• Government threatens bakery for refusing to bake cake for lesbian wedding
    165 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Stroma;41923633]i don't support child rape, and if i remember correctly i've stated that already. i don't support molestation of children, but i would endorse [b]consensual[/b] sex with somebody not of the age of consent. the fact you're getting "agrees" is actually pretty sad[/QUOTE] except technically speaking consent cannot be legally given by someone under the age of consent so all sex underage is nonconsensual!!!
[QUOTE=3picFail;41923624]I know his popularity has pull here, but his comments are baseless and unnecessary. Maybe flaming isn't the right word, but that justifies nothing.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Stroma;41923633]i don't support child rape, and if i remember correctly i've stated that already. i don't support molestation of children, but i would endorse [B]consensual[/B] sex with somebody not of the age of consent. the fact you're getting "agrees" is actually pretty sad[/QUOTE] yes so baseless [editline]22nd August 2013[/editline] 'consensual sex with someone who is unable to give consent' is basically what you just said stroma
[QUOTE=Stroma;41923633]i don't support child rape, and if i remember correctly i've stated that already. i don't support molestation of children, but i would endorse [b]consensual[/b] sex with somebody not of the age of consent. the fact you're getting "agrees" is actually pretty sad[/QUOTE] There is literally no such thing as consensual sex with a child, because children are not emotionally or physically developed enough to make sound decisions on the subject. You may as well be arguing that date rape drugs are on the up-and-up.
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;41923592] Except he pretty specifically spoke out in favor of molesting children, so...! Yeah, I'm poking fun. I'm being absurd to reveal absurdity. What Stroma said is straight borked, and I think some exposition might be in order![/QUOTE] In favor of isn't the right description of what he's doing. Indeed his arguement for his standpoint is absurd, and his hypothetical was outrageous, but he hasn't spoken in favor of pedophilia. He said that not all underage sex is inconsensual. Again, its absurd, but people are nitpicking what he said in this thread and are needlessly demonizing him and its throwing this thread off track.
[QUOTE=Lachz0r;41923653]yes so baseless [editline]22nd August 2013[/editline] 'consensual sex with someone who is unable to give consent' is basically what you just said stroma[/QUOTE] [quote] Consent refers to the provision of approval or agreement, particularly and especially after thoughtful consideration.[/quote] in a legal sense, no, they cannot give consent; however, i'm speaking in a literal sense. as long as they can agree, they can consent.
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katzenbach_v._McClung[/url] [QUOTE]Katzenbach v. McClung, 379 U.S. 294 (1964), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that Congress acted within its power under the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution in forbidding racial discrimination in restaurants as this was a burden to interstate commerce.[/QUOTE] I would imagine this is analogous
[QUOTE=Stroma;41923681]in a legal sense, no, they cannot give consent; however, i'm speaking in a literal sense. as long as they can agree, they can consent.[/QUOTE] "hey toddler say yes" -- kiddy diddler "y..yes???" -- toddler congrats according to you that toddler just gave informed consent to sex thats totally not how consent works and you're weird for even thinking that thats how consent works
[QUOTE=Stroma;41923681]in a legal sense, no, they cannot give consent; however, i'm speaking in a literal sense. as long as they can agree, they can consent.[/QUOTE] in the legal sense, moral sense, intellectual sense, basically every other sense except the literal one. and that's why we have consent laws to defend children who yes, can literally consent but no cannot legally morally or intellectually consent
[QUOTE=Lachz0r;41923653]yes so baseless 'consensual sex with someone who is unable to give consent' is basically what you just said stroma[/QUOTE] Doesn't mean he supports pedophilia. He said that he supports consensual sex. Generally, By definition of law, minors cannot consent, but that does not mean he supports pedophilia.
[QUOTE=3picFail;41923707]Doesn't mean he supports pedophilia. He said that he supports consensual sex. Generally, By definition of law, minors cannot consent, but that does not mean he supports pedophilia.[/QUOTE] for non consensual sex to occur, its either 1. rape -- which is bad 2. kiddy diddling -- which is also bad
Not to derail the thread any more than it already is, but does anyone remember this situation? [url]http://www.nbcnews.com/id/28269290/ns/us_news-weird_news/t/-year-old-hitler-cant-get-name-cake/#.UhV-ZpL2qAA[/url] Man orders cake from store, asks that "Happy Birthday Adolf Hitler" be written on top in icing. His son was named Adolf Hitler. The store refused to write the name of the child on the cake. Does the store have the right to refuse service on moral grounds? How about a hypothetical? I do not hate Orthodox Jews, but I disagree with the practice of circumcision on baby boys. An Orthodox Jew walks into my bakery asking for a cake with the words "Happy Circumcision, Baby Yehuda!" I tell the man that I cannot make the cake for him, but am willing to direct him to a store that will. He wants to know why. I tell him why. He calls me a Jew hater then blows a racially/religiously charged whistle. The State mandates that I make the cake, else bad things will happen. Now I, the shop owner, am no longer authorized to decide which jobs I do or do not take. I'm not suggesting that you approve of the store owner's decision (ironic, no?), but that you at least respect (tolerate) their decision.
