• Reminder: Do not call, text, or mention harrassing someone in real life. Do not encourage it. Do not talk about killing or using violence against anyone, or engaging in any criminal behavior. If it is not an obvious joke even when taken out of context, don't post it. Please report violators.

    DMCA, complaints, and other inquiries:

    [email protected]

I'll just leave this here, then.

SpaceEdge

Intern at Sojourner's
Forum Clout
41,214
Why should I take seriously the moral arguments of either 1) a thief, or 2) someone who is stupid enough to assume the identity of a thief?

Well thanks for admitting I'm right then. Weird how rape is some complicated moral argument, but that's a pedophile defender for you.

That said, why would I take moral arguments seriously from a guy who assumes the identity of Eric hildeman?
 
G

guest

Guest
Bullshit. Let's bury this "child rape" thing one once and for all. You use the word "rape" three times in your argument. @Sue Lightning makes the same erroneous accusation. "Child rape advocate" she calls Delany. I disagree. Delany was abused as a boy by an older man, and somehow didn't find it unpleasant, so now he apparently believes in a gay version of Finch and Stiffler's mom in American Pie. I frankly disagree with this and think Delany is full of shit. But he's got a limited (but troublesome) point in that you can't rape the willing. So no, Delany isn't a "rape advocate," and you're an idiot each time you repeat that lie. I know that's a nuanced argument, and you people are incapable of comprehending nuance because you've deliberately supplanted brain-matter for shit for so long you can't think straight.
Going off this logic, if Mr. Hitler wants to gas the kikes, he's not an advocate for murder because in his mind, Jews are all bloodsucking leeches who destroy society, and he is just enacting justice. This is of course faulty reasoning. Just because Mr. Hitler feels that his killings are justified does not mean that he isn't advocating for murder. Furthermore, all adult sexual contact with children is by definition child rape. Sam Delaney wants to make it legal to fuck kids. Ergo, he is a child rape advocate.

From now on, any of you that say "Delany rape advocate" are out of this debate (such as you are even capable of debating) as far as I give a damn.
Lol.
 

Harry Powell

Bruce is more helpful to Defendants than Plaintiff
Forum Clout
91,996
Why should I take seriously the moral arguments of either 1) a thief, or 2) someone who is stupid enough to assume the identity of a thief?

That is the real Thomas Apostle.

I would be careful, did you not watch the surveillance video of him at the vape shop? He’ll have your shrubs out of your yard and in his truck before you can blink.
 

SpaceEdge

Intern at Sojourner's
Forum Clout
41,214
Wah the Catholic Church is bad for protecting pedophiles but the sfwa is fine for using member dues to fund their legal defence.
I certainly don't like the Catholic church, especially the new age one, but at least they hid the pedophiles and felt shame.

The SFWA took the pedophile and gave him the highest award they could and still regularly feature him

Both are unacceptable, but the open worship of pedophiles still seems worse
 

Prison Enjoyer

Status: Enjoying Prison! 😁
Forum Clout
35,725
That is the real Thomas Apostle.

I would be careful, did you not watch the surveillance video of him at the vape shop? He’ll have your shrubs out of your yard and in his truck before you can blink.

He don't do that no more, he's retired I think, been so for about 6 months now. His reddit contact as well. I wish him well he's clearly got nothing coming down the pipe, unlike Pat who has niggers coming down his pipe
 

T. Booth Willy

Caged heat
Forum Clout
9,232
"I frankly disagree with this and think Delany is full of shit." READ. You're right. Society has deemed it rape, and society is right. Gay or straight, it's wrong. That's why I disagree with Delany on that point, and yet somehow you fail to bother READING what I wrote. Pay attention.
You disagree with Delany on that point. Jesus. Society has also deemed certain crimes to be so repugnant that it becomes your identity once you commit them. Murderer, rapist, wife beater, CHILD MOLESTER. How can you call yourself a "free thinker" and not see the huge double standard and blind spot you have for shit like this? If Delany came out as a trump voter it would immediately become his new identity. You wouldn't call him an author without using some sort of descriptor ahead of it. Disgraced author, MAGA author..etc. Your group demands ridgid conformity on all sorts of issues that normal people can disagree on, while at the same time turning a blind eye to things that no normal person would ever ignore. It's the exact opposite of free thinking. You know the people you're allowed to support and the ones you aren't without having to be told. Thats how actual cults operate. You aren't half as smart as you think you are and even if you did start to notice how fucked up your friend group is, you're too much of a coward to say anything about it.
 
