Sebrof Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 So if the charges are dropped does that mean drugging a minor for sodomy is acceptable? You know, talking about facts... Come now, PK. Let us not be disingenuous. A person has made an allegation, which another person has denied. We may have our suspicions, but we don't have FACTS. The dropping of the charges has nothing to do with whether the alleged behaviour is acceptable or not. Drugging women in order to have sex with them is wrong however old or young they are. These are two entirely different things, but I suspect you knew that. S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thesultanofsheight Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 So if the charges are dropped does that mean drugging a minor for sodomy is acceptable?. I think he's just reinforcing the views and feelings of all the other Polanski supporters http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/...s-Thailand.html Odd morality when your trying to rationalise and justify what he did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 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? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sebrof Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 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? Reprehensible. But not in the same class as the care-home workers I alluded to earlier. S ETA: http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/art...abuse-horror.do Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 Maybe not in the same class - if it was consensual - but various politicians, celebrities etc aren't saying that it is ok for the care-home workers to abscond and escape from the judicial consequences of their actions. But if the facts are as stated - drugged, continued after she said no, sodomized after she said no, has a history of such actions - then I do not think there is any large difference between Polanski and the care-worker. Extensively Edited. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.K. Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 Come now, PK. Let us not be disingenuous. A person has made an allegation, which another person has denied. We may have our suspicions, but we don't have FACTS. The dropping of the charges has nothing to do with whether the alleged behaviour is acceptable or not. Drugging women in order to have sex with them is wrong however old or young they are. These are two entirely different things, but I suspect you knew that. You can get your shoulders re-done here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MilitantDogOwner Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sebrof Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 2009 Maybe not in the same class - if it was consensual - but various politicians, celebrities etc aren't saying that it is ok for the care-home workers to abscond and escape from the judicial consequences of their actions. But if the facts are as stated - drugged, continued after she said no, sodomized after she said no, has a history of such actions - then I do not think there is any large difference between Polanski and the care-worker. Extensively Edited. Care to expand on "has a history of such actions". Or are you just repeating tittle-tattle. Saw it on the Internet, so it must be true? And the reason that politicians and "celebrities" (whatever they are) are not sticking up for the care workers is because it's a totally different class of abuse. I'm very surprised you can't see that. S Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Declan Posted October 8, 2009 Share Posted October 8, 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. No it doesn't. Apartheid was the law of the land in South Africa but it was still wrong, the gas chambers were legal in Nazi Europe but wrong. Whether slavery is legal in a particular country or at a particular time doesn't stop it make it right. Some things there is no moral equivalency about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MilitantDogOwner Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 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. No it doesn't. Apartheid was the law of the land in South Africa but it was still wrong, the gas chambers were legal in Nazi Europe but wrong. Whether slavery is legal in a particular country or at a particular time doesn't stop it make it right. Some things there is no moral equivalency about. 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. 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Declan Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 Right & Wrong are not the same as legal & illegal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MilitantDogOwner Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 Right & Wrong are not the same as legal & illegal. Never a truer statement... It might be wrong to sleep with 13 years in some places. But it is not illegal. And at the end of the day its the law that decides if you get put away or not. Maybe if enough people stood up and demanded a change maybe you wouldn't get "paedo tourists" who make a point of travelling to places with a low age of consent so that they can "get away with it". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ans Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 Surely the only country whose laws matter are the ones in which the offence was committed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Declan Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 Right & Wrong are not the same as legal & illegal. Never a truer statement... It might be wrong to sleep with 13 years in some places. But it is not illegal. And at the end of the day its the law that decides if you get put away or not. Maybe if enough people stood up and demanded a change maybe you wouldn't get "paedo tourists" who make a point of travelling to places with a low age of consent so that they can "get away with it". So we've come full circle and I'm left wondering again what point you are making by mention the age of consent in Spain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miss Roo Posted October 9, 2009 Share Posted October 9, 2009 So we've come full circle and I'm left wondering again what point you are making by mention the age of consent in Spain. Exactly! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.