TirithRR wrote:
They showed, uncensored, a man being deboned, skinned, and molded into a sculpture of a human heart.
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Lying Liberals and the webs they weave
Lying Liberals and the webs they weaveFollow
Huh, weird how I'm not watching this.
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
Jophiel wrote:
Well, I was riffing off Gbaji's line there. How it's the worst thing in the world to molest someone who is 13 (to use the definition Gbaji gave) but apparently fairly trivial if they're 14 and you can handwave it away as being "like statutory rape". The fact that statutory rape is his benchmark for "not so bad" is another question entirely.
You're playing with age numbers, and while the legal codes often also include specific ages, the purpose behind them is that we really do make a distinction between a sexual assault where the sexual act might otherwise be "normal" if not for some other factor which makes it assault (victim too immature to grant consent, victim under control/supervision by the perpetrator, or victim forced in some manner into the act), and a sexual act that is not biologically "normal" at all (victim is pre-adolescent in addition to whatever other components of the crime constitute the "assault" part of it).
Our society makes a distinction between sexual attraction to someone who is biologically adult versus sexual attraction to someone who is biologically a child. And that's a good thing. It's also why we make the aforementioned distinction and treat far more harshly sexual crimes against actual biological children versus against biological adults. You can stomp your feet and declare that this isn't fair because it means that someone like Hastert wont be treated the same as someone who diddles 5 year olds, but that's a pretty freaking lame reason to do that. When we flip your position around, you're basically arguing that both should be treated the same. And I suspect that's a pretty unpopular position to take.
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
Once again, have fun trying to defend some GOP fuckup for sexually abusing 14 year old boys and twisting yourself in knots trying to insist that it really isn't so bad.
If noting that is "stomping my feet" then I guess I'm far more comfortable being the one stomping than the alternative party.
If noting that is "stomping my feet" then I guess I'm far more comfortable being the one stomping than the alternative party.
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
gbaji wrote:
Our society makes a distinction between sexual attraction to someone who is biologically adult versus sexual attraction to someone who is biologically a child.
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
Please, Gbaji has made every excuse short of "He was asking for it in that tight wrestling singlet".
The victim whose sister is speaking now says that his life was pretty fucked up by what Hastert did to him. Individual A felt strongly enough about it to punish Hastert by blackmailing him. The FBI has spoken to a third person about it. This wasn't some "statutory rape" scenario where the only thing keeping two happy lovebirds apart was the calendar, this was a predator who used his position in the school to habitually sexually abuse kids.
The victim whose sister is speaking now says that his life was pretty fucked up by what Hastert did to him. Individual A felt strongly enough about it to punish Hastert by blackmailing him. The FBI has spoken to a third person about it. This wasn't some "statutory rape" scenario where the only thing keeping two happy lovebirds apart was the calendar, this was a predator who used his position in the school to habitually sexually abuse kids.
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Yep, it's classic abuse of power.
Just as Planned.
lolgaxe wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Our society makes a distinction between sexual attraction to someone who is biologically adult versus sexual attraction to someone who is biologically a child.
Neither does mine. Joph's society, apparently, intentionally mixes up terminology so that it's unclear whether it was a child who was touched. So less "making excuses" as "helping them hide".
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
If the accusations are correct, this man is criminal scum who deserves to be locked away in prison. Don't you agree?
If they are incorrect then, of course, the issue does not arise.
If they are incorrect then, of course, the issue does not arise.
Timelordwho wrote:
I'm not quite sure that scheming is an emotion.
Jophiel wrote:
Please, Gbaji has made every excuse short of "He was asking for it in that tight wrestling singlet".
The victim whose sister is speaking now says that his life was pretty fucked up by what Hastert did to him. Individual A felt strongly enough about it to punish Hastert by blackmailing him. The FBI has spoken to a third person about it. This wasn't some "statutory rape" scenario where the only thing keeping two happy lovebirds apart was the calendar, this was a predator who used his position in the school to habitually sexually abuse kids.
The victim whose sister is speaking now says that his life was pretty fucked up by what Hastert did to him. Individual A felt strongly enough about it to punish Hastert by blackmailing him. The FBI has spoken to a third person about it. This wasn't some "statutory rape" scenario where the only thing keeping two happy lovebirds apart was the calendar, this was a predator who used his position in the school to habitually sexually abuse kids.
It's not all or nothing Joph. Some of us are capable of condemning Hastert for what he did while not claiming he did something he didn't do. It's not about picking a side here. It's about being accurate about what we accuse him of.
Here's a really simple question for you: Did Hastert engage in child molestation? Yes or no?
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
Kavekkk wrote:
If the accusations are correct, this man is criminal scum who deserves to be locked away in prison. Don't you agree?
Absolutely. Toss him in jail and throw away the key.
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
gbaji wrote:
Here's a really simple question for you: Did Hastert engage in child molestation? Yes or no?
Using the definition of "13 or younger", very possibly given his multiple known victims and the fact that he preyed on them as high school freshmen. If they were all 14 or older, then perhaps not in a strict sense but then if your defense is "they were over the line -- they had a birthday!" I'm still going to consider you the same.
Out of a strict yes or not? I'd feel much more comfortable saying "yes".
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Oh look, gbaji's hiding behind a semantics argument. 
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
Jophiel wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Here's a really simple question for you: Did Hastert engage in child molestation? Yes or no?
