|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joy S. and Sally and claim, "If you are also a female childlover, we want you to know there is nothing wrong with you. The biggest problems are the teachers, therapists, cops, clerics, and parents who force their stale morality on the young people in their custody. For children experiencing sexual pleasure is not damaging at all, they enjoy it... just like we do."
This argument is a clear extension of the radical feminist lesbian agenda, arguments made by the APA, the author of the Vagina Monologues, and others. They rely on moral relativism to do away with value judgments.
Today, when a person makes moral judgments against them then they claim the group or person is judgmental. With this kind of moral decay we now find ourselves in a position where the public is becoming increasingly reluctant to make a judgment against such vile women.
The public increasingly reasons that if radical feminist condone the behavior that it must be okay. The fear of making a moral judgment comes out of political correctness in relation to the philosophy of moral relativism.
Well I'm judging these women as evil, sick, and criminal. So by the rules of the radical feminists left, that makes me judgmental. They can go to hell.
Notice that there is an absence of social conscience on the part of the authors. There is no longer any ability to recognize right from wrong. They are an absolute danger to all children and responsible adults everywhere.
This ideology of childlove is truly the epitome of the pathological lying that has become so prevalent on the left in America.
It is sick and demonstrates the need to give women equal sentencing in criminal law (equal responsibility). It also demonstrates the need to vote out political ideologues that support an amoral philosophy that encourages the evolution of this type of culture and philosophy.
Warble
Disclaimer: My statements are intended to be personal opinion, belief, sarcasm, or allegation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ick. and I feel that though it may not be an activist opportunity, it is certainly relevant when one needs to point out a largely ignored truth of society:
1. women are not paragons of virtue
Women can be criminal, immoral, etc. etc. whatever term you want to use. Somehow, in feminist conditioning, we immediately consider the circumstances "not as bad when it's a woman."
Which contradicts the rad.fem. opinions that women can do anything that men can, there are no biological differences between men and women, everyone would be better if they were more effeminate.
[FAQ was down when I visited, and I really didn't feel like reading the stories, so no happy quotes from me - I agree with Warble]
additionally, [OT!!] from my sociology textbook: [paraphrased, because I don't feel like digging out the book]
"The institution of marriage will crumble while the wife continues to be a delightful slave and the man the soul-breadwinner and unweaned dependent."
That was really disappointing in an essay that started with "the modern lives of men seem booby-trapped at every step." :P
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Wednesday August 27, @11:01PM EST (#3)
|
|
|
|
|
I know a bit about child sexual abuse and, the experts in this field say that female pedophiles sexually abuse children for similar if, not the same reasons male pedophiles do. Read for yourself on this subject. I do believe that female pedophiles are given more leniency by society as a whole, not to mention judges.
I believe this is some very warped minds trying to excuse their sexual deviancy, while also claiming moral superiority over their male partners in crime. I don't exactly believe this should be blamed on anything called moral relativism. The vast majority of people, including women and of course social workers would condem their morality.
Our morals are constantly evolving, and I'm glad that they do. At one point in time the moralizers have argued that slavery was moral and god ordained. These same people also praised the morality of fuedalism and could see nothing wrong with it as we do today. Moralizers still tell us that it's immoral to masturbate which, also has it's roots in our foolish custom of male circumcision. Hopefully in the near future our morality will evolve enough so that we will no longer mutilate baby boys penis's. Moralizers have sanctioned the death penalty, torture, and the crusades.
And once upon a time and, still to this day the moral absolutists have socially ostracized, lynched and made laws against homosexual men (and women). In fact the dsmv(--correct initials?) use to include homosexuality as a sexual deviency, now they do not, especially since there is no mentally, physically, and sexually undeveloped victim, as with pedophilia. I'm very thankful for moral evolution.
P. George
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Thursday August 28, @07:10PM EST (#10)
|
|
|
|
|
... don't exactly believe this should be blamed on anything called moral relativism. The vast majority of people, including women and of course social workers would condem their morality.
Our morals are constantly evolving, and I'm glad that they do. At one point in time the moralizers have argued that slavery was moral and god ordained. These same people also praised the morality of fuedalism and could see nothing wrong with it as we do today. Moralizers still tell us that it's immoral to masturbate which, also has it's roots in our foolish custom of male circumcision.
Interesting point however it is clearly quite biased against "moralizers." I've sat in one too many classes where professors use moral relativism to justify any immoral ideal. If the argument were balanced it would point out the extremes and dangers of relativism also and not just attack "moralizers." It would weight the costs of the extremes of the “moralizers” against the extremes of the secularists relativist and determine that relativism is much more dangerous and deadly than a system of Christian values ever was.
With relativists ideas, we find that cultural anthropologist will argue that cannibalism, infanticide, a massive slaughter of people that is much greater than the holocaust (think USSR), and more are justifiable. With moral relativism we find that Marxists would argue that it is in the best interest of the children to have literally ANY male named by the state as a father of a child and assign property to the control of the state.
In fact, we many of these evil practices America today in the form partial birth abortions, child seizures without justifiable cause, false arrest, the seizing of property, and we see the CA-DCSS routinely assigning ANY male as the father of a child as though biology doesn’t matter.
Currently, America has a moral crisis where our children are permanently damaged on a massive scale because of the hope that America "...morality will evolve enough ..." We see our prisons overflowing more than ANY other nation, marriages are devalued and too easily dissolved against the best interest of the children and to the detriment of a fathers rights without a trial.
Moral relativism has caused the death and the victimized the life of 100's of millions in today’s world. This is a much greater amount of damage than a few evil "moralist" have ever done.
