|
|
Post by cupcakes on Apr 11, 2018 1:40:15 GMT
tpfkar Let's pick it up where you faded away. 
assuming that all adult/child sex is always innately harmful even when there's some research to suggest that the harm is dependent on many factors is a sign of moral outrage lacking reasonI'm not going to start necro-threading. If you want to dig through those four (IIRC) old threads and find any evidence where I "advocated adult sex with prepubescents" and post that here, then be my guest. Of course you're not, you "necro'd" away from it the first time. And I didn't say your silly little feint , but I guess you think you can hide under your cute edit. 
Eva Yojimbo: And what "facts already established by experts" are you referring to? What would you say in response to someone posting a list of pro-to-neutral studies of pedophilia like THESE? Now, I haven't read any of them, and neither have you; but I'm also guessing that you (like myself) have done zero actual research into the subject in general. All you're doing is basing this on your gut reactions and social mores, reactions and mores that history has taught us are remarkably unreliable. |
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Apr 12, 2018 1:43:27 GMT
tpfkar I'm not going to start necro-threading. If you want to dig through those four (IIRC) old threads and find any evidence where I "advocated adult sex with prepubescents" and post that here, then be my guest. Of course you're not, you "necro'd" away from it the first time. And I didn't say your silly little feint , but I guess you think you can hide under your cute edit.
Eva Yojimbo: And what "facts already established by experts" are you referring to? What would you say in response to someone posting a list of pro-to-neutral studies of pedophilia like THESE? Now, I haven't read any of them, and neither have you; but I'm also guessing that you (like myself) have done zero actual research into the subject in general. All you're doing is basing this on your gut reactions and social mores, reactions and mores that history has taught us are remarkably unreliable. OK, I reread what you said: “advocacy of considering the ‘good’ of adult sex with prepubescents.” Even that completely misses the point. |
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Apr 12, 2018 13:18:21 GMT
Paralysed people don't have a clear cut right to the refusal of nutrition and hydration, especially when they are diagnosed with a mental illness (the unfortunate man in the link was diagnosed with Borderline Personality Disorder. And he wouldn't be considered eligible for assisted dying under the conservative laws that exist in the various states that have 'right to die' laws on the books. He would probably be eligible for assistance in Belgium or The Netherlands, though.  When was he prevented from PRoFaN? Or are you just making up shyte again (when not!) Got any more outliers you wish to found your women-abusing mass-murdering cult faith dreams upon? How about some more posed naked southeast Asian "torture" pics?
Morally I would be fine with post-birth abortions, but I realise that this would probably be too radical to ever be implemented. |
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Apr 12, 2018 13:21:06 GMT
tpfkar Of course you're not, you "necro'd" away from it the first time. And I didn't say your silly little feint , but I guess you think you can hide under your cute edit.
Eva Yojimbo: And what "facts already established by experts" are you referring to? What would you say in response to someone posting a list of pro-to-neutral studies of pedophilia like THESE? Now, I haven't read any of them, and neither have you; but I'm also guessing that you (like myself) have done zero actual research into the subject in general. All you're doing is basing this on your gut reactions and social mores, reactions and mores that history has taught us are remarkably unreliable. OK, I reread what you said: “advocacy of considering the ‘good’ of adult sex with prepubescents.” Even that completely misses the point. Regardless of how "dressed" up in rambling nonsense, the point comes galloping through with pedo.
Eva Yojimbo: If you're raised in an environment where Jews are considered inferior, then it's very easy to just blindly accept that without ever questioning it. I mean, did YOU do any research into what the experts thought about pedophilia before arguing in these threads? I know I didn't. |
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Apr 13, 2018 1:45:09 GMT
tpfkar OK, I reread what you said: “advocacy of considering the ‘good’ of adult sex with prepubescents.” Even that completely misses the point. Regardless of how "dressed" up in rambling nonsense, the point comes galloping through with pedo.
