NationStates Jolt Archive

What is the effect on ideas when a person or group of persons try to shut down ideas through banning, jailing, closing threads, burning books, killing heretics, etc.

To me the effect is this. It justifies the banned idea. If some one says The Holocaust never happened I notice a ban on his attempt to communicate that idea I may suspect the person has a point. Although when it comes to The Holocaust I know the evidence is there to support that it did exist. When it comes to Catholic censorship I have to wonder. What did books the catholic church destroyed or banned contain that the Catholic church doesn't want me to read? Could it be that the ideas in the books the Catholic church banned and destroyed contained information the Catholic church could not refute and therefore needed to destroy or ban the books in order to protect itself?

When it comes to sexuality. I know the university of Massachusetts lost founding for publishing Judith Levine's book Harmful to Minors. I know James W Prescott was forced out of his job for doing good research that demonstrated something several people did not want to hear. You see by attempting to suppress an idea you justify it.

Here I have had threads closed for manufactured reasons. I have a thread destroyed by having been reduced to my last bump in order to preserve the thread so some one with a busy schedule could get back to it.

When you find out ideas are being banned or withheld do you suspect that that idea contains something the censer couldn't refute? Do you think that banned ideas gain justification from the very action of trying to prevent the idea from spreading?

P.S.

In terms of perverted I've never actually played with them. Although I do think it would be fun. They are vigilantes and they upset legitimate law enforcement with their stupid antics. You are better of not supporting them. I think it would be fun setting them up to wait for a contact in the mall that never showed. They are bad actors and when ever they try to play the part of a love starved minor it is quite obvious.

There is a website where many of my ideas are expressed. It's logicalreality.com.

No I'm not for hurting people, but I am for questioning the current trendy ideas concerning CSA, child sexuality, pedophilia and other ideas.

PS go ahead and ban me. It would do a great service to my arguments.

If the ban is effective, the idea can't gain acceptance because it can't be made public in the first place.

But I don't think that was the answer you were looking for, was it? Seems to me all that you only really wanted to open another thread to challenge the accepted view on effects of pedophilia on the victims. So I'll just be leaving you to that.

If the ban is effective, the idea can't gain acceptance because it can't be made public in the first place.

But I don't think that was the answer you were looking for, was it? Seems to me all that you only really wanted to open another thread to challenge the accepted view on effects of pedophilia on the victims. So I'll just be leaving you to that.

Well kinda in a round about way.

What I'm talking about here are the ideas people know got banned. Or those ideas people know are being suppressed. I'm not talking about the trully effective bans but rather the defective ones.

Well kinda in a round about way.

What I'm talking about here are the ideas people know got banned. Or those ideas people know are being suppressed. I'm not talking about the trully effective bans but rather the defective ones.

That would then entirely depend on the authority that bans the notion, and how much credibility it has to the individual.
For example, the fact that the Holocaust denial is illegal in Germany does not affect the notion that the Holocaust took place for the vast majority of people, as they know why the ban is in place and agree with the motivation.

*Sigh* Not another thread on this subject by you... Of course, we have free speech, to a limit of course. Now, in Sweden, where I happen to live, we have very few censorship issues. Mainly you are not allowed to preach hate towards people of a different color, religion, sexuality and of oposing political ideals and you are not allowed to spread, store or otherwise handle any form of child pornography. Works fine for me, so its a non-issue. On the net, however, the communities are managed by private interest and they have their own private rules, within the law of the society and theres not much you can do about it. If you can't find justification for your ideas and thoughts here, my suggestion would be that you take those same ideas somewhere else and share them with people who wish to listen.

*Sigh* Not another thread on this subject by you... Of course, we have free speech, to a limit of course. Now, in Sweden, where I happen to live, we have very few censorship issues. Mainly you are not allowed to preach hate towards people of a different color, religion, sexuality and of oposing political ideals and you are not allowed to spread, store or otherwise handle any form of child pornography. Works fine for me, so its a non-issue. On the net, however, the communities are managed by private interest and they have their own private rules, within the law of the society and theres not much you can do about it. If you can't find justification for your ideas and thoughts here, my suggestion would be that you take those same ideas somewhere else and share them with people who wish to listen.

