Martin Nolan give 1 year to guilty pedo.

meeeeh wrote: »

Do we? It's a very strong word to use so use it properly.

Ephebophile isn't much better, the two are closely related to each other inasmuch as they are describing somebody who preys on underage people to have sex with them.

Are you another poster more distraught about the use of the incorrect descriptor than the offence itself?

meeeeh wrote: »

You are not even smart enough to understand I wasn't having a go at you (now I am), I was making a point how words matter. But apparently the words matter only when it's about you not when it's about others.

Don't worry I don't think you are a paedophile I just think you are a hypocrite.

How am I a hypocrite?

You've some neck making assumptions about other people's intelligence with your track record on this site.

You do realise that your post quoted a post of mine and was directed in its entirety at me right? I mean you wrote it, or am I not smart enough to understand that your were quoting me but actually talking to somebody else in some Basil Fawlty-esque attempt to untangle yourself from responsibility for something you know you did but would perhaps prefer you hadn't done?

Yet more nonsense from you, what a surprise.

tommyled1984 wrote: »

This was a good thread which generated plenty of interest and at the start was inviting to people to share their opinions. Unfortunately your persistant input has completely killed it.
I see you have had a very productive day today. IF you work I hope it's in the public sector so the whole country can share the burden as opposed to a small private company trying to make it.

Sorry but that is a pile of crap.
I contributed to this thread plenty, if my opinion doesn't chime with yours that's too bad. That is what goes on in a forum, you'd be aware of that if you'd posted more than 12 times in ten years.

I see you're another "Emmanual Macron married his teacher after she had sex with him at 15 so this poor teacher shouldn't be locked up" types.

You feel this teacher did nothing wrong, which is factually incorrect. Your understanding of the case is also incorrect and your opinion about consent between adults and minors is wrong.
And because I and others have shown the opinion you and others hold to be without merit I am personally responsible for killing this thread?
Get a grip.

RandomName2 wrote: »

Mainly by calling other posters here predators. That usually encourages deep and meaningful conversation on complicated and controversial topics, yeah.




From a legal standing you are incorrect. From Emanuel Macron's point of view you are also incorrect. I assume you mean from an ethical point of view? I think you would have actually a point there, that is if you didn't articulate it by any other means than say that everyone who doesn't agree with you is something something. Vacuous virtue signalling.

Feel free to ignore criticism of your posting as just 'waffle'. Bask in the glow of the victories that come from smashing straw men to bits.

I never called anybody a predator. For somebody banging on about facts you're a little short of them yourself.

The Macron situation is an oddball situation and using it as a jumping off point for discussion on this type of topic is laughable.

nullzero wrote: »

I never called anybody a predator. For somebody banging on about facts you're a little short of them yourself.

Oh lordy you got me there nullzero. That retort, man, how can I ever show that you attack posters by calling them paedophiles, predators, or people who are so way inclined. How do I show that you throw a temper tantrum at every opportunity and call your opponent names because you can't argue a point? How do I show that you've just lied? Gee.. this is going to be a difficult one. I mean, you're right, it's just a little short.

nullzero wrote: »

So when you have people splitting hairs over the difference between paedophilia and ephebophilia whilst arguing for the age of consent to be lowered whilst also arguing that sentences handed down for these offences are "too harsh" what other conclusion [other than the posters being paedophiles] should be drawn?

nullzero wrote: »

You say I sound ridiculous, you really need to take a look at what you're saying from an objective standpoint, you're not coming across particularly well. In fact you come across as somebody with quite deep seated issues

Here's the thing Random I hope that what I'm saying does upset you and everyone who agrees with you because your beliefs are worrying. I feel the line in the sand is clear for all to see and those who choose to cross it deserve no quarter.

nullzero wrote: »

In all honesty your post makes no sense whatsoever, but then that seems to be par for the course with you from what I've experienced of you in the past.

nullzero wrote: »

This is just unbelievable.
You should be ashamed of yourself for defending this woman (she isn't a "girl").

The mental gymnastics you're engaged in are incredible. Shame on you and all those thanking your post.

nullzero wrote: »

But I'm going to assume you understand that, and we're just being smarmy and pretending not to understand what I meant.

So while you think you've shown me up by posting that I don't understand what paedophilia means, you saying that is a type of dog whistle(and I really dislike that term but I'm struggling to find a better description) for "I'm actually OK with adults having sex with minors".

nullzero wrote: »

I find it incredible how many people crawl out of the woodwork on topics like these.
A few years ago when Adam Johnson was being sent to prison for engaging in sexual activity with a teenage girl there was all sorts of people defending him.

Maybe there's more people in society that have paedophilic tenancies than we care to recognise.

God I really am a stupid one. I hadn't realized until this moment you're just a troll. Usually trolls don't have as much pathos in their register. [slow clap]

tommyled1984 wrote: »

I'm just saying it puts people off contributing when they read the childish(must have the last word) dialogue.

"So if my opinion doesn't chime with yours, too bad" yet you try ridicule anyone who has an opinion different to you.

I used the example of macron for those who were unaware of an instance where a teacher and student had sex in their area. I didn't say what happened macron was ok.

I never said that the Irish substitute teacher did nothing wrong. I said I don't think she should be a registered sex offender. You've misquoted me twice there.

My opinion about consent can't be wrong because it is my opinion. I think the laws around consent need change.

And yes I have posted very little, I'm kept busy at other things. I see you have posted a lot more than me and also that you have been booted out of many threads by the moderator. No surprise there.. I await your inevitable reply.. 😴

Tommy you replied to me accusing me of killing the thread. You took it upon yourself to do that, do you think I should come on and apologise to you?

Your initial post on this thread used language that excused the behaviour of the teacher in question, and the situation you described bore no resemblance to the reality of the situation where this woman knew the boy from school and made the effort to actively groom him.

I'm also not attempting to have the last word, I'm merely defending my argument. The thread can go on for any length of time, it isn't up to me to kill it off.

Also I haven't tried to ridicule anybody here at any point. I have made bold statements undoubtedly, but that is due to the seriousness of the subject. There are people here who I would have serious reservations about based upon what they have posted, they have had a go at me and I've had a go back.

As for your opinion not being able to be wrong, I'm afraid you're mistaken there as well. If I came on here and made a racist slur and said it can't be wrong because its my opinion you'd laugh me out of the place and rightly so. You are entitled to an opinion, you are not entitled to believe it to be correct you because you hold it and you can expect it to be challenged if it is wrong.

I think you should look again at the particulars of this case and maybe come back and post your opinion on it after you have.

tommyled1984 wrote: »

YES you killed this thread, hence the lack of posts. NO AGAIN I did not excuse the behaviour of the teacher in my initial post. YES you did try to ridicule me. "They had a go at me and i had a go back" im too lazy to check but im confident that you had a go at a lot more people than people have had a go at you. An absolute dose....

Tommy I didn't ridicule you, I didn't "kill the thread" and I think you need to re read your initial post in the thread and examine it in finer detail.
If you're too lazy to check that's on you. People have a go at each others arguments here all the time, if you don't like that, again it's too bad.

I'm an" absolute dose"? Take a look in the mirror.