Out of a strict yes or not? I'd feel much more comfortable saying "yes".
Aren't we all children in the eyes of the lord?
Dandruffshampoo wrote:
Curses, beaten by Professor stupidopo-opo.
Annabella, Goblin in Disguise wrote:
Stupidmonkey is more organized than a bag of raccoons.
Gbaji wrote:
Did Hastert engage in child molestation? Yes or no?
Probably. Agreeing to pay someone $3.5 million if he hadn't molested him would seem silly otherwise.
Withdrawing the $ in increments that were flagged by the bank & then lying to the FBI about it also implies guilt.
Granted, there's no proof, but it's about as likely as Brady knowing about the deflated footballs or Michael Jackson exposing himself to children. And I'm saying that as a fan of both!
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin
Jophiel wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Here's a really simple question for you: Did Hastert engage in child molestation? Yes or no?
Using the definition of "13 or younger", very possibly given his multiple known victims and the fact that he preyed on them as high school freshmen.
Is it possible to be a freshman in HS at age 13? Barring being advanced a year for some reason, that's not normal. Normal age range is 14-15 during freshman year, ending at 17-18 in senior year. So you're stretching what is already a stretched definition to get the answer you want rather than the one that is more likely to be true.
Quote:
If they were all 14 or older, then perhaps not in a strict sense but then if your defense is "they were over the line -- they had a birthday!" I'm still going to consider you the same.
My position is that child molestation is based on the biological development stage of the victim, not a specific age. So I'm not looking at birthdays. I am, however, allowing for the fact that many of our laws simply look at ages. Hence the "13 or younger" bit. I'm not the one counting birthdays here, the legal system is. You have an issue with that, take it up with the folks who pass the laws.
Quote:
Out of a strict yes or not? I'd feel much more comfortable saying "yes".
Ok. I think you're engaging in an extreme stretch of both the definition and the likely circumstances, but if your comfortable assuming based solely on the information you have about the event in question that Hastert more likely did engage in sexual behavior with a person aged 13 or younger than not, then I guess that your choice.
I think that's a low probability outcome. But hey. Let's wait and see what facts actually come out and find out for sure. Crazy idea, isn't it?
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
Omegavegeta wrote:
Gbaji wrote:
Did Hastert engage in child molestation? Yes or no?
Probably. Agreeing to pay someone $3.5 million if he hadn't molested him would seem silly otherwise.
So how much would he have paid if the victim was say 16 at the time of the sexual assault(s)?
Quote:
Withdrawing the $ in increments that were flagged by the bank & then lying to the FBI about it also implies guilt.
Yup. But not neccessarily of child molestation. He could be guilty of anything at all that he wanted to conceal. Neither you nor I know what he actually did. What we have is information that he paid off one person, and then an allegation from the sister of another person that Hastert assaulted her brother when he was in high school and Hastert was his coach. We're assuming that the first allegation is true and that the pay off money must be to someone else who was assaulted as well.
That's a reasonable speculation, absent additional info. But to leap to "and they must have been under the age of 14 as well!" just seems like a stretch. Isn't sexually assaulting a minor under your care sufficiently "bad"? Why the need to exaggerate the likely actual events?
Quote:
Granted, there's no proof, but it's about as likely as Brady knowing about the deflated footballs or Michael Jackson exposing himself to children. And I'm saying that as a fan of both!
Again. Not disagreeing. Just questioning the label of him as a child molester. So far, I see no evidence that suggests more than an incredibly slim chance that said label actually applies here.
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
A link showing that it's very rare to be 13 in high school? Um...
Quote:
Have fun defending the child molester and twisting yourself in knots pretending that it's not solely because he's a Republican.
I'm not defending anyone. I love how you keep trying to go back to that.
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
He didn't say "very rare" but if that's what you're clinging to at this point... sure. Hell, I had two 17 year olds on my dorm floor when I started college. Hey, pop quiz: what age do you think you are as a high school freshman if you're 17 as a college freshman?
I love how you keep pretending that you're not defending him so I guess we're both getting our needs met by this thread
Edited, Jun 23rd 2015 9:02pm by Jophiel
I love how you keep pretending that you're not defending him so I guess we're both getting our needs met by this thread
Edited, Jun 23rd 2015 9:02pm by Jophiel
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
gbaji wrote:
I was 13 in high school. The cut-off birthdate for starting kindergarten was like September 20 and the school year starts like August 25. So 7% of the population could fall into that span (25/365). Are you able to figure out anything at all, in the world? How do you make it to work in the morning without sticking your hand in the toaster?
Well, here in mid-America they figure your starting year for school based on your birthday. If you are born prior to September 1, you start school that year. If born September 1 or later you wait until the next year. So...13 is the most common age to start 9th grade (freshman).
remorajunbao wrote:
One day I'm going to fly to Canada and open the curtains in your office.
Gbaji knows literally 100 high school freshman and none of them are 13 so no high school freshmen are ever 13 
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Jophiel's posts are always such a pleasure to read.
Just as Planned.
There are a lot of places that set the birthdate cut off as Dec 31st, which means one would start school at 4 and wouldn't turn 5 for up to 4 months.
Donate. One day it could be your family.
An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo
An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo
gbaji wrote:
Neither does mine.
Edited, Jun 24th 2015 9:14am by lolgaxe
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
Recent Visitors: 276
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (276)
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Lying Liberals and the webs they weave
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC