Ted Hoffman

Helen

But the 'delete' option doesn't work, even on my own posts!!!

(Or at least, not the last few times I tried it)

I also dont know how to delete.

And from how things look now, this is a hold-up.

MOJO-JOJO

Well, again, "derail" can be interpreted many different ways, but that certainly was not my intent. Helen, some of your more 'interesting' posts in the past might have been considered 'non-serious' by some. But I think you'll agree with me that freedom of expression, no matter how interpreted is the important thing here...just as in real life.

I simply post as I would speak if we were standing around having this discussion, and as is the case with 'real-life' discussions....they sometimes get a little heated or perhaps silly...not always staying serious.

I love my kids and feel that there is too much child abuse in this world. I shared my opinion that I thought pedophilia was wrong and bad in every sense of the word, regardless of culture, and Amen-Moses called me a bigot because of that.

My response to A-M translated;

Okay, A-M, I guess it's all relative to your perspective then, my opinion on the immorality of pedophilia is just my opinion then. You think that makes me a bigot (gives 'hi-sign'), and you will still be a pedophile in the morning....whatever. We will just have to agree to disagree, and I will keep my children far away from people like you.


99percent....I vote that you NOT resign. I like you and respect you. I only aired my opinion in the spirit of open and honest discussion which I have ALWAYS enjoyed here.

Peace

99Percent

MOJO-JOJO, thanks for the vote of confidence.

Intensity, I think you just did what The Other Michael asked you to do.

Actually only moderators can complety delete posts. And normally I delete identical double posts as they are obviously a keyboard or software mistake.

Ok, now lets get back on track on the discussion...

Intensity, I think you need to seriously reconsider the ability of children to give consent for sex. Its not a question of whether bodies are designed for sex or not. Sex involves a mutual give and take arising from free will. A child who is under the protection of adulst (they have to be because they still don't know how to take care of themselves and make a living) is not in a position to freely give consent for sex.

[ September 18, 2002: Message edited by: 99Percent ]</p>

HelenM

You probably don't know how many of those 'interesting' posts were deleted off one of the more serious forums, though.

I imagine the one who deleted them will support 99Percent's decision, although I may be wrong.

I don't agree with unlimited freedom of expression when the freedom of expression of one person is detracting from the experience of a number of others.

I also don't agree with the death penalty for that person...something in between seems best to me

Helen

Mad Kally

Does anyone else get chills from reading the quote below?

HelenM

Yeah really

Maybe it's getting a bit close to 'advice for paedophiles'

(No offense to Intensity but maybe some lines of argument oughtn't even be pursued...)

Helen

MOJO-JOJO

After reading Grizzly's remark regarding higher forums, I suppose I should endeavor to keep my comments more serious in these types of threads...saving the good-humor for the cocktail lounge forums. Given that, I feel that 99% was warranted in deleting my tongue-in-cheeker.

brighid

Some of the responsibilities moderators have include reading of all or most of the posts posted to their given forum. So, when ONE thread of many becomes 12 pages long, and that thread is a heated topic it does take up a lot of moderators time. We are to make sure things don’t get out of hand with personal insults, ad hominem attacks, and the such and to attempt to keep things on track. I think the moderators (myself included) at MF&P allow for much freedom in discussion but as this being a “higher” forum we don’t want things degrading into the types of discussions allowable in RR&P. That sort of environment is not conducive to informative discussions or civil discourse.

Our duties don’t make us hypersensitive, but we accepted certain responsibilities and we must do our best to uphold a modicum of respect in an effort to further discussions and thought. Sometimes, these types of subjects DO get out of hand and require some intervention, or a friendly reminder that things need to calm down, a restatement of forum rules, or in some extreme cases banning of an abusive member. If we are hypersensitive about anything that would be in regard to fairness and freedom of speech.

There is A LOT for us to read through out any given day and some of the content of posts in MF&P can be pretty technical and at times we aren’t able to keep up with the flow.


Brighid
Moderator, 2nd class

Ted Hoffman

99 Percent.
Intensity, I think you need to seriously reconsider the ability of children to give consent for sex. Its not a question of whether bodies are designed for sex or not.

Thank you. Lunachick would be very interested in that teleological bit.

Sex involves a mutual give and take arising from free will.

What about circumcision? Are they asked to consent? And do you know many babies and children have died from overbleeding and infections related to circumcision?
Why does the western society sanction such excruciatingly painful acts that involve physical dismemberment and mutilation of sexual organs while totally denouncing sex with children?

What is the basis of this doublestandard?

And religion? Do we ask our kids whether they would like to be christians or muslims? or mormons, devil worshippers, moon cultists etc?

We choose for them, don't we?
And do you know lives have been lost in the name of religion?

A child who is under the protection of adulst (they have to be because they still don't know how to take care of themselves and make a living) is not in a position to freely give consent for sex.

The consent of children is illegalized because they are liable to getting swindled to agreeing to have sex and adults can also excercise undue influence upon them thus robbing them of free decision making ability. (Its for the same reasons that mentally ill people can not give legal consent.)

But this is a western concept (the invalidity of a childs consent) that is enforced to protect children from being abused by adults. And with good reason - where sick adults are many and where sexual abuse against children are perpetrated habitually.

I have seen communities where girls get married at 11 and they go on to be very able mothers. Do such children consent to being used sexually while in the "marriages"?


Helen
No offense to Intensity but maybe some lines of argument oughtn't even be pursued...

It depends on which axe one wants to grind and perspectives differ.

I have no axe to grind, all I needed was a reational explanation for why children should not be used sexually and I have got it in page 10.

So this thread was successful in that respect. I can see all sorts of irrelevant worms crawling out of the woodwork.

Lets see for how long the mods will allow my thread to be hijacked.

HelenM

And the reason you accepted as rational was which one? (I hope I'm not trying your patience too much by asking this)

Helen