I realize that to you "democracy" is just a magic word that invokes rainbows and unicorns. The United Kingdom isn't a democracy either, it's a parlimentary republic superimposed upon a constitutional monarchy. And it's still a constitutional monarchy. After all, where do the royals get their income? |
"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."
- Carroll Quigley, CFR member, mentor to Bill Clinton, from 'Tragedy And Hope'
|
|
|
MoonShadow
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1708
Merit: 1007
|
|
October 12, 2011, 08:14:07 PM |
|
Hawker, please define the term "society" in this context.
|
"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."
- Carroll Quigley, CFR member, mentor to Bill Clinton, from 'Tragedy And Hope'
|
|
|
Hawker
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1001
|
|
October 12, 2011, 08:16:00 PM |
|
In the UK, parliament gets to decide. I have no idea how its done where you live. Hopefully its a democracy so you get a say in these things. Ah, so it's not "society", but the State. Hmm... I live in the U.S. and I'm pretty sure it's not a democracy, but a constitutional republic. It's ok, I realize that to you "democracy" is just a magic word that invokes rainbows and unicorns. If the State could decide, that would mean the Queen or her agents would decide. Parliament is simply the part of the State that represents the voting public. In the US, assuming you have the vote, you have a say in what is called harmful and what actions are taken. The particular labels you use for it are off topic. In the case of intellectual property, where I live the part of the State that represents voters has decided that IP laws are a good thing and if you accept that society has a right to intervene to prevent harm, you should accept that society has a right to maintain IP laws. EDIT: Link for Moonshadow - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Society |
|
|
|
|
Rassah
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1680
Merit: 1035
|
|
October 12, 2011, 08:18:44 PM |
|
...snip...
That is the issue, because if there is absolutely no harm in it, then why stop it? And if there is harm in it, then probably yes, intervene. Thus the answer depends on you answering what you believe the harm in that situation to be.
And by the way, neither you nor society can answer your question decisively (14? 16? 18? Marriage?) so why are you expecting me to?
But, again, why do you believe sex is harmful?
So you accept that society has a right to intervene to prevent harm. No, I do not. I never even implied such. Note "probably" is not "yes" and note that Why do you believe sex is harmful? |
|
|
|
|
Hawker
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1001
|
|
October 12, 2011, 08:23:17 PM |
|
...snip...
That is the issue, because if there is absolutely no harm in it, then why stop it? And if there is harm in it, then probably yes, intervene. Thus the answer depends on you answering what you believe the harm in that situation to be.
And by the way, neither you nor society can answer your question decisively (14? 16? 18? Marriage?) so why are you expecting me to?
But, again, why do you believe sex is harmful?
So you accept that society has a right to intervene to prevent harm. No, I do not. I never even implied such. Note "probably" is not "yes" and note that Why do you believe sex is harmful? Answered earlier. If 10s of 1000s of people say that giving head to priests as kids damaged them, I'm inclined to take their word on it. |
|
|
|
|
Rassah
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1680
Merit: 1035
|
|
October 12, 2011, 08:24:00 PM |
|
Answered earlier. If 10s of 1000s of people say that giving head to priests as kids damaged them, I'm inclined to take their word on it.
Is "because that's the way it is" and "because that's what I've been told" the status quo for your answers to all the laws and reasons and why's? Do you even have your own opinions on matters, or are you just parroting others and feeling more sure of yourself because that's what others say too? (Without ever questioning why) Rassah asked in an effort to change the subject. Now he has accepted that if something is harmful, society has a right to intervene, I can answer. If the victim feels harmed, they are harmed. There are 10s of 1000s of Irish victims and it clear that they feel they were damaged by giving priests blow jobs.
I also never said "society" is government. A neighbor is society, and laws aren't needed to intervene. Also, I am not asking for a number of claims, or other peoples opinions. I don't care if millions of people claim they were harmed. I just want to know why you believe sex is harmfull? What about it causes harm? You brought up this a an example of something that according to you is harm full, and thus should be illegal. I want to know how or why it causes harm. I have my own thoughts on this, but I need to hear yours. So, why is sex harmful? |
|
|
|
|
MoonShadow
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1708
Merit: 1007
|
|
October 12, 2011, 08:24:36 PM |
|
That's not an answer, it's a link. Even if you believed it word for word, there are at least three different definitions of that one term in that article, which are all loose definitions and generally mutuall exclusive. If society gets to decide, how does one decide what society actually is? If it is the voting public, then children are not part of society? If it is parliment, then are you part of society? If society is defined by established national borders, do you still think you have a valid opinion about anything in mine? |
"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."
- Carroll Quigley, CFR member, mentor to Bill Clinton, from 'Tragedy And Hope'
|
|
|
MoonShadow
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1708
Merit: 1007
|
|
October 12, 2011, 08:30:31 PM |
|
I have my own thoughts on this, but I need to hear yours. So, why is sex harmful?
