Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ichy Smith who wrote (204989)	10/2/2006 10:43:15 PM
From: SiouxPal	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

You were defending the current Republicans by my perception. That's a fact. Or else I read wrong.

To: Ichy Smith who wrote (204989)	10/2/2006 10:48:07 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

<If he is guilty of molesting children or abusing children, I hope they hang him.> Would people please stop abusing the word "children". Hanging is a bit extreme for a victimless "crime". When I was 17, I was perfectly capable of telling people to take a hike. Especially people like that who would obviously not want to be found out. A 17 year old is not a "children". If you hang for such an offence, you will be doing a LOT of hanging as there is a LOT worse crime than that going on in the community. BTW, what's the difference between abusing children and molesting them. I suppose one is "You little sod! You despicable piece of spoiled brat horror". That would be abuse. Molesting would be groping with hands in a sexual way, which wouldn't necessarily involve genital contact. Palestinians are always going on about their children being killed by Jews. But their "children" are usually fully-grown young thugs out for trouble and it's not surprising that Jews fight back. Some of those "children" are being supplied with explosives to wear in suicide attacks. I wonder if those "children" are also offered a whole passel of virgins in the hereafter. In many countries around the world, such as Holland, the age of consent [to sex] is a LOT lower than 17. That's recognizing the facts of post-pubescent sexuality. Pretending that 17 year olds are children is silly. They used to be married often enough and having a family by then. It was no big deal. What is more weird is the current attitude of delayed adulthood until early 30s when settled relationships and families are started. It's psychologically and physically flawed as an ideology. It's stupid! People should be growing up at 15 and 16, not 35. Mqurice PS: Edit... I see you have taken a wider look at it [I was surprised by your vehemence in that first post I saw] <If the boy is over the age of consent, and there was no sex, no one has so far as I have heard intimated there was sex, The guy is guilty of dirty messaging. In the messages I have seen there didn't seem to be a message saying screw off foley ya bug me. So was the kid a willing participant or what? Hysterics and conviction before one has any facts, and I don't have a lot of them seems to be the forte of the Democrats >