I am perfectly aware of what you pointed out.

Ummm... pedophilia is wrong... pretty plain and simple.
If you have some sort of difficulty with the moral concepts, you can't refute the scientific ones of lifetime physical and mental damage pedophiles do to children.
Pedophiles are some of the only offenders who really scare me. I don't care what you, or anyone else says, doing sexual things to children and babies (I just read an article that said 3 month olds have been used) is never right.
Sick.

What is the effect on ideas when a person or group of persons try to shut down ideas through banning, jailing, closing threads, burning books, killing heretics, etc.
Depends on who's doing the banning, why, and to whom. I don't usually start giving credidence to tin foil hat theories just because the Library of Congress refuses to enshrine a book that claims the Moon landings were hoxes.

To me the effect is this. It justifies the banned idea.
This explains so much too.

When it comes to sexuality. I know the university of Massachusetts lost founding for publishing Judith Levine's book Harmful to Minors. I know James W Prescott was forced out of his job for doing good research that demonstrated something several people did not want to hear. You see by attempting to suppress an idea you justify it.
Here we go again. I'm busy right now, could you go find someone else to bug?

Here I have had threads closed for manufactured reasons.
Err, no. Of the threads I have seen you post, one degenerated into threats on your life (forum rules) and was Mod locked, one piddled out (most threads don't last), one never actually got started and was Mod locked for that reason. And the last was died due to me being busy and the forum crashing.

I have a thread destroyed by having been reduced to my last bump in order to preserve the thread so some one with a busy schedule could get back to it.
Sorry, my kids are graduating tomorrow. Helping to prepare for that and saying goodbye to all 148 of them is far more important than responding to you yet again with the same replies that you ignore.

There is a website where many of my ideas are expressed. It's logicalreality.com.

No I'm not for hurting people, but I am for questioning the current trendy ideas concerning CSA, child sexuality, pedophilia and other ideas.
And you were doing so well with an actual question, but yet again it comes down to trying to find people here to agree with your ideas on pedophilia.

PS go ahead and ban me. It would do a great service to my arguments.
If you want to suicide by Mod, you'll have to do better than this.

or example, the fact that the Holocaust denial is illegal in Germany does not affect the notion that the Holocaust took place for the vast majority of people, as they know why the ban is in place and agree with the motivation.

Yes, but on the other hand, the power of the extreme right in Germany is rising.

When it comes to sexuality. I know the university of Massachusetts lost founding for publishing Judith Levine's book Harmful to Minors. I know James W Prescott was forced out of his job for doing good research that demonstrated something several people did not want to hear. You see by attempting to suppress an idea you justify it.

Can I receive more information from you about this book?

Yes, but on the other hand, the power of the extreme right in Germany is rising.


Again? Well, I haven't been there in a while. Still, it's only a very, very small group within the political right in Germany today that actively tries to deny the Holocaust. They tend to try and distance themselves as far a possible from anything related to the 3rd Reich, in order to gain political credibility.

Yes, but on the other hand, the power of the extreme right in Germany is rising.

Can I receive more information from you about this book?

The book questions the notion of asexual children. It also questions whether children need protection from sex. It goes as far as to say maybe protecting childrens purity is harmful.

If you want to suicide by Mod, you'll have to do better than this.

It's so much easier in Christian forums.

Simply type the words I'm a pedophile and your banned. Here it's a little more challenging.

Ugh!! I hate challenging.

The book questions the notion of asexual children. It also questions whether children need protection from sex. It goes as far as to say maybe protecting childrens purity is harmful.

Are we talking prepubescent children or adolescents that are not legally off age yet?

With the first one, I can assure you from personal experience, sexual contact with an adult is harmful and has lasting psychological consequences.
The second one depends on age and maturity of the adolescent.

You tell me this sort of thing is not a crime, and one of the worst people have come up with.

http://www9.sbs.com.au/theworldnews/region.php?id=127783&region=4

You tell me this sort of thing is not a crime, and one of the worst people have come up with.

http://www9.sbs.com.au/theworldnews/region.php?id=127783&region=4


Yea deceptive reporting should be a crime.