Eva Yojimbo: If you're raised in an environment where Jews are considered inferior, then it's very easy to just blindly accept that without ever questioning it. I mean, did YOU do any research into what the experts thought about pedophilia before arguing in these threads? I know I didn't. The only thing that came galloping through was your active imagination. The point of “most people don’t deeply research a subject before developing ethical opinions” shouldn’t be a controversial statement. 99% of history serves as proof of the point. |
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Apr 13, 2018 2:22:55 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Apr 13, 2018 2:41:49 GMT
There's your active imagination and lack of reading comprehension galloping away again. And since you keep mentioning it, I'll ask again: what "promulgated expert consensus" did you consult before deciding pedophilia was bad? |
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Apr 13, 2018 2:52:08 GMT
tpfkar There's your active imagination and lack of reading comprehension galloping away again. And since you keep mentioning it, I'll ask again: what "promulgated expert consensus" did you consult before deciding pedophilia was bad? That is what the advocates of considering the "good" of adults abusing prepubescents say. How many expert cosensuses did you "consult" before you learned running with a knife was bad? It figures you wouldn't know what "promulgate" means.
Eva Yojimbo: If you're raised in an environment where Jews are considered inferior, then it's very easy to just blindly accept that without ever questioning it. I mean, did YOU do any research into what the experts thought about pedophilia before arguing in these threads? I know I didn't. |
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Apr 14, 2018 1:53:44 GMT
tpfkar There's your active imagination and lack of reading comprehension galloping away again. And since you keep mentioning it, I'll ask again: what "promulgated expert consensus" did you consult before deciding pedophilia was bad? That is what the advocates of considering the "good" of adults abusing prepubescents say. How many expert cosensuses did you "consult" before you learned running with a knife was bad? It figures you wouldn't know what "promulgate" means.
Eva Yojimbo: If you're raised in an environment where Jews are considered inferior, then it's very easy to just blindly accept that without ever questioning it. I mean, did YOU do any research into what the experts thought about pedophilia before arguing in these threads? I know I didn't. You mean "advocates of considering the "good" of adults abusing prepubescents say" ask you to support your claims?  Running with a knife is hardly comparable; we know knives can kill/wound, so doing anything reckless with a deadly weapon is inherently dangerous. Sex isn't usually dangerous (certainly not in the same way). I know what promulgate means; I don't think you know how to distinguish between a "promulgated expert opinion" and "promulgated social opinion." |
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Apr 14, 2018 2:14:36 GMT
tpfkar "Most reasonable people would agree that we shouldn't just scorch the Earth irresponsibly and that there is a duty to future generations when it comes to trying to mitigate the impact of climate change, for example. So people are clearly thinking about the wellbeing of those who do not yet exist and don't have any say, and they're not called irrational for that particular reason."
Krazy wannabe killer klown, it's perfectly fine if you want to consider future people, as you do, you just have to consider all aspects. What you can't do as a sane person, is say that you can only consider whatever shrilly deranged versions of bad you try to peddle, but not the good, great, and just their overwhelmingly likely wants. Or flapjack back and forth like a drunk psychopath depending on if it serves your current wacky utterance. And people just aren't generally as crushed as you, regardless of how badly you want all to join you in your hormone ragey pity pit. 
Moreover, it may be possible to spray a chemical in the world's air, or add something to the water supply that would prevent women from becoming pregnant. It wouldn't be necessary to ban sex. Alternatively, we could develop an AI that would peacefully and swiftly wipe out all sentient organisms on Earth, perhaps by releasing some kind of toxin into the air. But if the people who will enjoy their lives are created, it will come at the cost of some having an absolutely wretched time that one wouldn't even wish on the cruellest Nazi war criminal. Non-existence is effectively just as good as paradise: H.P. Lovecraft Nah, one birth is not inherently connected to another contemporary one except in the scripture of Morbid Death for All Now. What was before is irrelevant except for it's lessons, we're living with what is now will with what's coming. Oblivion's return is not the pathetic wish for subjugation, abuse, and mass murder by impotents crushed by the world who nurse and laughably attempt to project their self-imposed self-loathing misery.
