Publicly denouncing pedophiles - General

[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;16799338]Okie dokie then. Why exactly should society not accept something that doesn't harm anyone and isn't chosen? Or perhaps not accept, but simply remain indifferent to.[/QUOTE] You don't seem to understand the issue. If they do not harm anyone and do not behave like a pedophile, society couldn't condemn them even if they wanted to. If someone starts parading around calling themselves a pedophile, responsible or otherwise, society is going to metaphysically fuck them up. Because that's fucked up and entirely irresponsible. If someone doesn't hurt anyone and doesn't display the behaviors of a pedophile, they AREN'T a pedophile in the eyes of society and public perception. Pedophilia isn't seen as a condition or a preference, it is seen as a set of behaviors, like rape and murder are. If you do not kill someone, you are not a murderer, even if you COULD be a murderer. If you do not rape someone, you are not a rapist, even if you imagined it. If you do not engage in pedophilia or parade around it, in the eyes of society you are not a pedophile. [editline]04:29PM[/editline] The point is society can only hate on a pedophile if they are exposed as a pedophile, and the only way for that to happen is if they do something a pedophile would do. Like saying "dat ass" to a 2 month old. I assumed you of all people would understand this simple concept given I have explained it three times.

[QUOTE=Lankist;16799431]You don't seem to understand the issue. If they do not harm anyone and do not behave like a pedophile, society couldn't condemn them even if they wanted to. If someone starts parading around calling themselves a pedophile, responsible or otherwise, society is going to metaphysically fuck them up. Because that's fucked up and entirely irresponsible. If someone doesn't hurt anyone and doesn't display the behaviors of a pedophile, they AREN'T a pedophile in the eyes of society and public perception. Pedophilia isn't seen as a condition or a preference, it is seen as a set of behaviors, like rape and murder are. If you do not kill someone, you are not a murderer, even if you COULD be a murderer. If you do not rape someone, you are not a rapist, even if you imagined it. If you do not engage in pedophilia or parade around it, in the eyes of society you are not a pedophile. [editline]04:29PM[/editline] The point is society can only hate on a pedophile if they are exposed as a pedophile, and the only way for that to happen is if they do something a pedophile would do. Like saying "dat ass" to a 2 month old.[/QUOTE] Thank you for clarifying, your argument makes much more sense.

[QUOTE=Lankist;16799431]You don't seem to understand the issue. If they do not harm anyone and do not behave like a pedophile, society couldn't condemn them even if they wanted to. If someone starts parading around calling themselves a pedophile, responsible or otherwise, society is going to metaphysically fuck them up. Because that's fucked up and entirely irresponsible. If someone doesn't hurt anyone and doesn't display the behaviors of a pedophile, they AREN'T a pedophile in the eyes of society and public perception. Pedophilia isn't seen as a condition or a preference, it is seen as a set of behaviors, like rape and murder are. If you do not kill someone, you are not a murderer, even if you COULD be a murderer. If you do not rape someone, you are not a rapist, even if you imagined it. If you do not engage in pedophilia, in the eyes of society you are not a pedophile.[/QUOTE] I may not understand the issue, because it seems from what you're saying to be a semantic issue we're arguing. Pedophilia is not an act. Saying, "I'm a murderer because I want to kill someone, but I won't," doesn't make sense. Murder is an act. You could say truthfully, however, that "I am a pedophile because I am sexually attracted to children, even though I'd never possess child pornography or have sex with a minor because it violates their rights." Pedophilia is an attraction to children, not the act of having sex with them. If the public doesn't understand that the public is generally retarded. A person who has sex with children, or willing possesses child pornography is a pedophile, a criminal, and a general fuckstick, but a pedophile is not necessarily a sexual predator.

I think that some of you doesn't understand the basic meaning of the words "pedophile" and "child predator". Pedophile = A person who is sexually attracted to kids. May or may not want to rape them, depending on weather they are sane or not. Child Predator = A pedophile that has decided to have sex with kids. Should pedophiles who do not rape kids really be complete social outcasts and jailed because of something they have no control over, when they are choosing the morally right thing, that is not raping children? And on the issue of lolicon, it's much better that they watch the drawn shit than actually watch the ones where the children are being raped. EDIT: After reading your latest post, Lankist, I understand what you mean. So you can disregard this.

I am speaking purely from a societal standpoint. I said that at least four times. Your argument is nonsensical and you clearly aren't reading the words I write. You can't be condemned if nobody knows you are a technical pedophile.

[QUOTE=Lankist;16799431]The point is society can only hate on a pedophile if they are exposed as a pedophile, and the only way for that to happen is if they do something a pedophile would do. Like saying "dat ass" to a 2 month old.[/QUOTE] I do believe I agreed with that eons ago.