I've seen our evolution of morals and seen the damage it causes first hand. It is many times more evil than what people give credit for. That is because when a social experiment fails the moral relativist try to fix the problem with more government law and institutions rather than admitting they were wrong and restoring proven cultural ideals. Instead, moral relativists compound their own lies and propaganda and continue to turn America into a miniature form of a socialist totalitarian state. God knows we already see this in California.
Warble
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Seems to me that extreme moral relativism and extreme moral absolutism both lead to the same results - justification of the most horrible outrages on 'moral' grounds.
Extreme moral absolutism, like extreme moral relativism, is in part responsible for the death and victimization of hundreds of millions - Stalin's purges, Islamic fundamentalism, the Chinese Cultural revolution, to name but a few recent examples.
I think ethical action relies on the ability to be flexible within some accepted absolutes. The sticking point is - what should the absolutes be? The literal interpretation of the Bible? (Who's literal interpretation?) The Koran? The Communist Manifesto?
Either we resolve those conflicts and others like them peacably, or we resort to conquest and pogrom - just like those whom we despise as moral "absolutists" or moral "relativists", depending on one's preference. And there is no certainty as to who will do the conquering, and who will be the victims of the pogroms.
I think it would be wiser to look for a middle way and resist both extremes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think it would be wiser to look for a middle way and resist both extremes.
It absolutely would. Note the tendancy of the mediaa's lace curtain and political correctness (Sponsored chiefly by the pheminazis) to silence and stifle dissenting speech from doctrinaire pheminist dogma.
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible make violent revolution inevitable.
* Putting the SMACKDOWN on Feminazis since 1989! *
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Taken from the faq on this site:
(Speaking honestly, the reader should not conclude from the pathetic reality that many male practitioners of incest demand and force exclusive sexual attention from the daughter applies to the incestuous mothers discussed here. These mothers and incestuous men have absolutely nothing in common.)
Nothing more to add.
Mitchell A. Smith
"An ambiguous perspective is all you can hope for when initially confronted by that which you do not know."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
when feminists label anyone as 'judgmental', they indict themselves instantly as hypocrites. It is impossible to ‘label’ someone for a moral stance without passing judgment on them.
"I say, let 'em crash"
Mitchell A. Smith
"An ambiguous perspective is all you can hope for when initially confronted by that which you do not know."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There is a "sister" membership-only site http://home.uni-one.nl/hostroom/bk/ which has a similar thrust. The pair appear to be hosted by a pedophilia support organization called IPCE (see home.wanadoo.nl/ipce/newsletters/nl_e_12/part_6.ht m & www.ipce.info). Ironically the only site on the net which links to fcl is the "Portal Of Evil" www.portalofevil.com/archives/ Society_&_CultureSex.html (there's a space in there!).
A nest of nasties but not a masculist issue per se. I doubt many feminists would support these people either.
cheers,
--sd.
Those who like this sort of thing
will find this the sort of thing they like.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Thursday August 28, @10:30AM EST (#7)
|
|
|
|
|
Germaine Greer might...
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/01/23/10429114 93003.html
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Friday August 29, @05:34AM EST (#14)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Friday August 29, @05:52AM EST (#15)
|
|
|
|
|
A nest of nasties but not a masculist issue per se. I doubt many feminists would support these people either.
Smoking Drive,
You should note Germaine Greer's recent advocacy of pedophile conduct as mentioned in one of the replies below. I also recall an episode of the "mens hour" some months ago in which a prominent feminist's writings were discussed. She positively supported the sexual abuse of young boys by both genders. She argued that the abuse caused psychological destruction of the boys and this, she felt, was good for women. I do not recall which episode of the menshour in which this was discussed. It is also to be noted that the feminist run "rape cisis" centres will not give assistance to child victims of female sexual abuse. Feminism and child abuse go hand in hand.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
... to have stuff like this publicly displayed? I think it wouldn't pass muster.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It is criminal behavior. I notified both the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children, and the US Dept. of Justice. If it was up to me, I would Lynch the bitches or throw them to the Crocodiles for the daily meal. They are criminals who pray on children... they are sexual predators who should face death. Time to thin the herd. Their ISP should shut them down.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Thursday August 28, @07:13PM EST (#11)
|
|
|
|
|
It is criminal behavior. I notified both the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children, and the US Dept. of Justice. If it was up to me, I would Lynch the bitches or throw them to the Crocodiles for the daily meal. They are criminals who pray on children... they are sexual predators who should face death. Time to thin the herd. Their ISP should shut them down.
Thanks. This site was really bothering me and I would like to see it shut down also. The bitches should also be prosecuted for criminal child abuse and locked-up using the confessions on their site.
Warble
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Friday August 29, @03:15AM EST (#13)
|
|
|
|
|
...and they'll hang themselves.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One of the stories on this site is about an adult woman who has intercourse with or more appropriately statutorily rapes an 11 year old boy.
However, did you know that the underage boy who was raped by this older woman could be obligated to pay HER child support if a child is conceived?
If you think I am kidding check out:
http://www.nas.com/c4m/rape_case.html
It is insane but true!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
However, did you know that the underage boy who was raped by this older woman could be obligated to pay HER child support if a child is conceived?
Not only do I know it, I've experienced it.
I was pretty livid the day I was informed that they calculated their support order on how much money I would of brought into the house had we been married. I told them this was alimony and I shouldn't have to support my rapist. Never changed anything. I still have to wonder if it's possible to sue *her* in civil court for the damages her rape has inflicted. Is there any precedent for this?
Freedom Is Merely Privilege Extended Unless Enjoyed By One & All.
|
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