On that note, you've also called me "deranged", which is the mental illness equivalent of "n*****" |
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Apr 14, 2018 2:20:58 GMT
tpfkar That is what the advocates of considering the "good" of adults abusing prepubescents say. How many expert cosensuses did you "consult" before you learned running with a knife was bad? It figures you wouldn't know what "promulgate" means.
Eva Yojimbo: If you're raised in an environment where Jews are considered inferior, then it's very easy to just blindly accept that without ever questioning it. I mean, did YOU do any research into what the experts thought about pedophilia before arguing in these threads? I know I didn't. You mean "advocates of considering the "good" of adults abusing prepubescents say" ask you to support your claims? Running with a knife is hardly comparable; we know knives can kill/wound, so doing anything reckless with a deadly weapon is inherently dangerous. Sex isn't usually dangerous (certainly not in the same way). I know what promulgate means; I don't think you know how to distinguish between a "promulgated expert opinion" and "promulgated social opinion." Sure, and any other of the pedo brigade. You support your convenient claims of "xenophobia" and "Puritanical reasons" and not for the obvious that kids' bits need to be protected from you predators, and the damage claimed over and over by the those experts you say are biased against you freaks. Maybe start you up an Okie chapter of NAMBLA and push those studies you hadn't read while pushing hard for the kiddie fiddlin'. 
Eva Yojimbo: I'm not sure why you think prepubescent sex would reduce a child's chances of making it to the point of successfully raising offspring of their own...
|
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Apr 15, 2018 1:21:11 GMT
tpfkar You mean "advocates of considering the "good" of adults abusing prepubescents say" ask you to support your claims? Running with a knife is hardly comparable; we know knives can kill/wound, so doing anything reckless with a deadly weapon is inherently dangerous. Sex isn't usually dangerous (certainly not in the same way). I know what promulgate means; I don't think you know how to distinguish between a "promulgated expert opinion" and "promulgated social opinion." Sure, and any other of the pedo brigade. You support your convenient claims of "xenophobia" and "Puritanical reasons" and not for the obvious that kids' bits need to be protected from you predators and the damage claimed over and over by the those experts you say are biased against you freaks. Maybe start you up an Okie chapter of NAMBLA an push those studies you hadn't read while pushing hard for the kiddie fiddlin'.
Eva Yojimbo: I'm not sure why you think prepubescent sex would reduce a child's chances of making it to the point of successfully raising offspring of their own...
Now we're back to that active imagination and you making shit up while completely missing my point again. As for the making shit up: I never said any experts were biased; how could I? You never posted any! Still nothing on what expert consensus you consulted before forming your opinion on the matter? |
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Apr 15, 2018 1:25:05 GMT
I think the amount of suffering is grossly overestimated by Eeyores, especially Eeyores with little practical responsibility/with too much free time on their hands.
|
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Apr 15, 2018 1:35:14 GMT
I think the amount of suffering is grossly overestimated by Eeyores, especially Eeyores with little practical responsibility/with too much free time on their hands. |
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Apr 15, 2018 1:35:45 GMT
tpfkar Sure, and any other of the pedo brigade. You support your convenient claims of "xenophobia" and "Puritanical reasons" and not for the obvious that kids' bits need to be protected from you predators and the damage claimed over and over by the those experts you say are biased against you freaks. Maybe start you up an Okie chapter of NAMBLA an push those studies you hadn't read while pushing hard for the kiddie fiddlin'.
Eva Yojimbo: I'm not sure why you think prepubescent sex would reduce a child's chances of making it to the point of successfully raising offspring of their own...
Now we're back to that active imagination and you making shit up while completely missing my point again. As for the making shit up: I never said any experts were biased; how could I? You never posted any! Still nothing on what expert consensus you consulted before forming your opinion on the matter? I'm ok with you continually babbling stupid not "knowing" what promulgated means. Regardless of the volume of chatter you dump, you pedos won't be getting to the kids' bits on sniffles of "Puritanical" and ass-pulls of "xenophobia", at least not without a very high price for you to pay.
