In message , Dillon
writes
>On Fri, 21 Mar 2008 07:16:18 GMT, Mike_B
>wrote:
>
>>In message , Janitor of
>>Lunacy writes
>>>
>>>"Dillon" wrote in message
>>>news:8ss5u35a3emilbvd33r9ngj69tte3r0r42@4ax.com...
>>>> Homo.uallity was once considered a crime but is now classed as a
>>>> normal .ual abberation.
>>>> Should not an adults atraction to children be seen in a similar
>>>> light.
>>>> Gay people are considered normal,why not pedophiles
>>>
>>>Not one thing you say makes sense even within itself. Take your trolling
>>>elsewhere, please.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>I took the underlying suggestion to be that homo.uality and
>>paedophilia are both .ualities that differ from the norm and which the
>>individual does not choose for themselves. That may well be an accurate
>>assessment. To then go on and call for the legalisation of acts of
>>paedophilia simply because homo.ual acts have been legalised is where
>>he goes off into nonsense land for me.
>
>I did not say that acts of pedeophilia should be legalised.
I took it that you did because you asked that it be treated in the same
way as homo.uality. The only legality concerning homo.uality that
has changed is to make homo.ual acts legal, I therefore assumed that
you were asking for paedophilia to be similarly treated.
>The point i am trying to make is the punishment for say possessing
>kp pictures is all out of all propotion to the actual crime committed
>(2years in jail).The easy way out is to just bang them up in jail.
>They will still have the same tendencies when they are released.
>I suppose we could just execute them instead.
I see, so your were commenting on the legality of child .ography.
That wasn't clear from your post.
>The responses to this thread just proves my point,BIGOTS galore.
>The same people who reckoned all homo.uals should be shot because
>they spread aids.
>
I haven't seen any bigoted responses here. The group doesn't lack in the
bigoted, but I don't think I would class the responses to your post as
such.
--
Mike_B |