[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;16799624]I do believe I agreed with that eons ago.[/QUOTE] Then why the fuck are you still arguing? If the only way for society to hate someone for being a pedophile is if they ACT like a pedophile, all of your semantics and differentiations are null and void. You're basically arguing "don't hate on pedophiles who you do not know are pedophiles." Like anyone is implying you go up to a stranger and say "If you're a pedophile I fucking hate you"

[QUOTE=Lankist;16799640]Then why the fuck are you still arguing? If the only way for society to hate someone for being a pedophile is if they ACT like a pedophile, all of your semantics and differentiations are null and void. You're basically arguing "don't hate on pedophiles who you do not know are pedophiles." Like anyone is implying you go up to a stranger and say "If you're a pedophile I fucking hate you"[/QUOTE] Dammit, just saying, "Society should condemn pedophilia in general because they can't do shit about pedophiles who don't do anything illegal anyway," would have cleared this up. Jesus. You're not always a paragon of concision, are you Lankist? Oh boy. Concision is quite a fun word to use.

I think we can all agree that pedophilia is NOT wrong, morally and naturally. But sex with children is definitely is illegal so don't do it. [editline]10:24PM[/editline] [QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;16799644]"Society should condemn pedophilia in general because they can't do shit about pedophiles who don't do anything illegal anyway" [/QUOTE] You know I actually disagree with that, I don't think pedophilia should be condemned just because it's illegal, it should be accepted as much as any other sexual orientation is accepted. Being a sexual predator of children however, should be portrayed as a wrong act. But not pedophilia. Imagine we're living in a country where homosexuality is viewed the same way pedophilia is viewed today, it's illegal and any homosexuals are treated like scum. Do you think it would be right to portray homosexuality as immoral and condemn it, just because it's illegal?

[QUOTE=<3 Riutse <3;16800370]You know I actually disagree with that, I don't think pedophilia should be condemned just because it's illegal, it should be accepted as much as any other sexual orientation is accepted. Being a sexual predator of children however, should be portrayed as a wrong act. But not pedophilia. Imagine we're living in a country where homosexuality is viewed the same way pedophilia is viewed today, it's illegal and any homosexuals are treated like scum. Do you think it would be right to portray homosexuality as immoral and condemn it, just because it's illegal?[/QUOTE] That doesn't make sense. The whole reason pedophilia is illegal is BECAUSE society condemns it. Society can't reasonably embrace something it outlaws.

[QUOTE=<3 Riutse <3;16800370]I think we can all agree that pedophilia is NOT wrong, morally and naturally. But sex with children is definitely is illegal so don't do it. [editline]10:24PM[/editline] You know I actually disagree with that, I don't think pedophilia should be condemned just because it's illegal, it should be accepted as much as any other sexual orientation is accepted. Being a sexual predator of children however, should be portrayed as a wrong act. But not pedophilia. Imagine we're living in a country where homosexuality is viewed the same way pedophilia is viewed today, it's illegal and any homosexuals are treated like scum. Do you think it would be right to portray homosexuality as immoral and condemn it, just because it's illegal?[/QUOTE] Homosexuality and pedophilia are two different things. child predators are quite wrong. Morally, naturally and many other -ally's. Actually, ignore the last sentence.

[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;16800638]That doesn't make sense. The whole reason pedophilia is illegal is BECAUSE society condemns it. Society can't reasonably embrace something it outlaws.[/QUOTE] It's illegal because society condemns it, but that doesn't make it morally wrong however. [editline]10:33PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Dr Nick;16800658]Pedophilia is quite wrong. Morally, naturally and many other -ally's.[/QUOTE] How so?

[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;16799644]Dammit, just saying, "Society should condemn pedophilia in general because they can't do shit about pedophiles who don't do anything illegal anyway," would have cleared this up. Jesus. You're not always a paragon of concision, are you Lankist? Oh boy. Concision is quite a fun word to use.[/QUOTE] On the other hand, you can't stop a person from thinking things. If we lock people up for just imagining things like this, we might as well lock the entire world up for things they've thought about. There is no person in the world who hasn't thought of doing something extremely illegal in their life.

[QUOTE=<3 Riutse <3;16800736]It's illegal because society condemns it, but that doesn't make it morally wrong however.[/QUOTE] Define morally wrong. I don't think anything is objectively immoral. There are things I an most others just aren't gonna fucking tolerate, however, and fucking kids is one of them unless you're using pedophilia to mean simply being sexually aroused by children, but even then Lankist's argument comes into play. Just because something isn't objectively immoral doesn't mean we have to embrace it. [editline]05:35PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Dr Nick;16800786]On the other hand, you can't stop a person from thinking things. If we lock people up for just imagining things like this, we might as well lock the entire world up for things they've thought about. There is no person in the world who hasn't thought of doing something extremely illegal in their life.[/QUOTE] That's precisely not what we're talking about.

