I dont care what you think,she chirps
You're moddy finger must be itching for some moddy tools eh? Because whether you make the disclaimer or not,that's what you're doing,attempting to modify how people post by what you said.
I cryed today...
I had editted that part out before reading this reply. I felt it was a cheap shot and had hoped to remove it before anyone got a chance to read it.
Sorry I wasn't quicker in the edit.
Everyone involved in a discussion or debate is trying to modify others opinions or how they post.
When Jan H comments about the banality of some of the topics, he is trying to modify how others post? Is that "moderation?"
By your inferring that it is wrong for me to ask others to cool the insults are you trying to modify my posting habits? So do you want moderator tools too?
I fail to see why you are so against requests for common decency and civilty. Do you insult and attack people like this in the real world?
BTW the above apology was not for speaking my mind but rather for singling you out as an example.
I really liked this part of your response:
You yourself are a fine example of the kind of deadness of soul that it produces -- someone who stands up to defend the disgusting coverup of child molestation -- even after being abused by their pharisaic 'law' against smoking.
"Deadness of soul" -- an excellent phrase.
Waiting as adopted a sort of rhetoric that works for her; others adopt rhetorics that work for them. Wayne has no problem hurling the jibes right back, and given the sneering, know-it-all attitude of his posts, I don't think we need to worry about hurting his feelings.
But I don't think it's just a matter of "hurling insults." I don't see much or any of that going on here. AlanF said that Wayne suffers a "deadness of soul" -- and I guess you could call that an insult, only AF goes on to explain why he applies the term as he does. The insult by itself proves nothing; it's a barb attached to an argument that stands up on its own. In this case, it's practically poetic. And that's a legitimate rhetoric, too.
: AF are you inferring he is a pedophile simply on the basis of a thread on the internet?
Not at all. What I said in my 2nd post was in the context of what I said in my 1st post, which was:
Your statement that "not all pedophiles are child molesters any more than all heterosexuals are sexual predators" is completely ridiculous. You're comparing apples to oranges. Heterosexuality is the norm among human beings. That's why men and women are attracted to one another. Pedophilia is defined as the abnormal attraction of adults for children; therefore a pedophile is by definition a child molestor.
Your excuses are exactly those that a practicing pedophile often makes to excuse his perversion to himself. "It's not really so bad. Besides, she likes it or she wouldn't let me do it."
Point being: if you're not a pedophile, then don't make the same excuses for them that they make for themselves.
: This despite his quoting a reference supporting his position...
Wayne: You miss the point. What one person calls sexual molestation another might call a peck on the cheek accompanied by an out of place comment. See studies by Janet Wakefield PhD: forensic psychology
AF: Really, man, your words are precisely those of a molester who wants to justify his perversion as being "not so bad".
: (If I mis-understood your comment above I apologize but the bold type certainly adds weight to my interpretation)
See above. The excuses that Wayne has posted certainly are precisely those often given by pedophiles to justify their perversion. If you disagree, then explain why.
I suspect you didn't read my words carefully enough, since you left out the main point in your partial quotation above. Here again is what I said, with the main point bolded:
: You miss the point. What one person calls sexual molestation another might call a peck on the cheek accompanied by an out of place comment. See studies by Janet Wakefield PhD: forensic psychology
If I missed the point, it's because you didn't explain it clearly. Participants on this forum are not mind readers.
As for your 'clarification', it should obvious that the complainer was not talking about a mere "peck on the cheek".
Really, man, your words are precisely those of a molester who wants to justify his perversion as being "not so bad". If you don't understand that, it's no wonder you're posting nonsense.
If Wayne had something more in mind than what one can glean from what he posted, he should have posted it.
: PS - and NO I am not trying to moderate this board. I just find it interesting that Waiting, a victim (rather a SURVIVOR) herself has been cordial to Wayne despite his differing view. But others (not referring to AF) do little but hurl insults.
Obviously I missed whatever you posted before you edited it away. However, waiting is a very nice person who tends to avoid telling fools off. I tolerate fools rather badly, and especially fools who defend those who are soft on pedophiles, liars and other perverts.
As for insults, I certainly hurl them when appropriate, but mostly they're accompanied by a clear indication of why they're there, and I never substitute insults for an argument.
And Im speaking my mind too. Whether you like the style or not. No one is trying to modify anyone,what I see is presenting info and making an arguement. I see no other attempts to modify posting here,but you. Old moddy habits dies hard.
What I am against is moderatoring under the guise of calls for civility. Communication styles are diverse,get used to it. It's not always going to be within parameters YOU feel is acceptable.
You also have a choice to read ot not read posters that offend you,dont you? Or do you feel its incumbant upon you to traverse the board and make your call for 'civility' (read Moderate) which I've seen before.
I realize you wren't sorry ,but guess what? I couldn't give a toss.
Guess what? Women in the real world arent always 'nicey-nice",,,,I know it makes some men uncomfortable,especially men who were once jw's. And when I hear someone spoutin ludicrous notions,drivel,etc in the real world YES I do let out a line. That's me.Like it or lump it. Tina
Stephen and Riz,
Your wish is my command!
For excellence in deviant behavior apologetics, I humbly bestow the much coveted "Head Up Your Ass" award upon you. For your sphincter enshrined head is duly in the dark and stanky place that nary a decent person shall tread. For those of you that have the royal anal head covering, this award is given.
This award is not bestowed upon those which are not deserving, but to those who truly live up to high calling of the "ignor-anus", that is to say, people of such a nature that protect the evil and vile printing corporations that continually betray the trust of it's adherants, namely, the Witchtower, Babble and Trick Society.(Please accept my apology, I don't know who to attribute the name of this fine institution to)
Wayne, you are in fine company indeed, with the likes of Joe "Booze" Rutherford, C.T. "Had a ball with Rose Ball" Russell, Nathan "DF" Knorr, and Fred "Criminally Insane" Franz. Yes, we prostrate ourselves before you, O analy challenged one. Not to mention all the pedophilic "ministers" of the WTBTS that still frequent the neighborhoods, knocking on doors where their prey live.
ROTFLMAO!!! It never stops being funny.
Women in the real world arent always 'nicey-nice",,,,
now there's a huge leap from left field... where the hell did this woman's issue come from. I have noticed this as being a major focus of yours. Hey guess what... I give men and women EQUALLY a hard time about being civil.. Take your personal angst and personal causes elsewhere they ain't here.
Tina further wrote:
what I see is presenting info and making an arguement.
I saw that from others. All I saw from you was a grade school insult.
I don't think you've worked in 2 mental health facilities,I think you've been a patient in both. T
where is this alleged presenting of info or making an argument???
I am glad you found your voice. I hope one day you learn the balance in using it.
AF: I thought I had misunderstood something. Thanks for the clarification
dedalus: We all do what works for us individually I suppose.
I like just about everybody here, but on this issue I am in agreement with you. I think that being civil and countering with sound arguements is the best way to influence those who present views that we know are in error. I think that ridicule and name calling detract from the effectiveness of our ideas. If you have read certain posts, you will see that I have skewered Wayne, mensa163, and lurker. I would rather slice up the person's peculiar ideas, than the person themselves. I think it is a better way.