Eva Yojimbo: To make the analogy with pedophilia, a psychologist might regularly deal with people who've been victims of pedophilia; but the very nature of their job would mean that they've probably ONLY seen those who thought the experience was negative (thus biasing the psychologist's conclusions), and even in coming to the conclusion that it is harmful the psychologist wouldn't have been able to discern a direct cause for the harm. So what you really need, then, are "experts" engaged in the research side of things, in reviewing as many cases as possible, preferably cross-cultural, and noting all those that were harmful VS not-harmful, and trying to find causal connections between the situations concerning each. If there's a consensus just among THOSE experts, I don't know what it is. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 16, 2018 0:52:26 GMT
I think the amount of suffering is grossly overestimated by Eeyores, especially Eeyores with little practical responsibility/with too much free time on their hands. Firstly, what is your basis for thinking that the amount of suffering is "grossly overestimated", and by that do you mean the total amount of suffering on Earth, or the amount of suffering that can be experienced by individual sentient organisms? Secondly, are there not people living lives now that you would be unhappy to be living yourself, and if so, do you imagine that these people living such terrible lives are deserving of more suffering than yourself? If you think that people aren't deserving of the suffering that they experience and recognise the distribution of suffering as being random and arbitrary, then why would you sanction allowing other people to 'roll the dice' on behalf of others, some of whom will have to endure these experiences that you would be unhappy having to endure yourself? From what I remember from when we last discussed antinatalism, your best argument in favour of keeping this going (the cycle of life) was that values do not exist independently of minds, and therefore experiences of suffering do not matter, may as well torture sentient organisms, etc. You haven't posited one positive reason for keeping the cycle going out of merit. |
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Apr 16, 2018 0:57:40 GMT
I think the amount of suffering is grossly overestimated by Eeyores, especially Eeyores with little practical responsibility/with too much free time on their hands. Firstly, what is your basis for thinking that the amount of suffering is "grossly overestimated", and by that do you mean the total amount of suffering on Earth, or the amount of suffering that can be experienced by individual sentient organisms? Secondly, are there not people living lives now that you would be unhappy to be living yourself, and if so, do you imagine that these people living such terrible lives are deserving of more suffering than yourself? If you think that people aren't deserving of the suffering that they experience and recognise the distribution of suffering as being random and arbitrary, then why would you sanction allowing other people to 'roll the dice' on behalf of others, some of whom will have to endure these experiences that you would be unhappy having to endure yourself? From what I remember from when we last discussed antinatalism, your best argument in favour of keeping this going (the cycle of life) was that values do not exist independently of minds, and therefore experiences of suffering do not matter, may as well torture sentient organisms, etc. You haven't posited one positive reason for keeping the cycle going out of merit. So, for the first question: the basis is interacting with a crapload of different people all over the world over the course of my 50+ years. |
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Apr 16, 2018 1:26:16 GMT
Now we're back to that active imagination and you making shit up while completely missing my point again. As for the making shit up: I never said any experts were biased; how could I? You never posted any! Still nothing on what expert consensus you consulted before forming your opinion on the matter? I'm ok with you continually babbling stupid not "knowing" what promulgated means. Regardless of the volume of chatter you dump, you pedos won't be getting to the kids' bits on sniffles of "Puritanical" and ass-pulls of "xenophobia", at least not without a very high price for you to pay.