[QUOTE=Blind Lulu;41923694]Oh and apparently he doesn't support underage sex even though he does... I don't even know anymore. Make up your mind Stroma.[/QUOTE] i support sex between two consenting persons, and i've made that clear throughout the thread. i havent said differently; only that i don't support child marriage.
[QUOTE=Lachz0r;41923638]way to quote the wrong post, he literally agreed with me anyway so i don't think he needs you to protect him from big bad american[/QUOTE] Please quote the post in which he explicitly says that he supports pedophilia. Yes, I realize that he said that consensual sex regardless of age is okay, but that does not mean he endorses fucking children.
[QUOTE=3picFail;41923707]Doesn't mean he supports pedophilia. He said that he supports consensual sex. Generally, By definition of law, minors cannot consent, but that does not mean he supports pedophilia.[/QUOTE] have you been reading his posts? he literally mentioned paedophilia, then when confronted about the stupidity of comparing paedophilia to homosexuality he said 'well whats the difference between gay sex and sex with a minor?' read between the lines idiot [editline]22nd August 2013[/editline] he hasn't explicitly said it because if he did he'd be banned
They refused to bake a cake, that is all. Go to another shop, tell people they discriminate and move on, but no, the government wants to hold hands and force people and make it law on how business should be run. Look at the A.D.A. people many people with disabilities loathe the A.D.A. because it forces people to be nice to them and hold their hand and get free passes.
[QUOTE=lolz3;41923758]They refused to bake a cake, that is all. Go to another shop, tell people they discriminate and move on, but no, the government wants to hold hands and force people and make it law on how business should be run. Look at the A.D.A. people many people with disabilities loathe the A.D.A. because it forces people to be nice to them and hold their hand and get free passes.[/QUOTE] they refused to bake a cake based on discrimination. discrimination is harmful, it's a governments job to defend it's citizens
[QUOTE=3picFail;41923680]In favor of isn't the right description of what he's doing. Indeed his arguement for his standpoint is absurd, and his hypothetical was outrageous, but he hasn't spoken in favor of pedophilia. He said that not all underage sex is inconsensual. Again, its absurd, but people are nitpicking what he said in this thread and are needlessly demonizing him and its throwing this thread off track.[/QUOTE] Stroma is attempting to use the example to defend his stance on the core subject of the thread, and if he wasn't prepared to defend the example then he shouldn't have put it on the table. This track of conversation is on-topic, and our "needless demonization" (IE- refuting his shoddy examples) of him is relevant because of it. Frankly, the only person here who is actively disrupting the topic of discussion is [I]you,[/I] with your silly high-horse forum vigilantism.
i love it when people who aren't part of discriminated minorities just tell the minorities to deal with it and go somewhere else. because that's totally not discrimination either
[QUOTE=Blind Lulu;41923750]Well incidentally two adult gays having sex or getting married is consensual. [/QUOTE] very good! nowhere in my post, however, did i say that i don't support gay sex or gay marriage. [QUOTE=Lachz0r;41923734]have you been reading his posts? he literally mentioned paedophilia, then when confronted about the stupidity of comparing paedophilia to homosexuality he said 'well whats the difference between gay sex and sex with a minor?' read between the lines idiot [editline]22nd August 2013[/editline] he hasn't explicitly said it because if he did he'd be banned[/QUOTE] that's an interesting opinion. i haven't explicitly said it because it's not what i meant. i honestly thought i'd have gotten banned for my current posts, so that's not the reason.
well if it's any consolation, at the very least you're supporting statutory rape so you're still awful
[QUOTE=LordCrypto;41923711]for non consensual sex to occur, its either 1. rape -- which is bad 2. kiddy diddling -- which is also bad[/QUOTE] He disagrees with the aspect of law that minors cannot consent. But consider the fact that states provide leeway for this. For example, in some places in America, at the age of 17, with the written consent of the parents of two individual minors allows for relationships between said individuals to be legal, as long as the indivduals consent. Also, relationships between an adult an a minor within a resonableage limit is legal (ie an 18 year old and a 17 year old) as long as the minor is completely consensual. And you can't tell me that you wouldn't have sex as a minor. Law bares that sex between two minors is illegal. You'd still do it.
