hboy Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 After all, if someone else had reported him instead of beating him up and letting him move on, he might not have been in a position to gain access to another child to abuse. But he's not abusing a child. According to MDO its legal in Spain to shag a 13 year old so its not child abuse at all you see. Its legally shagging a 13 year old - meaning that if you beat him up you'll be in court for assault and it will cost you a lot of money. Don't you people understand what MDO is saying. Shagging 13 year old's is really totally ok because you can in Spain and in other places which makes it totally legal and not creepy, or wrong, or being a paedo at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gladys Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 Who pays for the flight? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sausage Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 Don't you people understand what MDO is saying. Shagging 13 year old's is really totally ok because you can in Spain Please provide the exact quote where MDO has said that shagging 13 year olds is totally ok.....or stop tallking horseshit ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nosferatu Posted October 12, 2009 Share Posted October 12, 2009 Hmm well before you loose it and beat him up - or set your wife on him - you would hopefully feel obligated to report him him to the police so that other 13 year old girls might be spared the same experience as your daughter. After all, if someone else had reported him instead of beating him up and letting him move on, he might not have been in a position to gain access to another child to abuse. Fair point Gilly . I could just word my proposal in a sneaky and underhand manner and say that I wouldn't phone plod . If anyone else in the house happened tp phone them though well nevermind , then he gets a sound kicking and his name in the register . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MilitantDogOwner Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 After all, if someone else had reported him instead of beating him up and letting him move on, he might not have been in a position to gain access to another child to abuse. But he's not abusing a child. According to MDO its legal in Spain to shag a 13 year old so its not child abuse at all you see. Its legally shagging a 13 year old - meaning that if you beat him up you'll be in court for assault and it will cost you a lot of money. Don't you people understand what MDO is saying. Shagging 13 year old's is really totally ok because you can in Spain and in other places which makes it totally legal and not creepy, or wrong, or being a paedo at all. Quote the statment I made or remove the post. You're starting to sound like the kind of person who would want to burn down a paediatricain's house. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hboy Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 Quote the statment I made or remove the post. And a 44 year old having sex with a 13 year old? Depends on the laws of the land as previously stated. That is more or less exactly what you said in the above statement. And here: I'm afriad your wrong. The law doesnt care about moral equivalancy. If the peoples of these nations felt that it is wrong then surely as a nation they should push for it to be changed. Have sex with a 13 year old in Spain...legal. Have sex with a 13 year old in the UK...illegal. Shame you have such poor memory that you can't even remember your own posts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 I really find this thread just plain wierd. There are two sides to it. 1) Morally. I believe that it is morally wrong for a 44 year old to have sex with a 13 year old. 2) Legally. In the US it is illegal for a 44 year old man to have sex with a 13 year old. Because of 1) I do not wish to see any relevent alteration to 2). I feel that the age of consent in California may be too high - 18, but any alterations I may want to see occur to it are irrelevent, as I would NOT want it lowered to 13. Now I really do wonder who disagrees with 1)? Sebrof and MDO both seem to be saying they don't - if that is true then there is no issue. Morals *should* trump laws in personal and ethical behaviour - just because something is legal isn't an excuse to do it if it is immoral/unethical. The legality debate should also then be moot - who would want a law change to allow a behaviour they think is immoral? I really think this debate is just a slag fest and people deliberately talking past each other. It's just the internet innit, but I feel this should be a sensible discussion of a serious issue. I, for one, am not going to say a 44 year old man should be able to evade the consequences - legal and morally - of having sex with a 13 year old. I'm glad Polanski wasn't in Spain when he acted the way he did. Is anyone really saying Spain should be seen as the moral lead in this issue? If not, then why go on about it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MilitantDogOwner Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 Quote the statment I made or remove the post. And a 44 year old having sex with a 13 year old? Depends on the laws of the land as previously stated. That is more or less exactly what you said in the above statement. So you can't find a quote. You've miss quoted me and then cherry picked something unrealted that I said to suit your purpose. And here: I'm afriad your wrong. The law doesnt care about moral equivalancy. If the peoples of these nations felt that it is wrong then surely as a nation they should push for it to be changed. Have sex with a 13 year old in Spain...legal. Have sex with a 13 year old in the UK...illegal. Shame you have such poor memory that you can't even remember your own posts. I think you really are having some problems with reading here. What you have quoted me as saying above is correct from a legal perspective. Which has nothing to do wether its right or wrong. I'm still waiting for you to find a quote, from me, saying it is okay to have sex with 13 year olds. Not illegal or legal, but from a right and wrong perspective. Just to help you, here some quotes I have made on the rights and wrongs of this topic: "When I mentioned age of consent I was referring to line where child rape crosses into adult rape. Both abhorrent none the less." "I have stated a couple of times I am not in support or sympathize with paedophiles." "1. "noun. an adult who is sexually attracted to children". The law of the land decides who is a child and who is not. Soooo if a countries law states that 13 year olds can have sex...can you see where I am going with this or do you need the crayon version. 2. Just because the above statement is true it does not mean I agree with it. But then its all okay because hboy is here to tell every nation in the world how to make their laws to fit his sensabilities." "I agree that Roman Polanski did indeed break the law by having sex with a 13 year old without her consent and that it was a disgusting act." "I did not suggest it was open season on 13 year olds like you are trying to say I have." "Whats to discuss or even argue about? Polanski is a peodophile, he sexually abused a child or possibly even children and for that he should be in prison with other criminals being used as someones bitch (daily). That I did not argue. You appear to be another post skimmer, picking out the most sensational parts of a post and missing the point." "I understand that it is disgusting from a moral angle but from a legal one it is not. I'm sure if you went to Spain and started outing people who had sex with 13 year old as paedos, you'd be on the wrong side of the law pretty quick. Again this is twisted but thats the law. Like it or change it." "To simplify and clarify. Its wrong...but not illegal, in the countries previously mentioned. " Now come Hboy I eagerly await your stone cold quote from me saying its okay to abuse 13 year olds. Hope theres one forth coming soon... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La_Dolce_Vita Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 ...as I would NOT want it lowered to 13.I would for those who people of around the same age. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terse Posted October 13, 2009 Author Share Posted October 13, 2009 I believe that it is morally wrong for a 44 year old to have sex with a 13 year old. I agree, wholeheartedly. However, I am well aware that there many men, from our island and the rest of the UK, who have travelled to Far Eastern destinations for exactly that purpose; some of them older than 44, buying sexual favours from children younger than 12. I just wish I could be convinced that none of them are enthusiastically condemning Polanski in order to conceal their own dirty secrets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 Drugging women in order to have sex with them is wrong however old or young they are. And a 44 year old having sex with a 13 year old? Depends on the laws of the land as previously stated. MDO - you have been inconsistent and have mixed up morality and legality. I don't agree with hboy's cariacture of you, but the above quote - where I was specifically asking about right and wrong, is an example where your posting style hasn't helped you. Morally it does NOT depend upon the laws of the land. That is the point most of the people disagreeing with you have been trying to make. I was asking about whether it was wrong - and you reply about legality. When Declan challenged you on this you stuck with legality. Legality does not equal morality - that is the main point being made, and the one where you seem to be still arguing. As I post above - if you agree with 1) why are you going on about 2)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 I just wish I could be convinced that none of them are enthusiastically condemning Polanski in order to conceal their own dirty secrets. I see this almost the other way round - I cannot believe that politicians, celebrities etc are campaigning so that Polanski does not have to face the consequences of his actions. And the fact that it is people with moral skeletons in their cupboard just increases my distaste. Overall I see a growing awareness of the problems of sex-tourism, the social and legal authorities working to stop it, campaigns to get people aware of the abuses they commit etc. I think those are all good things. You'll always get the string him up brigade, it isn't helpful to a debate, but it's the internet. But what I didn't expect was people coming on here and arguing that there are important extenuating nuances in this case. I really can't see them. And when pushed it looks like every one agrees that what he did was repugnant and they are glad what he did was illegal. If that is the case then what are the issues here? Is anyone saying that they believe Polanski shouldn't face a judge for what he did? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MilitantDogOwner Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 Drugging women in order to have sex with them is wrong however old or young they are. And a 44 year old having sex with a 13 year old? Depends on the laws of the land as previously stated. MDO - you have been inconsistent and have mixed up morality and legality. I don't agree with hboy's cariacture of you, but the above quote - where I was specifically asking about right and wrong, is an example where your posting style hasn't helped you. Morally it does NOT depend upon the laws of the land. That is the point most of the people disagreeing with you have been trying to make. I was asking about whether it was wrong - and you reply about legality. When Declan challenged you on this you stuck with legality. Legality does not equal morality - that is the main point being made, and the one where you seem to be still arguing. As I post above - if you agree with 1) why are you going on about 2)? But surely morality is subjective. We as a nation with a higher legal age would find it morally wrong to have sex with a 13 year old, but those in other countries would not necessarily see it as morally wrong. Are we any less morally corrupt as those countries when compared to countries with a age of consent higher than ours? At the end of the day its the law that sends you to prison not morals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
localyokel Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 But surely morality is subjective. We as a nation with a higher legal age would find it morally wrong to have sex with a 13 year old, but those in other countries would not necessarily see it as morally wrong. Not at all. I'm sure even in those countries where the age of consent is low most residents would find a 44 year old having sex with a 13 year old morally wrong. Legal or not. Will you please stop embarrassing yourself by trying to prove you are right when everyone (except Sebrof) has shown categorically that you are totally wrong. At the end of the day its the law that sends you to prison not morals. Sounds like an odd defense to me. She was entirely legal in the country in which I was based m'lud. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MilitantDogOwner Posted October 13, 2009 Share Posted October 13, 2009 But surely morality is subjective. We as a nation with a higher legal age would find it morally wrong to have sex with a 13 year old, but those in other countries would not necessarily see it as morally wrong. Not at all. I'm sure even in those countries where the age of consent is low most residents would find a 44 year old having sex with a 13 year old morally wrong. Legal or not. Will you please stop embarrassing yourself by trying to prove you are right when everyone (except Sebrof) has shown categorically that you are totally wrong. At the end of the day its the law that sends you to prison not morals. Sounds like an odd defense to me. She was entirely legal in the country in which she and I had sex. Fixed. Not right but legal. I have not been proven wrong at all. Your just not listening to what I've been trying to say, just seeing what you want to see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.