Scotlands fucked up.... | xltronic messageboard
 
You are not logged in!

F.A.Q
Log in

Register
  
 
  
 
Now online (1)
big
...and 544 guests

Last 5 registered
Oplandisks
nothingstar
N_loop
yipe
foxtrotromeo

Browse members...
  
 
Members 8025
Messages 2614128
Today 0
Topics 127542
  
 
Messageboard index
Scotlands fucked up....
 

offline ecnadniarb on 2003-09-04 09:27 [#00849553]
Points: 24805 Status: Lurker | Followup to uzim: #00849516 | Show recordbag



Oral sex is an act of mutual pleasure through physical
stimulation. Homosexuality, is a very similar thing, two
concenting people gaining mutual pleasure in physical
intimacy. So neither are the same as this case.

This was the infliction of pain on a none concenting person
for sexual pleasure. Not the same thing at all. This is an
act of mental illness.


 

offline eXXailon from purgatory on 2003-09-04 09:29 [#00849555]
Points: 6745 Status: Lurker | Followup to ecnadniarb: #00849553



exactly


 

offline danbrusca from Derbyshire (United Kingdom) on 2003-09-04 09:32 [#00849562]
Points: 4570 Status: Lurker | Followup to ecnadniarb: #00849553



What has consent got to do with whether or not something is
natural behaviour?


 

offline ecnadniarb on 2003-09-04 09:32 [#00849563]
Points: 24805 Status: Lurker | Followup to danbrusca: #00849543 | Show recordbag



By the way you are phrasing this, there is no such thing as
mental illness, just deviant behaviour that people don't
understand. Whose to say a serial killer who is acting on
the word of God isn't really doing so?


 

offline ecnadniarb on 2003-09-04 09:36 [#00849570]
Points: 24805 Status: Lurker | Followup to danbrusca: #00849562 | Show recordbag



OK, if we are to go on another tact...if you look in nature
when a youngster in a group of animals is threatened by an
adult male or female the rest of the hurd will often seek to
kill the potential threat. Therefore the killing of this
person by other humans would be a perfectly acceptable and
justifyable natural response to his actions. Would you
agree that murder in this case would be perfectly OK?

If it was perfectly natural behaviour why would animals
resort to this sort of response, given that they havent
undergone the same level of conditioning and respression
that humans have?


 

offline uzim on 2003-09-04 09:39 [#00849581]
Points: 17716 Status: Lurker



ecnadniarb > yes, i completely agree with this... that's why
i was pointing out : )
but maybe i just got your sentence wrong, confusing "not
natural" and "illness" (but anyway... homosexuality oral sex
etc. are natural too in my opinion, we don't make/configure
our desires/attractions ourselves most of the time we just
have them... but that's just my opinion)

as for pedophilia being an illness or not i think it depends
on the cases... can't tell a general case, i think some are
disturbed/sick in their minds so they do stuff like that
(also serial killing etc.), and others just have this
attraction which they do not restrain, and commit what they
commit, in a totally egoistic/evil/bestial way.. (and maybe
there are other cases too)


 

offline uzim on 2003-09-04 09:40 [#00849584]
Points: 17716 Status: Lurker



(this was meant to be a follow-up to the message at the top
of the page, [#00849553] )


 

offline ecnadniarb on 2003-09-04 09:45 [#00849595]
Points: 24805 Status: Lurker | Show recordbag



I have chatted to Paul in the past about peadophilia and I
agree with him that it can be natural behaviour between
sexually aware people if that is what they choose to do,
although hormonal changes through puberty can lead to
youngsters mistaking the need for closeness to others with
sexual needs, which is why I think laws governing underage
sex are needed. The desire to gain sexual gratification
through the harming of others is not natural.


 

offline Ceri JC from Jefferson City (United States) on 2003-09-04 09:49 [#00849602]
Points: 23533 Status: Moderator | Followup to uzim: #00849516 | Show recordbag



Uzim:

Interesting point... there was a lot of furore about
"anti-sodomy" laws in America in the 70s in certain states.
Whilst most people of the time (at least publicly) agreed
that it was a good idea to make buggery illegal, it also
covered oral sex and in fact, any sexual act from which
procreation was not possible. To paraphrase Hunter S.
Thompson, "I just hope that anyone who does anything other
than a quick, dutiful hump in the missionary position for
the purposes of procreation doesn't get a visit from these
law endforcment Nazis..."

Titsworth:

Most prisons in this country do keep; corrupt police,
paedophiles and grasses in a seperate wing to stop other
prisoners doing them in.


 

offline danbrusca from Derbyshire (United Kingdom) on 2003-09-04 09:56 [#00849608]
Points: 4570 Status: Lurker | Followup to ecnadniarb: #00849570



I would say the murder of the individual would be a natural
act, but not everyone would consider it socially acceptable
in a society where rule of law is supposedly paramount.


 

offline titsworth from Washington, DC (United States) on 2003-09-04 10:00 [#00849613]
Points: 14550 Status: Lurker | Followup to Ceri JC: #00849602



yes i know, but if you're going to give a baby rapist 5
years in prison at least put them in a violent prison. 5
years of bragging to your fellow pedophiles and rapists is
NOT just punishment.


 


Messageboard index