[QUOTE=Lachz0r;41923787]well if it's any consolation, at the very least you're supporting statutory rape so you're still awful[/QUOTE] indeed, i do, but it's a good thing statutory rape isn't actual rape, because the minors consented to sex in that case, where rape is sex that was not consented to.
[QUOTE=Stroma;41923815]indeed, i do, but it's a good thing statutory rape isn't actual rape.[/QUOTE] gabba gabba hey everybody!
[QUOTE=lolz3;41923758]They refused to bake a cake, that is all. Go to another shop, tell people they discriminate and move on, but no, the government wants to hold hands and force people and make it law on how business should be run. Look at the A.D.A. people many people with disabilities loathe the A.D.A. because it forces people to be nice to them and hold their hand and get free passes.[/QUOTE] that is nothing like the ada is 3 sections are basically just "civic entities have to allow and accommodate disabled persons; public accommodations have to to allow and accommodate disabled persons; telecom for disabled persons" there is not free pass anywhere
[QUOTE=3picFail;41923808]He disagrees with the aspect of law that minors cannot consent. But consider the fact that states provide leeway for this. For example, in some places in America, at the age of 17, with the written consent of the parents of two individual minors allows for relationships between said individuals to be legal, as long as the indivduals consent. Also, relationships between an adult an a minor within a resonableage limit is legal (ie an 18 year old and a 17 year old) as long as the minor is completely consensual. And you can't tell me that you wouldn't have sex as a minor. Law bares that sex between two minors is illegal. You'd still do it.[/QUOTE] You are just tripping all yourself, aren't you? In the same post, you stated that the law allows for people within a similar age group to engage in relationships, [I]and[/I] that it does not. Nobody here is talking about sex between minors anyway; this example is pointless and irrelevant. "It is illegal to have sex with an elephant." "Yes, but it's not illegal for two elephants to have sex! Aha! Gotcha!"
[QUOTE=Lachz0r;41923821]gabba gabba hey everybody![/QUOTE] this thread is already vastly off topic without your shitposting
[QUOTE=Stroma;41923815]indeed, i do, but it's a good thing statutory rape isn't actual rape, because the minors consented to sex in that case, where rape is sex that was not consented to.[/QUOTE] Haha, holy crow. So you're basically just broken, right? You claim that you don't in any way support pedophilia or sex with minors, but also that you do, and that even though they can't give consent to sex, they also can, and that even if they can't then they should, because rape isn't actually rape. Did somebody forget to update your drivers, or something? You got a corrupt file in your brain?
[QUOTE=Stroma;41923815]indeed, i do, but it's a good thing statutory rape isn't actual rape, because the minors consented to sex in that case, where rape is sex that was not consented to.[/QUOTE] its not talking about literal consent its legal consent "Although it usually refers to adults engaging in sex with minors under the [B]age of consent[/B]"
[QUOTE=Lachz0r;41923734]have you been reading his posts? he literally mentioned paedophilia, then when confronted about the stupidity of comparing paedophilia to homosexuality he said 'well whats the difference between gay sex and sex with a minor?' read between the lines idiot [editline]22nd August 2013[/editline] he hasn't explicitly said it because if he did he'd be banned[/QUOTE] "he mentioned pedophilia" God forbid "whats the difference between gay sex and sex with a minor. His point was they are both sex. And don't mention statuatory rape, he's working from a technical (but absurd) standpoint. For the record, I am addressing the fact that people are focusing on his mentioning of pedophilia. Once again I will say that what he said was stupid, but way too many people are focusing on that instead of his arguement. [QUOTE=Blind Lulu;41923665]Basically to sum up Stroma's opinion, Business rights > Protecting people from discrimination. [/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;41923874]Haha, holy crow. So you're basically just broken, right? You claim that you don't in any way support pedophilia or sex with minors, but also that you do, and that even though they can't give consent to sex, they also can, and that even if they can't then they should, because rape isn't actually rape. Did somebody forget to update your drivers, or something? You got a corrupt file in your brain?[/QUOTE] i support sex between two people if they consent, regardless of age. in some cases, this would be considered statutory rape, so in a sense i do support it.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.