(March 1, 2013 at 4:32 pm)Vera Wrote: Jesus Christ! Overreacting much!

Whether or not the urge to have sex with prepubescent kids is acted upon is not what it is all about. The whole point of my post was to say that paedophilia involves prepubescent children and is not simply about a big age difference.

If I misunderstood Gilgamesh's post, I'm sorry.

Semantics arguing over averages wont change that our species does not like having it's young fucked with.

(March 1, 2013 at 5:26 pm)Brian37 Wrote: Semantics arguing over averages wont change that our species does not like having it's young fucked with.

Which I never ever claimed. But people seem hell bent on nitpicking and trying to see whose is bigger. Whatever floats your collective boats, I guess.

(March 1, 2013 at 5:26 pm)Brian37 Wrote:

(March 1, 2013 at 4:32 pm)Vera Wrote: Jesus Christ! Overreacting much!

Whether or not the urge to have sex with prepubescent kids is acted upon is not what it is all about. The whole point of my post was to say that paedophilia involves prepubescent children and is not simply about a big age difference.

If I misunderstood Gilgamesh's post, I'm sorry.

Semantics arguing over averages wont change that our species does not like having it's young fucked with.

Another religious assertion.

Also, a completely false one too. How "Christian" of you...

Counter evidence would be ancient Greece's swathes of cultural attitudes towards young male-old male relationships.

---

(March 1, 2013 at 5:29 pm)Vera Wrote:

(March 1, 2013 at 5:26 pm)Brian37 Wrote: Semantics arguing over averages wont change that our species does not like having it's young fucked with.

Which I never ever claimed. But people seem hell bent on nitpicking and trying to see whose is bigger. Whatever floats your collective boats, I guess.

Like you are hellbent on making lazy assertions so ill-thought out but "simple" enough that the common cretin can understand?

Two legs bad, four legs good!

Baaaah!

Vera...Vera...
What has become of you?
Does anybody else in here feel the way I do?

(March 1, 2013 at 5:38 pm)John V Wrote: Vera...Vera...
What has become of you?
Does anybody else in here feel the way I do?

I feel that you are a troll, but I'm not certain you share my feelings.

(March 1, 2013 at 4:32 pm)Vera Wrote: Jesus Christ! Overreacting much!

Whether or not the urge to have sex with prepubescent kids is acted upon is not what it is all about. The whole point of my post was to say that paedophilia involves prepubescent children and is not simply about a big age difference.

If I misunderstood Gilgamesh's post, I'm sorry.

No. It is not an over reaction to take offense to someone lying and then acting as if it is someone else's religious beliefs that leads them to point out that you are wrong. You were being dishonest. Now, you are trying to behave as if my reaction is what was out of line, when really you should have just corrected yourself like an honest person would have.

(March 1, 2013 at 11:54 am)John V Wrote:

(February 27, 2013 at 6:28 pm)The Germans are coming Wrote: Fuck off you turd!

Gay sex is consensual, pedophilia means unconsensual - therefor rape.

Your equasion is incriminating and disgusting!!!

I didn't equate the two. I said that pedophiles have studied the tactics used to change public perception of homosexuality and are applying them, and will continue to do so.

---

Regarding the definitional debate: OP used "pedophilia" in the title, and that is attraction to prepubescent children.

HOWEVER, in the text he clearly mentioned acts and both prepubescent and sexually mature children: "What are your opinions of aduts having consensual sex with children and teenagers?"

---

(February 27, 2013 at 6:52 pm)teaearlgreyhot Wrote: I think it's funny how often atheists on this forum will just assert moral values like if they're obvious.

And it begins.

You obviously mean to slander gay relationships by suggesting that pedophilia will follow the tactics of the 'gay movement' in winning acceptance. However, almost no one here agrees with you that there is anything obviously wrong with gay relationships. So your attempted slander just makes you look like someone who is soft on pedophilia at the very least and possibly a proponent of sex with kids. (Are you a catholic priest by any chance?)

If you wish to slander homosexual relations you'd do better (but not well) to approach the topic head on. I'll bite. On what basis do you question the acceptability of homosexual relations? If your rationale has anything to do with the bible, forget it. The bible and Christianity generally are what have given cover to pedophiles for ages. Nothing wholesome can come from there.

(March 1, 2013 at 4:50 am)Vera Wrote: What a great, well-reasoned rebuttal.

B-but your original response was literally just, "it is."

...

=/

Gilgamesh is a troll Vera, You shouldnt be suprised if you dont get a reasonable response by him. Let alone should be suprised how he hasnt been banned yet.

(March 1, 2013 at 7:57 pm)The Germans are coming Wrote: Gilgamesh is a troll Vera, You shouldnt be suprised if you dont get a reasonable response by him. Let alone should be suprised how he hasnt been banned yet.

Relevant and truth.

I was just trolling you, Vera. I'm not capable of reason. The wikipedia page you linked proves me wrong. Everyone who is supporting the original point I made in this thread is just part of my big ruse. I expect my ban any day now.

r u angter vera?

Also, as a troll, I have to say German's is one of the slowest on this forum. Real slow in the head, I mean. His willingness to let emotion and reason mix is never-ending. If you disagree with him, you're probably a supporter of child rape. Because you support child rape, you are deservingly subject to his barrage of "fuck you's."