Mohammed was a child molester - Page 111

Agnapostate · #**1101** (**permalink**) 10-11-2008, 07:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Makedde

I asked you a question, you refuse to answer because you cannot provide the proof. You fail.

I hereby request that you provide me with a peer-reviewed study on the topic of neurology written by a gardener. Start now. If you cannot do this, you fail.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Makedde

Second, don't give me the facepalm treatment. You basically stated that a man should anticipate sex if a woman comes home with him, not me.[/font]

And then you used the patently absurd analogy about you expecting to be raped when you were at your neighbor's house for tea.

Makedde · #**1102** (**permalink**) 10-11-2008, 07:20 PM

Did these people go to a prison and speak with convicted rapists?

Do any of these 'subjects' believe that rape is a biological act?

Makedde · #**1103** (**permalink**) 10-11-2008, 07:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Agnapostate

I hereby request that you provide me with a peer-reviewed study on the topic of neurology written by a gardener. Start now. If you cannot do this, you fail.

So you cannot provide me with the answer, then? Yes or no?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Agnapostate

And then you used the patently absurd analogy about you expecting to be raped when you were at your neighbor's house for tea.

I said it so you wouldn't have to.

Agnapostate · #**1104** (**permalink**) 10-11-2008, 07:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Makedde

So you cannot provide me with the answer, then? Yes or no?

I am requesting that you provide me with public statements provided by a layman who would have no expertise in a techical field. Since you expected me to be able to do this, I am requesting the same of you.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Makedde

I said it so you wouldn't have to.

I don't believe I would have said anything so patently absurd. A man in a romantic relationship with a woman who is invited back to the woman's house for "coffee" (haven't you ever watched Seinfeld?!) can reasonably expect that they are returning to her house to engage in sexual activity of some sort. If she had wanted to simply "drink coffee," they could have done so in a public area, and an invitation back to a private area should be a fairly obvious indication.

When I was in high school (I'm not far out of high school, as it were) I went to a girl's house to "hang out" after school. (Not much different than "drinking coffee," or so one would expect.) We talked for a while, and then she told me that I should probably go, since there was "nothing else for us to do." We could have talked just as easily outside, and no, I wasn't happy about being led along on what essentially amounted to a wild goose chase. And yes, I had been expecting "something," as we'd been together for about a month and a half. But I neither did anything to her, nor would it have been morally acceptable for me to do anything to her. But I can understand the motivation of somebody who would have.

Makedde · #**1105** (**permalink**) 10-11-2008, 07:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Agnapostate

I am requesting that you provide me with public statements provided by a layman who would have no expertise in a techical field. Since you expected me to be able to do this, I am requesting the same of you.

Nice why of trying to get of it, hmm? Ain't gonna happen, buddy. Give me what I want and maybe I'll make an effort to find what you want.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Agnapostate

When I was in high school (I'm not far out of high school, as it were) I went to a girl's house to "hang out" after school. (Not much different than "drinking coffee," or so one would expect.) We talked for a while, and then she told me that I should probably go, since there was "nothing else for us to do." We could have talked just as easily outside, and no, I wasn't happy about being led along on what essentially amounted to a wild goose chase. And yes, I had been expecting "something," as we'd been together for about a month and a half. But I neither did anything to her, nor would it have been morally acceptable for me to do anything to her.

Your girlfriend invited you to her house to hang out. Many people hang out at their partners houses but no one expects sex. You are selfish if you expected this.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Agnapostate

But I can understand the motivation of somebody who would have.

Why am I not surprised?

Agnapostate · #**1106** (**permalink**) 10-11-2008, 07:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Makedde

Nice why of trying to get of it, hmm? Ain't gonna happen, buddy. Give me what I want and maybe I'll make an effort to find what you want.

Your girlfriend invited you to her house to hang out. Many people hang out at their partners houses but no one expects sex. You are selfish if you expected this.

Why am I not surprised?

This will be my last response to you. I have already explained in rather elaborate detail why your analogy and your demand for the public commentary of laypersons and technical matters is foolish. Unless you resort to some tactic other than referring to dignified professionals as rapists and rapist supporters, and posting inane nonsens, you will receive no further replies from me.

Makedde · #**1107** (**permalink**) 10-11-2008, 07:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Agnapostate

This will be my last response to you. I have already explained in rather elaborate detail why your analogy and your demand for the public commentary of laypersons and technical matters is foolish. Unless you resort to some tactic other than referring to dignified professionals as rapists and rapist supporters, and posting inane nonsens, you will receive no further replies from me.

Question: Did you, or did you not, claim that rape was biological? Yes or no.

Question: Is there a cop, doctor, counseller, victim or lawyer who agrees? Yes or no?

Simple, really. I would have more respect for you if you would just state 'yes' for the first question, and 'no' for the second.

The fact that you are ignoring me futher proves that I win.

Agnapostate · #**1108** (**permalink**) 10-11-2008, 07:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Makedde

Question: Did you, or did you not, claim that rape was biological? Yes or no.

Question: Is there a cop, doctor, counseller, victim or lawyer who agrees? Yes or no?

Simple, really. I would have more respect for you if you would just state 'yes' for the first question, and 'no' for the second.

The fact that you are ignoring me futher proves that I win.

I have told you repeatedly that the aforementioned varieties of individuals have no grounding in the field of sociobiology, and would thus have not studied components of evolutionary behavior or adaptation as it relates to rape. Thus, it is implausible to assume that any such individual would have made a public statement or any sort of commentary regarding the issue of the evolutionary basis for rape, just as it is implausible to assume that a gardener would have made a public statement or any sort of commentary regarding the topic of neurology.

