MTG

[Arthur Brain]

Of course you didn't. That's because you think such things are fluid--just like laws. And just like looniness. Homosexuality used to be a type of psychological problem, along with gender disphoria, but instead, you now don't even know whether a woman is female or not.

You tell me which is more nuts.

Oh, it's pretty easy to spot lunacy, it practically advertises itself on the far right in America nowadays. Sure, homosexuality used to be regarded as a psychological disorder 50 and more years ago and then sanity prevailed and it was recognized as normal, no matter how much that might irk the more zealous. So? FTR, I don't think such things are as 'fluid' as you posit either.

 

[Derf]

Oh, it's pretty easy to spot lunacy, it practically advertises itself on the far right in America nowadays. Sure, homosexuality used to be regarded as a psychological disorder 50 and more years ago and then sanity prevailed and it was recognized as normal, no matter how much that might irk the more zealous. So? FTR, I don't think such things are as 'fluid' as you posit either.

Then sexual predation and rape can also, in time, be regarded as normal, yes? I don't even think you will need another 50 years. The penalty for such has already dropped below physical assault.

California doesn't see pedophilia as such a bad thing anymore: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/california-bill-lower-penalties-sexual-relations-with-minor-newsom.

In a world where morality is fluid, justice doesn't exist.

 

[User Name]

Was that an allegation? Are you suggesting an arrest, conviction, and sentencing based on that allegation? What's your point?

Gaetz's associates are smart enough to get away from him before he crashes and burns. Can't say I blame them.

 

[Derf]

Gaetz's associates are smart enough to get away from him before he crashes and burns. Can't say I blame them.

You didn't answer my question. Are you making an allegation, and then expecting someone to resign merely because there was an allegation? And is resignation really enough?

 

[Arthur Brain]

Then sexual predation and rape can also, in time, be regarded as normal, yes? I don't even think you will need another 50 years. The penalty for such has already dropped below physical assault.

California doesn't see pedophilia as such a bad thing anymore: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/california-bill-lower-penalties-sexual-relations-with-minor-newsom.

In a world where morality is fluid, justice doesn't exist.

Um, nope. You're not one of these people who equate the acceptance of homosexuality with a ridiculous slippery slope fallacy where the likes of rape and paedophilia are going to be accepted in society are you?

 

[Arthur Brain]

Then when DO we believe a woman's accusations?

The same as we do with any accusation a man makes, at least for the sane among us. If an accusation has sufficient evidence to corroborate it and it holds up to scrutiny then fine and if it doesn't then do the math. Heck, hardly a gender issue.

 

[Derf]

Um, nope. You're not one of these people who equate the acceptance of homosexuality with a ridiculous slippery slope fallacy where the likes of rape and paedophilia are going to be accepted in society are you?

Nope. I’m one of those that equate homosexuality with evil. No slippery slope needed when you’re already at the bottom.

But repentance is still an option for most.

 

[Arthur Brain]

Nope. I’m one of those that equate homosexuality with evil. No slippery slope needed when you’re already at the bottom.

But repentance is still an option for most.

Well, that's up to you then really although at least you're not so daft as to equate such with society accepting rape and paedophilia because it blatantly wouldn't.

 

[Derf]

Well, that's up to you then really although at least you're not so daft as to equate such with society accepting rape and paedophilia because it blatantly wouldn't.

It already has—just not everywhere.

 

[Arthur Brain]

It already has—just not everywhere.

Where exactly, at least in the western hemisphere? Child protection laws have stringently tightened with a zero tolerance towards molestation in the UK as with rape or any sexual assault so if there's anywhere in the US where it's tolerated then that's abominable. Then again, I recall the dulcet tones of Phil "Duck Dynasty" Robertson advocating his followers to 'get girls when they're fifteen/sixteen'

'Duck Dynasty' Star Advises Men to Marry Teenage Girls

Relive some of Phil Robertson's most discussed comments. Some may surprise you!

abcnews.go.com

"Look, you wait 'til they get to be 20 years old, the only picking that's going to take place is your pocket," he said. "You got to marry these girls when they are about 15 or 16. They'll pick your ducks. You need to check with mom and dad about that, of course."

Lovely, eh?

 

[Derf]

Where exactly, at least in the western hemisphere? Child protection laws have stringently tightened with a zero tolerance towards molestation in the UK as with rape or any sexual assault so if there's anywhere in the US where it's tolerated then that's abominable. Then again, I recall the dulcet tones of Phil "Duck Dynasty" Robertson advocating his followers to 'get girls when they're fifteen/sixteen'

'Duck Dynasty' Star Advises Men to Marry Teenage Girls

Relive some of Phil Robertson's most discussed comments. Some may surprise you!

abcnews.go.com

"Look, you wait 'til they get to be 20 years old, the only picking that's going to take place is your pocket," he said. "You got to marry these girls when they are about 15 or 16. They'll pick your ducks. You need to check with mom and dad about that, of course."

Lovely, eh?

I think you answered your own question with the comment about the laws in UK. Why would the laws need to tighten if there weren’t a problem someone to solve?

Why is Robertson’s statement a problem? We weren’t talking about marriage, were we? Unless you equate rape and sexual assault with marriage. If so, I can see why you Brain is so addled:
Romans 1:28 (KJV) And even as they did not like to retain God in [their] knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;

 

[Arthur Brain]

I think you answered your own question with the comment about the laws in UK. Why would the laws need to tighten if there weren’t a problem someone to solve?

Why is Robertson’s statement a problem? We weren’t talking about marriage, we’re we? Unless you equate rape sexual assault with marriage. If so, I can see why you Brain is so addled:
Romans 1:28 (KJV) And even as they did not like to retain God in [their] knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;

Robertson's statement is a problem because it's asinine and pathetic. Do you agree with him that men should get girls as young as 15 so as they do their bidding rather than 20 when they're not so easily manipulated or pliable as is his obvious implication and liable to pick their wallets?

There have always been problems with child abuse, domestic abuse and all sorts of else Derf. That laws have tightened in regards to such doesn't mean there wasn't a problem to begin with. It actually means it's been better solved.

 

[Derf]

Robertson's statement is a problem because it's asinine and pathetic. Do you agree with him that men should get girls as young as 15 so as they do their bidding rather than 20 when they're not so easily manipulated or pliable as is his obvious implication and liable to pick their wallets?

There have always been problems with child abuse, domestic abuse and all sorts of else Derf. That laws have tightened in regards to such doesn't mean there wasn't a problem to begin with. It actually means it's been better solved.

I deal with “zero tolerance” efforts at work. They are often a political ploy to make someone look good, while the errors are often hidden to meet the new policy on the surface, if not in actuality.

On Robertson, do you have any idea who he was talking to? It didn’t seem to be targeted toward older men, but younger. And he was encouraging them to seek out women who were not too much younger than themselves, if any, and to ask permission from the parents of the ladies. This encourages the young men to grow up, rather than be dependent on their own parents, to start thinking about providing for their future bride and future family, and to marry young ladies when they are still feminine, before they are corrupted by feministic and selfish ideals. He encouraged them to find brides that love and live the Bible and want to follow it in their home-making—as well as to check out their home-making skills. I don’t see anything wrong with any of that.

 

[Arthur Brain]

I deal with “zero tolerance” efforts at work. They are often a political ploy to make someone look good, while the errors are often hidden to meet the new policy on the surface, if not in actuality.

On Robertson, do you have any idea who he was talking to? It didn’t seem to be targeted toward older men, but younger. And he was encouraging them to seek out women who were not too much younger than themselves, if any, and to ask permission from the parents of the ladies. This encourages the young men to grow up, rather than be dependent on their own parents, to start thinking about providing for their future bride and future family, and to marry young ladies when they are still feminine, before they are corrupted by feministic and selfish ideals. He encouraged them to find brides that love and live the Bible and want to follow it in their home-making—as well as to check out their home-making skills. I don’t see anything wrong with any of that.

Okay, you'll have to go into some more detail in regards to the former and in specific detail really.

As regards Robertson, he was talking to a crowd, it's not difficult to find and so what if it was directed at 'younger men'? That make it all okay? Get over yourself with your' feminist' diatribe dude. This guy advocates getting girls as young as 15 because in his opinion they're more likely to do someone's bidding and it has zero to do with love or anything associated. What he said was pathetic. What, do fifteen year old girls suddenly morph into rabid, selfish feminists when they hit 20 or something?

 

[Derf]

Okay, you'll have to go into some more detail in regards to the former and in specific detail really.

As regards Robertson, he was talking to a crowd, it's not difficult to find and so what if it was directed at 'younger men'? That make it all okay? Get over yourself with your' feminist' diatribe dude. This guy advocates getting girls as young as 15 because in his opinion they're more likely to do someone's bidding and it has zero to do with love or anything associated. What he said was pathetic.

Because it disagrees with your worldview? How is that any kind of standard? What he said was sage advice.

 

[Arthur Brain]

Because it disagrees with your worldview? How is that any kind of standard? What he said was sage advice.

No, because it was absolutely degrading and pathetic to boot. How is it 'sage advice' to encourage young men to get girls as young as 15 because if they wait until they're 19 or so they're suddenly going to *morph* into rabid and selfish feminists and the like? What kind of 'sage advice' is that?

 

[Derf]

No, because it was absolutely degrading and pathetic to boot. How is it 'sage advice' to encourage young men to get girls as young as 15 because if they wait until they're 19 or so they're suddenly going to *morph* into rabid and selfish feminists and the like? What kind of 'sage advice' is that?

“Sage” is the descriptor. You don’t need to ask what kind it is anymore.

But you answered your other question, too. Since they are going to morph into rabid and selfish feminists, it’s better to marry them before they get that way. Feminists are made, not born.

 

[Rusha]

No, because it was absolutely degrading and pathetic to boot. How is it 'sage advice' to encourage young men to get girls as young as 15 because if they wait until they're 19 or so they're suddenly going to *morph* into rabid and selfish feminists and the like? What kind of 'sage advice' is that?

Quite simple. The mindset of cretins such as Robertson is to deprive women of having control over their own lives. Depriving a person of education and life experience is easier to accomplish with young teens as compared to women.

 

[Derf]

Quite simple. The mindset of cretins such as Robertson is to deprive women of having control over their own lives. Depriving a person of education and life experience is easier to accomplish with young teens as compared to women.

And feminism does the same thing.

 

[Arthur Brain]

“Sage” is the descriptor. You don’t need to ask what kind it is anymore.

But you answered your other question, too. Since they are going to morph into rabid and selfish feminists, it’s better to marry them before they get that way. Feminists are made, not born.

No, "risible" is the actual descriptor or "pathetic", there's quite a few appropriate adjectives to choose from in similar vein.

So, you agree with Robertson that it's better to get teenage girls as young as 15 because if they get to 20 they'll only be interested in money and the like? How do you even define feminism anyway and why would girls suddenly 'morph into rabid and selfish feminists' by the age of twenty? Has it not occurred to you that Robertson's sentiments are deeply patronising and insulting towards women and that your endorsement of them are just as abysmal?