Mostly likely a latent cultural influence of Anglican moral code. I'm sure he'll see the error of his ways once Sharia law dominates in the UK. After all, The Prophet married an eight year old in his 50's; what right does he have to intervene when the law says that a man of the Koran can take the child daughter of an infidel such as himself? (I have no doubt that the sarcasm will be entirely missed by Hawker, the cognative dissonance must be terrrible.) |
"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."
- Carroll Quigley, CFR member, mentor to Bill Clinton, from 'Tragedy And Hope'
|
|
|
MoonShadow
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1708
Merit: 1007
|
|
October 12, 2011, 08:34:08 PM |
|
...snip...
That is the issue, because if there is absolutely no harm in it, then why stop it? And if there is harm in it, then probably yes, intervene. Thus the answer depends on you answering what you believe the harm in that situation to be.
And by the way, neither you nor society can answer your question decisively (14? 16? 18? Marriage?) so why are you expecting me to?
But, again, why do you believe sex is harmful?
So you accept that society has a right to intervene to prevent harm. No, I do not. I never even implied such. Note "probably" is not "yes" and note that Why do you believe sex is harmful? Answered earlier. If 10s of 1000s of people say that giving head to priests as kids damaged them, I'm inclined to take their word on it. Once upon a time, dozens of little girls said that dozens of adults in the area were bewitching them in their sleep. The town's elders and local judge felt the same way you do. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salem_witch_trials |
"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."
- Carroll Quigley, CFR member, mentor to Bill Clinton, from 'Tragedy And Hope'
|
|
|
|
|
MoonShadow
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1708
Merit: 1007
|
|
October 12, 2011, 08:42:28 PM |
|
Careful. Next he'll be causing you of defending pedos/rapists and blaming the victims. Not to mention the obvious bias I hold against Wiccans, Druids and other related Anglosaxon pagen religions. |
"The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world."
- Carroll Quigley, CFR member, mentor to Bill Clinton, from 'Tragedy And Hope'
|
|
|
Hawker
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1001
|
|
October 12, 2011, 08:52:34 PM |
|
I have my own thoughts on this, but I need to hear yours. So, why is sex harmful?
Mostly likely a latent cultural influence of Anglican moral code. I'm sure he'll see the error of his ways once Sharia law dominates in the UK. After all, The Prophet married an eight year old in his 50's; what right does he have to intervene when the law says that a man of the Koran can take the child daughter of an infidel such as himself? (I have no doubt that the sarcasm will be entirely missed by Hawker, the cognative dissonance must be terrrible.) I'll take your 8 and bid 7 for the Sambia: In that society, boys are separated from their families from the ages of 7 to 10 and forced to fellate older adolescent boys and ingest their semen. Ironically, the Sambia haven’t really a concept of “homosexuality,” either. Rather, they believe that only by swallowing prodigious amounts of semen can boys become fierce warriors. Not until they've completed several years of semen-swallowing and then another four or five years of being fellated by boys themselves can Sambia males become fully adult and enter into exclusively heterosexual marriages
Your sarcasm is misplaced. I've met Iranians who married at 9 and they seem fine. But that's their society. In our society, people are harmed and if you believe we have the right to intervene where harm is being done, we have a right to intervene to prevent child abuse. Your citing the Salem witch trial is mischievous and you know it. The "witnesses" were a few young children whereas in the clerical abuse scandals, the witnesses are in their 30s and 40s and there are lots of them. Their evidence has been listened to and its accepted they were abused. The issue here is not at what age sex moves from abuse to a damn good time but whether society has a right to intervene in cases where it sees harm being done. |
|
|
|
|
|
BitterTea
|
|
October 12, 2011, 08:55:39 PM |
|
I've met Iranians who married at 9 and they seem fine. But if that's their society. In our society, people are harmed and if you believe we have the right to intervene where harm is being done, we have a right to intervene to prevent child abuse.
How can sex harm a 9 year old in one society and not another? Surely then the harm comes from those who convince the child that they've been harmed?! |
|
|
|
|
Hawker
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1001
|
|
October 12, 2011, 08:58:47 PM |
|
I've met Iranians who married at 9 and they seem fine. But if that's their society. In our society, people are harmed and if you believe we have the right to intervene where harm is being done, we have a right to intervene to prevent child abuse.
How can sex harm a 9 year old in one society and not another? Surely then the harm comes from those who convince the child that they've been harmed?! I'm happy to talk about that and I suspect we will broadly agree, especially if you read the Sambia research. But would you mind starting a thread for it? This is for Intellectual Property - In All Fairness! |
|
|
|
|
|
BitterTea
|
|
October 12, 2011, 09:00:44 PM |
|
I'm happy to talk about that and I suspect we will broadly agree, especially if you read the Sambia research. But would you mind starting a thread for it? This is for Intellectual Property - In All Fairness!
Hilarious! You're the one who brought up your child molestation fetish. |
|
|
|
|
|
