Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Fr.Andrew · 11-13-2002, 04:02 AM

(Vesica): "So it seems this idea and the feelings are social in nature. We have learned to feel this way yet most of us are willing to leave it at 'This is wrong. The idea is morally repugnant and no sane personwould think otherwise. PERIOD.'
(Fr Andrew): My feelings exactly, Vesica. I think we would do well to examine all such cultural prejudices with an open mind and a level tone of voice. We should never accept something simply because that's how it's always been.
And we should be particularly troubled by irrational thugs who seek to shout down honest questions by vilifying the questioner for asking them.

JohnV · 11-13-2002, 05:19 AM

Quote:

Mimi was seven years old...

She asks. An honest woman, Reenie says that it's something that people do sometimes by themselves and sometimes married couples do it together...and tries to change the subject. But Mimi is still curious and asks if Reenie and Uncle Will had done that in bed. Reenie says yes...they had. Mimi asks if Reenie doesn't miss it because it feels so good. Reenie says yes...she misses it a lot. She sometimes does it to herself, but it's not the same.
The next time they're in bed together, feeling sorry for her aunt, Mimi slips her knee against Reenie's crotch and the old woman, relenting to a flood of emotions she thought she'd never experience again, allows her niece to bring her to orgasm.

Interesting (and perhaps telling) fantasy, but this is not 7-year-old behavior. Feel free to try again, though.

JohnV · 11-13-2002, 05:21 AM

Quote:

To give an example that I think he may have in mind a previous girlfriend of mine recounted her losing her virginity at 11 to a 21 year old mentally retarded male...

Are you implying that 7-year-old girls sexually prey on 35-year-old retarded men?

JohnV · 11-13-2002, 05:24 AM

Oh, and also, Fr Andrew: our case involves a MAN with a 7-year-old girl. How about re-doing your story with a male adult, rather than a female, and we'll see how it sounds?

Amen-Moses · 11-13-2002, 05:35 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by JohnV:
Are you implying that 7-year-old girls sexually prey on 35-year-old retarded men?

Are you implying it is impossible?

Amen-Moses

JohnV · 11-13-2002, 05:53 AM

Quote:

Are you implying it is impossible?

Amen-Moses

Hehe. THe famous AmenMoses non-answer.

I'm saying it's so unlikely as to be irrelevant.

Amen-Moses · 11-13-2002, 06:04 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by JohnV:
Hehe. THe famous AmenMoses non-answer.

I'm saying it's so unlikely as to be irrelevant.

But that wasn't your question.

Why don't you make it even more unlikely just to be safe? How about you change your question to be a 2 year old hermaphrodite and a 120 year old castrato?

Amen-Moses

Amen-Moses · 11-13-2002, 06:06 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by JohnV:
Oh, and also, Fr Andrew: our case involves a MAN with a 7-year-old girl. How about re-doing your story with a male adult, rather than a female, and we'll see how it sounds?

Are you saying that changing the sexes makes a difference? Why?

Amen-Moses

JohnV · 11-13-2002, 06:30 AM

Re: Tiresome nitpicking

Quote:

But that wasn't your question.

Nope. My question was whether the 7-year-old girl would be better off with a platonic, rather than sexual, relationship.

Quote:

Are you saying that changing the sexes makes a difference?

I really don't know - why don't you change it, and we'll see?

Amen-Moses · 11-13-2002, 08:11 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by JohnV:
I really don't know - why don't you change it, and we'll see?

Don't be coy John, you do see it as different otherwise you wouldn't be so eager to change it!

Basically you specifically chose what to you is a worse case, that is a subjective choice and tells us a lot about your thought processes but little about the bigger picture.

Now you have been presented with a different case as a thought experiment but brush it aside to get back to your own pet case, why? Could it be that you do not see the alternative case as being "as wrong" or "as harmful" as the one you wish to pursue? If this is so then doesn't this indicate that even your black and white moral stance may really be covering up a greyer reality?

At a guess I would say that your 35 & 7 scenario is based on probably your age and that of your daughter which is an understandable way of arguing but is counter-productive to a discussion of the issues because having constructed such a personal angle you end up responding emotively to every post rather than actually thinking it through.

Now tell me why you think the two are different?

(btw when you dismiss a post with "that is not the behaviour of a 7 year old" upon what authority do you speak of all 7 year olds?)

Amen-Moses

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

11-13-2002, 04:02 AM	#61
Fr.Andrew Senior Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: Betsy's Bluff, Maine Posts: 540	(Vesica): "So it seems this idea and the feelings are social in nature. We have learned to feel this way yet most of us are willing to leave it at 'This is wrong. The idea is morally repugnant and no sane personwould think otherwise. PERIOD.' (Fr Andrew): My feelings exactly, Vesica. I think we would do well to examine all such cultural prejudices with an open mind and a level tone of voice. We should never accept something simply because that's how it's always been. And we should be particularly troubled by irrational thugs who seek to shout down honest questions by vilifying the questioner for asking them.

11-13-2002, 05:24 AM	#64
JohnV Banned Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: . Posts: 132	Oh, and also, Fr Andrew: our case involves a MAN with a 7-year-old girl. How about re-doing your story with a male adult, rather than a female, and we'll see how it sounds?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.