Eva Yojimbo: To make the analogy with pedophilia, a psychologist might regularly deal with people who've been victims of pedophilia; but the very nature of their job would mean that they've probably ONLY seen those who thought the experience was negative (thus biasing the psychologist's conclusions), and even in coming to the conclusion that it is harmful the psychologist wouldn't have been able to discern a direct cause for the harm. So what you really need, then, are "experts" engaged in the research side of things, in reviewing as many cases as possible, preferably cross-cultural, and noting all those that were harmful VS not-harmful, and trying to find causal connections between the situations concerning each. If there's a consensus just among THOSE experts, I don't know what it is. I know what promulgated means; you apparently don't know what "what expert consensus you consulted (“promulgated” or not) before forming your opinion" means because you've yet to post it. What, do you think that by adding "promulgated" that means there's no burden on you to prove what you said?  I'm glad you're enjoying your imagination's ability to lump me in with "the pedos," but maybe one day you'll learn your ass-pull claims have no effect on people with reading comprehension. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 16, 2018 1:58:33 GMT
Firstly, what is your basis for thinking that the amount of suffering is "grossly overestimated", and by that do you mean the total amount of suffering on Earth, or the amount of suffering that can be experienced by individual sentient organisms? Secondly, are there not people living lives now that you would be unhappy to be living yourself, and if so, do you imagine that these people living such terrible lives are deserving of more suffering than yourself? If you think that people aren't deserving of the suffering that they experience and recognise the distribution of suffering as being random and arbitrary, then why would you sanction allowing other people to 'roll the dice' on behalf of others, some of whom will have to endure these experiences that you would be unhappy having to endure yourself? From what I remember from when we last discussed antinatalism, your best argument in favour of keeping this going (the cycle of life) was that values do not exist independently of minds, and therefore experiences of suffering do not matter, may as well torture sentient organisms, etc. You haven't posited one positive reason for keeping the cycle going out of merit. So, for the first question: the basis is interacting with a crapload of different people all over the world over the course of my 50+ years. I doubt that you've interacted deeply enough with people of a low enough standing in life to be able to make that determination. During your travels, have you been invited to stay in the homes of various peasants (if they were fortunate enough to have homes) and to observe the conditions in a Bangladeshi sweat shop manufacturing cheap clothing for westerners? It also doesn't begin to address the issue of why you think that it is acceptable to draw straws for strangers and have some of these people subjected to terrible fates based on fortune rather than merit. Nor does it address what you think is so important about human life that it needs to be perpetuated at absolutely any cost. |
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Apr 16, 2018 2:00:56 GMT
I'm ok with you continually babbling stupid not "knowing" what promulgated means. Regardless of the volume of chatter you dump, you pedos won't be getting to the kids' bits on sniffles of "Puritanical" and ass-pulls of "xenophobia", at least not without a very high price for you to pay.
Eva Yojimbo: To make the analogy with pedophilia, a psychologist might regularly deal with people who've been victims of pedophilia; but the very nature of their job would mean that they've probably ONLY seen those who thought the experience was negative (thus biasing the psychologist's conclusions), and even in coming to the conclusion that it is harmful the psychologist wouldn't have been able to discern a direct cause for the harm. So what you really need, then, are "experts" engaged in the research side of things, in reviewing as many cases as possible, preferably cross-cultural, and noting all those that were harmful VS not-harmful, and trying to find causal connections between the situations concerning each. If there's a consensus just among THOSE experts, I don't know what it is. I know what promulgated means; you apparently don't know what "what expert consensus you consulted (“promulgated” or not) before forming your opinion" means because you've yet to post it. What, do you think that by adding "promulgated" that means there's no burden on you to prove what you said? I'm glad you're enjoying your imagination's ability to lump me in with "the pedos," but maybe one day you'll learn your ass-pull claims have no effect on people with reading comprehension. Obviously you don't. You don't have to "consult" experts anew for what was already promulgated. And sorry, but the "burden of proof" is on the ones trying to get the kiddie's bits available to the grown predators. That's well before your laughably pathetic "the Puritans are keeping me down" and of course the arse depth-mining of "xenophobia".  Keep trying, maybe you NAMBLA types will one day seen as being ahead of your time. Or just incarcerated & put down. 
Eva Yojimbo: If you're raised in an environment where Jews are considered inferior, then it's very easy to just blindly accept that without ever questioning it. I mean, did YOU do any research into what the experts thought about pedophilia before arguing in these threads? I know I didn't. |
|
Keep trying, maybe you NAMBLA types will one day seen as being ahead of your time.