Pedophilia Guide Author Arrested

reply to post by Sinnthia


Gosh are you ignorant... Did you read where is says "generally 13 or younger".. Why does my definition have to match exactly? What is your motivation here?? Really.. you are just ignorant, and have proven that here!

I gave you my thoughts because you asked.. I did not ask for your opinion. Why do you feel it necessary to rip into me like this? Are you a child toucher? Do you "like em young"? Seek help then, leave me out of your attacks.

reply to post by Sinnthia


Can you read... let me help you

prepubescent children (generally age 13 years or younger,

prepubescent children (generally age 13 years or younger,

prepubescent children (generally age 13 years or younger,

prepubescent children (generally age 13 years or younger,

prepubescent children (generally age 13 years or younger,

Should I add spaces and caps for you?

Ok this is from beforeitsnews.com check out what Pope "Palpatine" said. According to him pedophilia isn't all that bad. What a nut job!!!

______beforeitsnews/story/322/397/Pope_s_child_porn_normal_claim_sparks_outrage_among_victims.html

reply to post by Sinnthia
I am sorry, but that is just nit picking. Most people would understand Younger than 12 or 13 to mean prepubescent. I did anyway.

Originally posted by Resurrectio
reply to post by Sinnthia

 

Gosh are you ignorant... Did you read where is says "generally 13 or younger".. Why does my definition have to match exactly? What is your motivation here?? Really.. you are just ignorant, and have proven that here!

Calm down for a moment. The only reason I asked is because you write these lengthy posts about pedophiles as if you are some kind of expert but most of them seem full of opinions you might from from a typical Dr. Phil watcher. I was curious what your knowledge base is that you come to feel so knowledgable. Speaking of ignorance though, your entire answer in full -

Originally posted by Resurrectio
reply to post by Sinnthia

 

I would define a pedophile as an adult that is sexually turned on or has sexual interest in a child under the age of 12 or 13.

I was no longer PREPUBESCENT at the age of 9. This means I did not qualify as a victim of pedophillia when I was 10, 11, or 12. Last I checked, those are all "under 12 or 13." Secondly, you said ADULTS and then went on to prove that pedophiles are not just adults but adolescents as well. See, you were just plain wrong on both accounts. Sorry it made you mad. I was not looking to make you look wrong or make you mad. I was asking about your expertise. I cannot help it if you were so wrong.

I gave you my thoughts because you asked.. I did not ask for your opinion. Why do you feel it necessary to rip into me like this? Are you a child toucher? Do you "like em young"? Seek help then, leave me out of your attacks.

Ah, now I am a child molestor because I asked you if you knew what a word meant and you did not. I get it.

Originally posted by sonofliberty1776
reply to post by Sinnthia

 

I am sorry, but that is just nit picking. Most people would understand Younger than 12 or 13 to mean prepubescent. I did anyway.

...and most people get all emotional and heated when you say "children" and toss logic out the window, next thing you know people are advocating torture and death for writing a book. There is a reason I asked the resident "expert" that question.

When I was 12, I lost my virginity to my then 16 year old boyfriend. My body was ready as I had not been prepubescent for 3 years. I enjoyed it, because my body was ready. Our expert on pedophillia is saying that my boyfriend is a pedophile and that I was a victim of pedophillia. I just find it hard to read all this other stuff he writes about pedophiles, who they are, what they think and do, and what shoulod be done with them from someone who sees the world so severely black and white on an issue that is anything but.

Originally posted by Resurrectio
reply to post by Sinnthia

 

Can you read... let me help you

prepubescent children (generally age 13 years or younger,

prepubescent children (generally age 13 years or younger,

prepubescent children (generally age 13 years or younger,

prepubescent children (generally age 13 years or younger,

prepubescent children (generally age 13 years or younger,

Should I add spaces and caps for you?

Yes I can and that is not the answer you gave. I am sorry if you think that all kids under 13 are prepubescent. I can only pray you never have to raise a daughter.

reply to post by Sinnthia


No, you are just nit picking..
You have no other argument.. yet you are reaching.. leads me to believe that you have some alterior motives here.. Possibility of having a dog in this fight is high, at this point...

Who cares 13 or 9.. An adult that is turned on sexually by a child is broken..

I know they are my opinions.. If your comprehension skills were better, you would have noticed that I have stated "IMO or This is my opinion" Several times.

I am not claiming that my opinion should be a national standard.. or the law..

It is more than obvious that many people do not share the same hatred toward pedophiles that I do..

With that being said... I am passionate about killing pedophiles because I feel they are broken/not fixable -

Why exactly do you vehemently defend them?

reply to post by Resurrectio


LOOK! It was just a simple question and I will no longer engage with you about that one thing because now it is just nitpicking.

Let me just try to give you a little perspective.

This thread is full of people complaining about what was written inside of a book they NEVER READ.
..... people calling for the torture, rape, and execution of a man NOT convicted of any crimes.
..... people writing essays on their vast knowledge of pedophillia based solely on opinions formed from seemingly nothing but emotional attatchment to the missperception of words and how they are used.


I was curious why people would talk so much about what is in a book they never read.
I was curious why Americans would want to kill someone for writing without trial for any crime at all.
I was curious why people would profess expertise on a topic whilst not fully understanding the topic.

It was just a question.

reply to post by Sinnthia


Now you have completely jumped off the logical cliff..

I said I would define a pedophile as an adult that is sexually turned on or has sexual interest in a child 12 or 13 years and younger...

The actual definition says prepubescent "generaly 13 years and younger"

Wouldn't your fight be with the person writing the definition?

get it over with.. What is your point? Why are you thinking you are so bright by nit picking small insignificant parts of my post?

get over yourself..

Aren't you intelligent enough to just say " I dont agree with you" and move on?

Originally posted by Resurrectio
Who cares 13 or 9.. An adult that is turned on sexually by a child is broken..

I do because I see people going on and on about death for people that have crossed a line but none of you seem to agree on where that line is. I am just curious I guess when you are all going to reach a consensus as to what is an adult and what is a child.

Is an 18 year old that has sex with a 17 year old a pedophile? How about an 18 year old that has sex with a 15 year old? How about a 54 year old that has sex with a 15 year old? What about the first couple. Do you draw the line at 18-16, or 18-15, or 18-14, or 18-13? I was sexually active at 13 and if you are going to tell me that I was not then I fail to see how this discussion can lead to any rational conclusion.

Where are we going to draw these lines before we start killing people for crossing them. Before you answer, you might be interested to know that the age of consent in the United States is and has been anything but static.

I have a few questions for the people who are defending the creep. And answer with the utmost honesty please.

1-Would you let that man near you children?
2-Would you rally at the court house and protest for him?
3-Would you want him as a friend?

There are no right or wrong answers here. Your own personal opignion is just what it is. Your opignions.

reply to post by Sinnthia




I have read most of the book. I have watched the interview with this creep! Have you done either of these? You seem to have all of this wealth of knowledge and opinions.. Again - without reading the book!

This book details how to "groom" children.. It also details specific ways to go about abusing the children to make it more pleasurable for the child... To defend this book and this Author is disgusting in my view.. You nor your anger will change my opinion.. So move on.. Your opinion is not relevant to me.

If you want the book.. get a bit torrent Dl'r and Dl it.. period!

2nd.. You didn't ask me that.. You asked me my definition.. Then proceded to nit pick the specific wording..

All of the questions you just listed.. You didn't ask me.. You only asked me one specific question.

Again .. Comprehension skills nil!

And your done with me? Did I even address you?

reply to post by Sinnthia


If you took the time or had the comprehension skills to intake the info.. You would see, early on, I addressed that exact issue.. So go do some reading, before you tell me what I haven't done!

So you were sexually active at 13?? There is a word for that too!

Originally posted by Resurrectio
reply to post by Sinnthia

 

Now you have completely jumped off the logical cliff..

I said I would define a pedophile as an adult that is sexually turned on or has sexual interest in a child 12 or 13 years and younger...

And that was wrong according to the definition you supplied.