Media pundunts have never been honest. 2 people exchanging kiddy porn on yahoo is a pornagraphy ring to them.

I can't say I know what happened although the news story did use a lot of inflamatory language.

Yea deceptive reporting should be a crime.

Media pundunts have never been honest. 2 people exchanging kiddy porn on yahoo is a pornagraphy ring to them.

I can't say I know what happened although the news story did use a lot of inflamatory language.

Such as "27 individuals... had been charged" and "victims as young as 18 months"?

Sure, the media are the bad guys here. :rolleyes:

Such as "27 individuals... had been charged" and "victims as young as 18 months"?

Sure, the media are the bad guys here. :rolleyes:

Dude...he's just trying to troll you and make you say that stuff. It's what he does to try and gain acceptance.

Dude...he's just trying to troll you and make you say that stuff. It's what he does to try and gain acceptance.

I know... that's why I kept clear of him so far. I just took the bait this time.

I remember a case where a person was arrested for distributing kid porn... it was pics of herself.

THAT was dumb.

What you linked us too... meh.

Yea deceptive reporting should be a crime.

Media pundunts have never been honest. 2 people exchanging kiddy porn on yahoo is a pornagraphy ring to them.
:rolleyes: Let me guess, your proof for this supposed media bias and your complaint of systomatic media decption is the same as your proof of the bias and incompedency of psychologist, right?

Or are you going to quote Good Will Hunting again?

Censorship is a great evil in principle yet at the same time it provides great publicity to that which it tries to oppress. Like that game Manhunt a year or 2 ago. Its a bit crap but when some nutjobs started using it as a scapegoat for a murder and tried to get it banned, it flew of the shelves.

On the other hand, total censorship like they are trying in Chine could just be bad, because if the idea is completely erased then it can do nothing. In a couple of generations there might not be any chinese people left who know about Tienemen square.

Censorship is bad but if done badly enough it can be good.

Why must every thread you make be about pedophilia?

Dont you think this is a bit of an unhealthy obsession?
Even if you dont agree that its unhealthy, its certainly an obsession.

If you can admit that, maybe you can admit its not acceptable.

Why must every thread you make be about pedophilia?

Dont you think this is a bit of an unhealthy obsession?
Even if you dont agree that its unhealthy, its certainly an obsession.

If you can admit that, maybe you can admit its not acceptable.

I'll admit it isn't accepted.

Unhealthy could be used to discribe peoples outrage over a topic they take very little time to understand.

:rolleyes: Let me guess, your proof for this supposed media bias and your complaint of systomatic media decption is the same as your proof of the bias and incompedency of psychologist, right?

Or are you going to quote Good Will Hunting again?

If you look at news stories you will notice that pedophile is often used instead of child molester. You may also notice news stories do not feature hetrosexuality in the same way you never see the term hetrosexual used where the term rapist should be. Also what I said about child pornography rings holds true. Often child pornography ring in news stories refers to 2 or more people exchanging pictures taken by some one else over the internet. Most of the time it's 2 or three. When it comes to pictures we are left to take the news stories word for it. The term sadistic evil abusive pictures of sexual abuse could either be used to refer to a close ups of a childs Pee Pee or to pictures showing the slow rape and murder of a child. Also to note there is a common media bias in the simple need for interesting stories. The ho hum stories get little attention while the big ones get lots. It's the news story dog bites mailman vs. the news story mail man bites dog. You can guess which one will be reported. This works similer to black on black crime. Black on black crime is reported as much becuase it isn't sensational enough. The news story selection process can produce a skewed public view.

I remember a story a while back of a couple charged with distributing kiddy porn. Truth was the couple simply provided an age verification service that was purchaced by 2 kiddy porn venders. As to why kiddy porn venders would want an age verfication sevice is beyond me. Any ways this couple was cast as horrid child pornogrraphers when it really wasn't the case. The is plenty of skewed reporting in the area CSA and child pornagraphy reporting.