[QUOTE=<3 Riutse <3;16800370]I think we can all agree that pedophilia is NOT wrong, morally and naturally.[/QUOTE] That's up for debate. :smug:

I'm not condoning paedophilia, but I personally think that paedos just never grow up and continue fancying people from their age when they were 12 or whatever.

[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;16800814]Define morally wrong.[/quote] What I mean is it is neither wrong, nor is it right, morally. [quote]unless you're using pedophilia to mean simply being sexually aroused by children, but even then Lankist's argument comes into play.[/quote] Lankist's argument applies to pedophiles, but not pedophilia. Pedophiles, the people, will be fine as long as they just shut up and don't show any signs of being a pedophile. Pedophilia, the sexual attraction to children however is a different thing, pedophilia does not hurt anyone, pedophiles acting upon their urges hurt people. It would be akin to conemning to heterosexuality because a couple of heterosexuals go around raping women, or homosexuality because a couple of men go around raping men. Pedophilia should not be condemned, just treated the same as other fringe sexualities, child predators should however be condemned. [quote]Just because something isn't objectively immoral doesn't mean we have to embrace it.[/quote] It also doesn't mean mean we have to condemn it either.

[QUOTE=Lankist;16794794] that's like saying psychopaths are fine as long as they don't murder people. They're still fucking dangerous[/QUOTE] Quick, someone's having Impure Thoughts, call the Thought Police ! :allears: What a retarded argument. [editline]10:47PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Dr Nick;16800658] Pedophilia is quite wrong. Morally, naturally and many other -ally's.[/QUOTE] By whose morals. How so naturally ?

[QUOTE=<3 Riutse <3;16800736]How so?[/QUOTE] Sorry, I should clear it up. I agree with you that child predators are bad. Pedophilia, not so bad so long as it doesn't hurt a person.

[QUOTE=jcallan;16801073]Quick, someone's having Impure Thoughts, call the Thought Police ! :allears: What a retarded argument.[/QUOTE] It's cool because you can't read.

[QUOTE=jcallan;16801073]By whose morals. How so naturally ?[/QUOTE] Morals are like fingerprints.

[QUOTE=Dr Nick;16801439]Morals are like fingerprints.[/QUOTE] They can be used to identify you as being at a crime scene?

[QUOTE=Gmod4ever;16801950]They can be used to identify you as being at a crime scene?[/QUOTE] Funny, but no. They are different for everyone.

[QUOTE=Dr Nick;16801967]Funny, but no. They are different for everyone.[/QUOTE] I know. :v: Also, this thread was very amusing to read. At least the Lankist and co vs JohnnyMo and co. Good game, my good sirs. :golfclap:

[QUOTE=Lankist;16799050]So you think it would be a good idea to socially accept wanna-murder and wanna-rape and wanna-steal as long as they don't murder rape and steal? [/QUOTE] Yes. How would it not be acceptable? They haven't done anything. THOUGH POLICE [editline]11:44PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Lankist;16801343]It's cool because you can't read.[/QUOTE] I know, I just recognize the smells of the letters on my screen and reply appropriately.

[QUOTE=jcallan;16802394]Yes. How would it not be acceptable? They haven't done anything. THOUGH POLICE[/QUOTE] l2r the thread

Lankist, you're acting like every pedophile either rapes children (child predator) or wants to but holds back. What about pedophiles that are not inclined to rape children? What's wrong with it then?

[QUOTE=cmanatlan;16805720]Lankist, you're acting like every pedophile either rapes children (child predator) or wants to but holds back. What about pedophiles that are not inclined to rape children? What's wrong with it then?[/QUOTE] uhh, no he's not

[QUOTE=cmanatlan;16805720]Lankist, you're acting like every pedophile either rapes children (child predator) or wants to but holds back. What about pedophiles that are not inclined to rape children? What's wrong with it then?[/QUOTE] Uhh, if you don't want to have sex with children you are not a pedophile. Read the thread, buddy, we've been through this.

You can want to have sex with them, but not want to rape them. If you are hetero, you want to have sex with the opposite sex, but you don't necessarily want to rape them. Being homo is the same thing but with the same sex. What if you were a heterosexual that no one wanted to have sex with, and you never raped anyone. Are "not a heterosexual"? No, you'd still be hetero.