G

guest

Guest
Bullshit. Let's bury this "child rape" thing one once and for all. You use the word "rape" three times in your argument. @Sue Lightning makes the same erroneous accusation. "Child rape advocate" she calls Delany. I disagree. Delany was abused as a boy by an older man, and somehow didn't find it unpleasant, so now he apparently believes in a gay version of Finch and Stiffler's mom in American Pie. I frankly disagree with this and think Delany is full of shit. But he's got a limited (but troublesome) point in that you can't rape the willing. So no, Delany isn't a "rape advocate," and you're an idiot each time you repeat that lie. I know that's a nuanced argument, and you people are incapable of comprehending nuance because you've deliberately supplanted brain-matter for shit for so long you can't think straight. Or at all. From now on, any of you that say "Delany rape advocate" are out of this debate (such as you are even capable of debating) as far as I give a damn.
Look Eric, (I'll treat you as not deserving a brick from some feral ape to the head, for the moment) it goes like this, there is no nuance regarding sex between adults and children. It is universally condemnable. There are no children who had sex with adults and grew emotionally from it. Delaney is a sick twisted nigger ghoul that had sex with men as a prepubescent child and like most victims that puts him at a much greater chance to reoffend. Use that bald Mensa dome to consider guys who break down and cry from sex that happened to them against their will as kids, still go on to do the same things frequently to new kids. What do you think perverted demons like Delaney would do to children if he both considered it a "fun and rewarding" experience and casually includes graphic portrayals of it in his books? You perpetually cling to a very dim-witted narrative of "radicalization and escalation" with regards to things from racism,sexism, transphobia, to obit defacing and Pat-posting, but somehow repeal from that with regards to pedophilia.

This will or should be simple from here out: First, do you not think that all types of human sexuality can become more obsessive as in the case of porn addictions leading to eventual rapes? Second, do you think that "fictional" (because neither of us know what Delaney has done, and you specifically have claimed lack of proof, does not prove lack of deed regarding Pat posters) depictions of child sex crimes may be based on real events or more often lead to people steeped in prolonged and unhealthy fantasies of sex with children to act out on those fantasies? Third, while you cite nuance as some sort of defense, why would or should people offer nuance to sex with children, when you can't see the nuance of southerners fighting federal troops invading their homeland ad heroes to sum especially when the societal norms and social constructs they acted on were normal contemporaneously? If you judge "confederate imbeciles" 75% of whom owned no slaves with thr mores of 2023 why can't you judge men graphically describing raping children with being morally decadent and unworthy of nuance? Lastly, you introduced us to your nuanced opinions, surely you must see why such a rare and unusual opinion set could and would garner such scorn and disgust? Did you think of a scenario where you could offer any defense (and yes it's a defense of pedophilia to equate it to trolling, not an indictment of trolling to compare it with pedophilia) of pedophilia short of fantasies of child murder and genocide where we should accept such unhealthy and potentially dangerous thoughts as "just thoughts" not deeds? You belong to a political philosophy that conflates mentioning disparate crime statistics amongst the races to nazism but somehow can craft nuance in a sick nigger ghoul fondly remembering his ass being fucked by some deranged nigger janitor and then fantasizing aloud in a book about sex with children. How is that possible?

Somehow you offer excuses for Pat threatening to murder a baby, why "fictional" child porn isn't bad, why Pat being swated potentially by himself is the fault of Pat posters and they should be punished for it and why his "brusk" opinions are all OK. What you do is contrive to make any offence by your side something offered nuance and measured opinions while elevating a "thoughts and prayers" by Tony Danza on some stupid tribute site into the worst of all crimes. You lack even the veneer of equality with your low IQ "deeds are worse than thoughts" nonsense when you openly dismiss any number of thoughts as too odious, but somehow include child rape as a thought worthy of special and select nuance and the holders of those thoughts like Delaney an endless window in which to backtrack and offer qualifiers and explanations of what they "actually" meant. Delaney is a worthless nigger ghoul, that's my opinion and thought, it isn't a deed so you're cool with it right? Or is saying nigger a deed even if it's on a "nigger safe" site? So publishing child rape descriptions that both children and sexually dangerous actors can get their hands on is somehow less bad than me nigger on a comedy forum? Is Mel Brooks eviler than Delaney for Blazing Saddles? How about Twain? Tell me in all your Mensa ways how I'm wrong and you're a genius because you ignore the reality of what exists like Baby murderer wannabe Tomlinson's 13 year old response to being broken up with.

Try and address any of this with that high IQ special brain and have it remain logically consistent. You can't you dumb bald nigger.
 
Top