DSN - you are single-handedly making me rethink my position on moral relativity. You are also making me throw up in my mouth a little.

DSN - you are single-handedly making me rethink my position on moral relativity. You are also making me throw up in my mouth a little.

Same thing could be done with the suggestion of drinking cow blood. People do drink cow blood. Although you may be grossed out by the practice.

Same thing could be done with the suggestion of drinking cow blood. People do drink cow blood. Although you may be grossed out by the practice.

Of course, drinking cow blood is a relatively rare phenomenon participated in by at most a handful of cultures.

People like you who want to fuck children infect just about every society.

Of course, drinking cow blood is a relatively rare phenomenon participated in by at most a handful of cultures.

People like you who want to fuck children infect just about every society.

What meaning do you apply to the term fuck here.

If your talking intercourse no I'm not intersted.

Although maybe you should be banned for using the word fuck.

I'll admit it isn't accepted.

Unhealthy could be used to discribe peoples outrage over a topic they take very little time to understand.

Dude, you apparently want to have sex with small children based on your obsession with the topic. How much more time do I need?

As for Harmful to Minors, I read the book myself, and found that it hardly endorsed pedophilia, but rather said many of the same things people on this board say: gee, just about all of us had sex before our state's official age of consent laws, and yet despite the fact that sex before you turn 18 is officially viewed as a dangerous gateway to self-destruction, most of us nevertheless managed to become decent, hardworking citizens. If that's the case, then maybe we ought to reformulate our policies to conform to reality rather than our myth of the innocent and uncorrupted child.

Same thing could be done with the suggestion of drinking cow blood. People do drink cow blood. Although you may be grossed out by the practice.

Not a good analogy. I would drink cow's blood if I was very hungry. I would not have sex with a child just because I was very horny.

Non-reproductive sex is basically for pleasure. You are willing to traumatize and mentally scar a child just for fun. You suck.

Not a good analogy. I would drink cow's blood if I was very hungry. I would not have sex with a child just because I was very horny.

Non-reproductive sex is basically for pleasure. You are willing to traumatize and mentally scar a child just for fun. You suck.

Your analogy is just as defective.

Are you willing to protect childrens purity at great cost to them. Do you wish to believe in fairy tails etc.

There is nothing wrong with pleasure. I am just as injured as you to see a child hurt. I think are disagreement here is in what cuases the pain.

Discrimiation against pedophiles when it comes to hiring even in places where no children are likely to be is allowed in the U.S.A.

In context of this thread

Notice how quikly you dehuminze? Encouraging hate for any group other than pedophiles will get you in trouble in Canada.

In context of this thread

Also notice how you on this board where flames are not allowed flamed me with "you suck " and you will never even get a warning.

Your analogy is just as defective.

Dude, I didn't even make an analogy.

Your analogy is just as defective.

Are you willing to protect childrens purity at great cost to them. Do you wish to believe in fairy tails etc.

There is nothing wrong with pleasure. I am just as injured as you to see a child hurt. I think are disagreement here is in what cuases the pain.

Discrimiation against pedophiles when it comes to hiring even in places where no children are likely to be is allowed in the U.S.A.

In context of this thread

Notice how quikly you dehuminze? Encouraging hate for any group other than pedophiles will get you in trouble in Canada.

In context of this thread

Also notice how you on this board where flames are not allowed flamed me with "you suck " and you will never even get a warning.


Dude, you apparently want to have sex with small children based on your obsession with the topic. What do you expect?

Seriously, the very fact that you apparently want to have sex with small children should be making you reconsider exactly what you are saying.

In terms of perverted I've never actually played with them. Although I do think it would be fun. They are vigilantes and they upset legitimate law enforcement with their stupid antics. You are better of not supporting them. I think it would be fun setting them up to wait for a contact in the mall that never showed. They are bad actors and when ever they try to play the part of a love starved minor it is quite obvious.
two things:
1. Just the other day you said you played with them all the time. now you say you think it would be fun to, implying that you haven't. You have just lost all credibility in regards to factual statements you make about yourself.
2. Police are working with them now in several stings.