Started By
Message

re: NYT: Protect Pedophiles

Posted on 10/6/14 at 12:02 pm to
Posted by Meauxjeaux
98836 posts including my alters
Member since Jun 2005
40521 posts
Posted on 10/6/14 at 12:02 pm to
There is no treating a pedo.

/thread
Posted by Rickety Cricket
Premium Member
Member since Aug 2007
46883 posts
Posted on 10/6/14 at 12:05 pm to
What the hell do same sex marriage proponents have to do with pedophiles?
Posted by Zach
Gizmonic Institute
Member since May 2005
112803 posts
Posted on 10/6/14 at 12:06 pm to
quote:

That's why I used the word appears


But it does NOT appear that he only surmised from the headline. The direct quotes prove that you are wrong in that assertion and now you're making yourself look really stupid.
Posted by Green Chili Tiger
Lurking the Tin Foil Hat Board
Member since Jul 2009
47991 posts
Posted on 10/6/14 at 12:13 pm to
quote:

What the hell do same sex marriage proponents have to do with pedophiles?


Not a damn thing, but it's not from a lack of certain people trying to tie the two together.
Posted by Zach
Gizmonic Institute
Member since May 2005
112803 posts
Posted on 10/6/14 at 12:20 pm to
quote:

What the hell do same sex marriage proponents have to do with pedophiles? Not a damn thing, but it's not from a lack of certain people trying to tie the two together.


It's called slippery slope and history is replete with examples that it happens.
Posted by SpidermanTUba
my house
Member since May 2004
36129 posts
Posted on 10/6/14 at 12:23 pm to
quote:


Poor ole pedophiles have to hunker down in fear. They can't help it.

Will serial killers be next?





Do we have you on record as stating you are opposed to a potential serial killer getting psychological help that might avert a killing spree?
This post was edited on 10/6/14 at 12:23 pm
Posted by Green Chili Tiger
Lurking the Tin Foil Hat Board
Member since Jul 2009
47991 posts
Posted on 10/6/14 at 12:24 pm to
quote:

It's called slippery slope and history is replete with examples that it happens.


Well based on that logic, then heterosexual marriage has led to homosexual marriage so we should outlaw heterosexual marriage immediately.
Posted by son of arlo
State of Innocence
Member since Sep 2013
4577 posts
Posted on 10/6/14 at 12:30 pm to
quote:

Would you rather deal with them after they commit a crime or before?


If you're recommending a good moral upbringing then I agree.
Posted by Zach
Gizmonic Institute
Member since May 2005
112803 posts
Posted on 10/6/14 at 12:31 pm to
quote:

Well based on that logic, then heterosexual marriage has led to homosexual marriage so we should outlaw heterosexual marriage immediately.


No. Heterosexual marriage has been around for 1,000s of years. Slippery slope occurs within a short time frame.

Here is an example. From 1960 to 2000 (forty years):

8 year old kids could buy cigarettes from vending machines for a quarter.

Vending machines banned. But smoking allowed everywhere.

Smoking restricted to the back seats of airplanes.

Smoking banned on all airplanes.

Smoking restricted by sections in restaurants.

Smoking banned in all restaurants.

Smoking banned in college classrooms.

Smoking banned on college campuses.

I could go on but I'm sure you see the point.

Posted by ballscaster
Member since Jun 2013
26861 posts
Posted on 10/6/14 at 12:31 pm to
It isn't NYT.
Posted by Al Dante
Member since Mar 2013
1859 posts
Posted on 10/6/14 at 12:32 pm to
quote:

Or would you prefer they don't get help and then one day molest a child?


Who's to say they're not born attracted to children so getting them help is pointless? If some males are born attracted to other males and therapy is pointless because it is genetic, it seems to me that some males may be born attracted to children and therapy is pointless because it is genetic.
This post was edited on 10/6/14 at 12:37 pm
Posted by Zach
Gizmonic Institute
Member since May 2005
112803 posts
Posted on 10/6/14 at 12:34 pm to
quote:

It isn't NYT.

Stop being behind the curve and looking stupid. Read the quotes in the first link from the NYT. Then read the entire NYT link.
Posted by Robin Masters
Birmingham
Member since Jul 2010
30195 posts
Posted on 10/6/14 at 12:38 pm to
quote:

Who's to say they're not born attracted to children so getting them help is pointless? Explain how a male can be born attracted to other males but not born attracted to children.


Maybe they are born that way, but until they are allowed to seek help and allow us to study them without fear of reprisal we may never know. You didn't realize you were doing it but you proved the need for the programs suggested in the OP-ed. Sounds like you are firmly on the side of science and reason, congrats.
Posted by ballscaster
Member since Jun 2013
26861 posts
Posted on 10/6/14 at 12:44 pm to
Your link is to a hack site.
Posted by Hawkeye95
Member since Dec 2013
20293 posts
Posted on 10/6/14 at 12:51 pm to
if you read the op-ed, it sounds more than reasonable in fact a good idea. How can you argue, we should not try to stop child molestation before it starts?

the op ed is very clear that if they commit a crime, they should suffer the consequences. But why not try to get them help before they commit a crime?
Posted by cwill
Member since Jan 2005
54754 posts
Posted on 10/6/14 at 12:54 pm to
quote:

There is no treating a pedo.

/thread


Based on current understanding you are correct. I guess we should therefor stop looking for a cure and allow child rape to continue.
Posted by Teddy Ruxpin
Member since Oct 2006
39649 posts
Posted on 10/6/14 at 12:54 pm to
Ya, I'm all for treatment/identification stopping them before they do something.

My problem is I really can't believe we ever let these people back out into society after they commit this crime.

I feel like Pedos, Murderers and rapists should be a lifetime you're done kind of thing.
Posted by cwill
Member since Jan 2005
54754 posts
Posted on 10/6/14 at 12:56 pm to
quote:

Posted by Zach
quote:
That's why I used the word appears


But it does NOT appear that he only surmised from the headline. The direct quotes prove that you are wrong in that assertion and now you're making yourself look really stupid.



If you read the actual oped you see how stupid your arguments and the arguments put forth by front page about slippery slope are. It's pathetic really.
Posted by Zach
Gizmonic Institute
Member since May 2005
112803 posts
Posted on 10/6/14 at 12:56 pm to
quote:

Your link is to a hack site.


That is your opinion and I don't value your opinion. But, if you'd like to show that my link's quotes from the NYT are fabricated, then knock yourself out.

David says Hi:

Posted by Zach
Gizmonic Institute
Member since May 2005
112803 posts
Posted on 10/6/14 at 12:58 pm to
quote:

If you read the actual oped you see how stupid your arguments and the arguments put forth by front page about slippery slope are. It's pathetic really.


I read the actual oped and your assertion that the OP is from a 'HEADLINE' is so stupid that I would not reappear on this thread if I were you. But if you want more embarrassment, knock yourself out.
first pageprev pagePage 2 of 5Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram