Right, I'm going to settle this once and for all. ****EXTREME TRIGGER***

Discussion in 'I Have a Question...' started by ybt, Jan 23, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. ybt

    ybt Guest

    OK.

    As I'm Under Moderation (due to a stupid decision by an admin, suprise suprise), my posts need to be 'approved'. I'm not against the decision to make the board pro life, or a lot of the rules, because I know they're necessary.

    However. I have been supporing paedophilia, trying to list my points in a logical manner, because I want both sides to be heard.

    My posts have not been approved about that. The reason is that they say they would get in trouble with the law.

    Yes, because of my opinion. I, of course, think this is bollocks. As a forum, you CAN'T get in trouble because of a member's OPINION. I keep saying this, but they refuse to tell me what specifically would get them in trouble, where it specifically says this. They haven't given me a straight answer yet. I've been asking this for months.

    So I'm asking you. How will an opinion by a member on a forum get the entire website in trouble? Where does it say this? Because I'm fucking tired not having my well thought out posts censored for stupid - nay - intolerable reasons. People are attacking paedophiles, and I want this propaganda to stop effective immediately.

    And don't move this to the Soap Box. It's in the Uncertainty Principle because I'm genuinely asking the rest of the forum, the members of the forum.
     
  2. Sarah

    Sarah SF Friend & Antiquitie's Friend Staff Alumni

    Re: Right, I'm going to settle this once and for all.

    This is a website not a usergroup. Websites can be taken down and the owners can prosecuted. This would be virtually impossible with usergroups however individual users can still be prosecuted for any illegal content on such groups. i have seen this happen. we will never promote nor will we allow messages promoting illegal content on this site especially when it comes to harming children. i understand that a pedophile may not be able to help being attracted to children and we will not discriminate against a member if they are a pedophile. even they need support. However acting on that attraction or posting messages promoting pedophilia is different. we have told you many times we will never allow these messages yet you continue to post them. needless to say we will not allow youre messages harm other members or this sites existance. you can post whatever you would like however no other members will see any of youre posts that we feel are immoral or illegal. youre posts will continue to be moderated.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 23, 2008
  3. Petal

    Petal SF dreamer Staff Alumni SF Supporter

    Re: Right, I'm going to settle this once and for all.

    weird
     
  4. Petal

    Petal SF dreamer Staff Alumni SF Supporter

    Re: Right, I'm going to settle this once and for all.

    paedophiles should be shot dead, so therefore they are right to remove posts regarding ''the supporting of paedophiles'' after all many people on this forum have a strong hatred for paedophiles. in my opinion such posts should not be approved.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 23, 2008
  5. BlackPegasus

    BlackPegasus Well-Known Member

    Re: Right, I'm going to settle this once and for all.

    You're asking the rest of the forum so as a member of the rest of the forum...hell no!!!!!!! There should be no supporting of pedophiles on here because they cause harm to innocent children. Get treatment elsewhere if you need it. Not on a forum where many of us have been molested/raped/abused. We need a place to feel safe from such individuals and seeing such a thing defended..well that wouldn't make this forum a safe place of support.
     
  6. Robin

    Robin Guest

    Re: Right, I'm going to settle this once and for all.

    I have this lurking suspicion that you are confusing underage sex with pedophilia, I could be wrong of course, how old would be too young for you?
     
  7. Alastair

    Alastair Well-Known Member

    Re: Right, I'm going to settle this once and for all.

    yeeeah, i gotta go with the underdog for the moment...untill i've seen both sides
     
  8. BlackPegasus

    BlackPegasus Well-Known Member

    Re: Right, I'm going to settle this once and for all.

    Let me guess..the usual claim that's it's consensual? The child who does not fully understand sexual relations desires it? BS!! They have no clue what's really going on.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 23, 2008
  9. Alastair

    Alastair Well-Known Member

    Re: Right, I'm going to settle this once and for all.

    if they werent shielded from sex...maybe they would?
     
  10. BlackPegasus

    BlackPegasus Well-Known Member

    Re: Right, I'm going to settle this once and for all.

    That was just too much............trigger, trigger, trigger........

    Edit NVM
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 23, 2008
  11. Only1?

    Only1? Active Member

    Re: Right, I'm going to settle this once and for all.

    WTF does that mean! The whole fuckin point of your childhood is that you are shielded from all the shit life throws at us, and certainly some fucked up individual who cant control themselves with regards to their sexuality. I cannot believe there is any tolerance for paedophiles in this world. They are the worst kind of predator and If I were ever faced with that again towards my own children I would not hesitate to let them know just how much I despise them.

    The law is too civilised for them, there should be a separate more severe law just for that group.
     
  12. BlackPegasus

    BlackPegasus Well-Known Member

    Re: Right, I'm going to settle this once and for all.

    :cry: mosnters. worthless monsters!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Abuser. rapest, predators, molestors.worthless all. I knew it! it's not safe anywhere.
     
  13. ybt

    ybt Guest

    Re: Right, I'm going to settle this once and for all.

    Sarah: My question is asking where it is written, or whatever clause there is, that a website can get into legal problems.

    lynn: "in my opinion such posts should not be approved." - Religion is also a strong issue on this forum that many members feel bad about, but *that* is still approved.

    Robin & others: "I have this lurking suspicion that you are confusing underage sex with pedophilia, I could be wrong of course, how old would be too young for you?"

    This is my definition of paedophilia. I have a suspicion that it's a translation problem. A consensual relationship (CONSENSUAL, NOT rape. Big difference. I do not condone rape.) between an 'adult' and a 'child'. Obviously, abuse and rape, are not the same thing. And I wish people would stop calling this position evil. I know some people on this forum have been raped. My sympathies for them, it's a terrible thing, but because of this people always assume the worst. So I've been trying to clear this up, and here it is.

    I understand if, as a privately run forum, certain things are against the rules because of personal values. This is fine. Really. A business has the right to do what they want in how they conduct their business, because if you don't like it you can go elsewhere. However, there's another big difference, in that management has said it deals with the LAW. Freedom of speech is an inalienable right, and that's why I say a forum can't possibly get into trouble because of somebody's opinion, and if that you are TRULY worried that this will happen, post a disclaimer, like every other site has, not just usergroups. "The views of the members of the site are not necessarily the views of that of the site."

    If there's a real reason why I'm wrong here in legal terms, please let me know, that's exactly what I'm looking for.

    Again, I want to stress something. Relationships such as this are NOT the same as rape. I do not approve of rape. Nor am I at all attracted to children. You don't have to be one to stand up for one. And the reason I stand up for this is because a) I don't believe it to be 'sick', and b) those people with that sexual orientation (again, why is it acceptable to discriminate against them, and not homosexuals? Not that I'm against homosexual persons, either.) are severely persecuted, as anyone can see abundantly from this website. And also, c) I don't believe that it comes with emotional distress because of the age necessarily. If a person did not want the sexual relationship at that time, it's rape, and should be judged as such, but leave age out of it.

    You can't help what you are. Illegal does not equal to immoral automatically.
     
  14. Petal

    Petal SF dreamer Staff Alumni SF Supporter

    Re: Right, I'm going to settle this once and for all.

    is this post some sort of a sick joke???:mad:
     
  15. Petal

    Petal SF dreamer Staff Alumni SF Supporter

    Re: Right, I'm going to settle this once and for all.

    moderators, please delete this thread...........
     
  16. ybt

    ybt Guest

    Re: Right, I'm going to settle this once and for all.

    PS, after Pegasus's replies, I realize that the thread should really have a trigger warning, so if a mod could edit the title...
     
  17. Alastair

    Alastair Well-Known Member

    Re: Right, I'm going to settle this once and for all.

    i didnt get to see the original convo...i had thought they were refering to teenagers

    http://abcnews.go.com/Primetime/LegalCenter/Story?id=1693362

    17 year old kid gets 10 Fucking Years!! for receiving a consensual blowjob from a 15 year old...

    are you familiar with the old robot saying...does not compute?

    if there is some important detail i missed please inform me
     
  18. Terry

    Terry Antiquities Friend Staff Alumni

    I'm going to lock this thread until I've had time to check back with Robin.

    This is obviously upsetting people.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.