What do you not understand?

Makedde · #**1109** (**permalink**) 10-11-2008, 07:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Agnapostate

I have told you repeatedly that the aforementioned varieties of individuals have no grounding in the field of sociobiology, and would thus have not studied components of evolutionary behavior or adaptation as it relates to rape. Thus, it is implausible to assume that any such individual would have made a public statement or any sort of commentary regarding the issue of the evolutionary basis for rape, just as it is implausible to assume that a gardener would have made a public statement or any sort of commentary regarding the topic of neurology.

What do you not understand?

I don't care about socio whatever, is there someone within the law who agrees with you? Are these socio people right in their opinions and everyone else is wrong?

Jellah · #**1110** (**permalink**) 10-11-2008, 07:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Agnapostate

Except that the experts who express their views in the links provided do so in a dignified and proper way. They do not accuse their opponents of being rapists or supporting rape. Rather, they cite factual evidence to support their position, which is something that you have not done.

I didnt see FACTS, I saw conclusions that arent supported.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Agnapostate

Did you read beyond the first paragraph? If you had, you might have noticed this:

I read the whole thing, it wasnt really that long or in depth.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Agnapostate

Notice that the term "conducted a series of studies" is used. According to my calculations, that would indicate that they conducted a series of studies. Further analysis indicates that the fact that they conducted a series of studier runs directly contrary to your assertion that they didn't.

Did you notice they didnt give ANY real detail on those "studies" nor link to them or even discuss any real details about them. They point to one study where they interviewed 790 girls. Firstly, this isnt enough for a study, secondly what questions did they ask that would help them truly determine such sweeping conclusions.

Its rather easy to say "series of studies" if you arent going to actually POINT to those specific studies for people to review for themselves isnt it. They could be fictional studies for all we know.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Agnapostate

In the (probably overly optimistic) hope that I can convey this message in a simple or concise manner, I will repeat this one last time. NOBODY. IS. SUGGESTING. THAT. RAPISTS. ARE. TRYING. TO. GET. WOMEN. PREGNANT. What is suggested is that rape evolved as a reproductive strategy for males that were not able to gain sexual access to females via conventional methods. Would you suggest that all men interested in sexual interactions with females are attempting to impregnate them? No. You would rightly recognize that as an absurd premise. Much like sexual pleasure evolved as a reproductive adaptation (those who felt greater sexual pleasure naturally engaged in the activity more, and thus reproduced more), rape evolved as a reproductive strategy for men unwilling to obtain mates in the conventional manner. It is absurd to suggest that men who rape women in contemporary times are attempting to impregnate them, and it is likely for that reason that nobody here has suggested that.

Again, you agree that is ridiculous that men rape to get women pregnant YET you continue to say its a "reproductive stratedgy" which would mean it IS the underlying reason they rape...to get women pregnant.

Its also very far fetched to say why men did it in previous times when we are still looking into why they do it NOW. Are those men from ancient times available to study?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Agnapostate

What is this nonsense? Are you honestly comparing the two? Your arguments have drastically decreased in quality from their originally form, which was already shoddy enough. It has been evidenced that rape as a whole evolved as a reproductive strategy, and today largely functions as an attempt to gain sexual gratificaton, whereas the rare motives of a few isolated serial killers cannot say anything to the motives behind serial killing as a whole.

How cute, you think trying set yourself up as my intellectual superior will actually work to accomplish something.

It hasnt been evidenced that rape as a whole evolved as a reproductive stratedgy. You fail on that alone!!

Yet the MAJORITY of serial killers say sexual gratification is what they get from killing...so there is definitely a link between sexual gratification and killing. Its rather easy to say a crime is about sex when there is ANY sort of sexual arousal or gratification linked to it...but what you arent dealing with is that there is something that comes BEFORE the sexual arousal and gratification...like the need to make someone fear you and have control over them. When that compulsion is satisfied it also causes a sexual arousal and gratification BUT the actual crime is not motivated by sexual lust at all...its a byproduct.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Agnapostate

As great an imposition it may be upon you, I would beg you to offer more compelling and accurate evidence. Your implausible example says nothing whatsoever as to the availability of prostitutes and the willingness of men to seek them out as opposed to the availability of ordinary women that men feel they are entitled to sexual gratification from.

The fact is there are prostitutes all over...many are your bottomrung crackhoes who will do it for five bucks.....if sexual lust is really the only motivation why not go to them? Why risk imprisonment to rape an unwilling victim rather than go to a willing woman for five bucks?

I also see you are back to some "entitlement" men feel to have whomever they choose....shouldnt matter if its a 6 year old, a 24 year old , a family pet ....right? That sounds more and more like you DO view that the natural status of women, children and animals is to be sexual tools for men and men are simply reacting to our unwarranted refusal to be sexual toys and assert ourselves as sentient beings.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Agnapostate

Paying attention is fun.

Yea, why dont you try it sometime.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
PUTIN the child molester SCUM insults Vice Prez Cheney	f100supersabr	Current Events	21	09-26-2008 10:55 AM
Clinton Pardoned Child Molester	JP5	History & Past Politicians	10	10-10-2006 07:31 AM
Mohammed B.: Murderer or Terrorist?	slurp11	Current Events	0	09-25-2005 06:44 AM
Child Murderer/Molester Duncan	JP5	Current Events	14	07-14-2005 11:32 AM