The actual definition says prepubescent "generaly 13 years and younger"

The key word being "prebuescent" because if a 12 year old is NO LONGER PREPUBESCENT, they do not fit into that "general" category. I saw no such qalifier in your answer. Furthermore, you still insist you have to be an adult to be a pedophile which is again wrong according to the definition you supplied. We have been over this. Now you are nitpicking.

Wouldn't your fight be with the person writing the definition?

No because I agreed with that definition before and after you posted it. It does not agree with YOUR personal definition and that is fine, it just tells me how to consider the rest of your "expertise" is all. Get over it.

get it over with.. What is your point? Why are you thinking you are so bright by nit picking small insignificant parts of my post?

I had no point as I have stated this all over and over. I was curious where you were coming from so I knew what context to put your essays in. That was all I wanted. The same reason I asked Tater why she had such strong opinions about the content of the book 23 pages before asking if she could read it.

get over yourself..

I am starting to think maybe you need to get over me. I asked a question, you answered it. I was done.

Aren't you intelligent enough to just say " I dont agree with you" and move on?

Ah, so you accuse me of being a child molestor and attack my intelligence. Good show!
Are you not intelligent enough to understand that I asked, you answered, I said thanks, I was done with it?

heres a curve-ball for ya.

little girls are starting puberty at ages as low as 3-7 now. they believe this is due to hormone disruptors that end up in our food and water.

what if these same chemicals are responsible for the behavior in people like this guy. coupled with the over-sexualization of children in the media?

Just wanted to point out sky news is off air is it the same else where?

reply to post by Sinnthia


So we are nit picking little words out of entire posts...

Did I accuse or ask? hmmmm Comprehension comes into question again.

reply to post by Brood


What on earth are you talking about?
What is not to understand about it?
It's hardly Dostoevsky or Joyce - there's no need to break out the scholars for it.
Plenty of excerpts were published in the press when the controversy began. If you had read them, you'd see that, not only is it very basic writing, it is also, badly edited, and steeped in terrible syntax and grammar. Finnigan's Wake, it is not.

It is a work of non-fiction. Believe me, anyone who reads excerpts will be able to understand exactly what the book is about. And, funnily enough, yes! Certain things, society does not agree with! Some things are illegal for a reason! Child molestation is illegal because we, as society, will not tolerate it! Murder is against the law! Rape is against the law! Assault is against the law! Some things are unacceptable to most of us in society and that is why we have laws!

Oh my sweet Lord of Hell. Listen, I know you guys would like to paint everyone who disagrees with you as some kind of hysterical fascist without brain in their heads, but you just look bad trying to do so. From the last few posts, I can tell that you will stoop to all new lows of histrionics and hyperbole to make a point.

And so, I bow out now. Not my kind of debate.

reply to post by Resurrectio


OK, since you cannot take a hint, I will just have to ignore you until the topic moves ahead.
I just want to point out that you are simply helping me understand you better and that is all I wanted.

I want to know why people want death for an author in this country. I want to know why people are so quick to judge anything based just on a title. I am curious why people have such violently strong opinions on topics when they rarely have all the FACTS.

Let me help you understand what it is I am trying to understand. This is a thread about a touchy topic with a lot of heated emotional responses. I think that is all fair and good but no way for a SOCIETY to actually function. We do all live here together and rely on each other whether we want to admit it or not. The very fact that you can argue with me about this right now can be owed to the cable guy that was here yesterday replacing my modem so that I could be online to read what you write. I guess I need to learn to live with the cable folks just like I need to learn to live with you and even people that write books that I may find deplorable.

So when it comes to online ranting, emotions and anger can be fun. When it comes to actually discussing societies ills and perhaps solving them, we need to slow down and pay attention to reality, facts, and the details that lie within.

Case and point: Out of the 23 times you added me as a respected foe, yes 23 times, did you notice the word "respected?"

I rarely accuse people I respect of being child molestors just because they own a dictionary and can read. Of course, I also never hit the same button 23 times when it worked the first time.

I just wanted to understand some of you a little better. Now I think I really undestand YOU.