U.S threatens to veto U.N. anti rape resolution?
- Thread starter Roger A. Shrubber
- Start date
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
Your ability to swing and miss is legendary. You see, I'm not supporting the result of everything a person does with their own body and their own property. In many cases I disagree with it, in the sense I wouldn't do some things others chose to do.
It is possible to support a persons right to do something, while not liking the thing that they do though, isn't it?
I think every black, or white or brown etc. person has the right to chose how they'll use their OWN property. If somebody else is making those choices for them, against their will, that's the crime.
If I asked a black person to bake a cake with derogatory or offensive things written on it and they didn't want to, you'd be okay with me calling a cop and making them do it? I wouldn't.
As far as you and 12 year old children, I'd be a bit aghast if I knew you were hanging around the bus station again, "offering rides" to kids, but it's possible your motives could be good. Possible.
Last edited:
Roger A. Shrubber
Well-Known Member
honestly rob, it just doesn't matter who or what you support or don't...which is a very good thing for the rest of the world.
you're just stupid and stubborn..."i don't care that my way would be a complete and total anarchic hell for everyone on earth except the very few strong enough to oppress everyone else....i still want it...."
fucking moron
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
You advocate for racial segregation signs and described pedophilia as a consensual act
londonfog
Well-Known Member
You support another person kicking your mom out a restaurant because he does not serve women.
You support a racist kicking a Mexican out a store open to the public because he is Mexican.
You support a person kicking a same sex couple out a store due to being gay.
You support a black man being refused service due to the color of skin at any business open to the public.
and you say you are not a racist nor bigot. Dude look at the shit you support.
Far as underage sex, do you still think a 12 year old can consent to sex with an adult ?
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
I advocate for freedom of choice and have never heard any good arguments why it's okay to force another person to serve you against their will. Do you have one?
Any human arrangement that begins with one parties consent not counting is suspect. Why you adhere to rapist tactics I'll never know, Poopy Pants.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
I've never supported any of those things.
How does my not supporting those things possibly give me any right to force another person to serve somebody against their will?
I think the only people who can consent are those capable of consenting. I probably would have banged Marilyn Monroe when I was 12, but she was busy boning Presidents and other important guys, she never returned my calls either. I've never gotten over it.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
I'm rubber and your Shrubber, everything you say bounces of me and sticks to you!
londonfog
Well-Known Member
no one forced anyone to open a restaurant that is open to the public. The other day I dined at a members only club and enjoyed a round of golf ( yes I still suck, but enjoy the beers ). It was not open to the public. The owners/member CHOOSE to make that way. Others can too, but when you are open to the public you will do just that. Why do you support me getting kicked out a restaurant open to the public based on my skin color ?
and can a 12 year old consent..just say no
Lucky Luke
Well-Known Member
Just don't let him get voted in again.....please.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
So you're saying that free choice is an important component in human relationships? Well it's about fucking time. Too bad you flip flop on that one so much though.
Could you define what you mean when you say "public restaurant" ? Is your laundromat public or private property ? Who owns it ? You or some imaginary thing you describe as "the public" ?
I don't support you being told what to do with your own property, I respect your right to make those choices your self. If I had a restaurant or golf course, I'd love to have your business, unless you started acting like you or "the public" own the place, then I'd probably ask you to leave. If somebody else had a restaurant or golf course, they might not serve you or they might, based on their own reasons. How do their rules concerning their own property fall to me or you to make? Aren't you now saying consent of the owner of something is no longer important? Make up your mind!
Your obsession with 12 year olds is dying hard...
The only people that can consent are those who possess the wherewithal to consent. The wherewithal to consent is not a set age for every person and the population generally follows a chronological curve, increasing as the age curve increases in number. Our personal and cultural and legal bias doesn't confer or deny a persons ability to consent. If it does could you explain how?
It also follows if a person has the ability to refuse to give consent, there could be a corollary that they are capable of giving consent. Since a refusal to consent suggests capability of making a choice about the thing under consideration.
Anyhow, could you show me where you consented to let other people make the rules for how you will operate your laundromat? I'm sure you were given a choice, right?
londonfog
Well-Known Member
Answer in red. Once again you have been served. Take the L
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
If "the public" is any person, HOW could a place be "open to the public" if the owner is making it clear he/she doesn't want to serve just any person ? Isn't that what's happening when people discriminate?
Are you saying the owner ISN'T the owner? By default, you are. Which means at least some of the time, you are using the word "owner" incorrectly.
I haven't lost, because my claim doesn't rely on flexible meanings....like yours does.
londonfog
Well-Known Member
flexible meaning ? WTF the English language is full of words with flexible or different meanings. They are called "Homonyms".
Your argument started with the word IF. big fail because it may not involve facts. Like IF your mother was a man would you still call her mother ?
Let me deal in facts while you IF
When a person does not what his business serving any and all. He/she can open it as a private club. No IF's involved
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
No, my argument was already made. I was questioning your silly argument, where you claim something can be owned and also "public". Are you falling into the trap of believing "government speak" ? I think you are.
IF, you can stick to one meaning of what owned means that would be nice. How can something be owned and also "public" ? How does that work?
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
most people would choose not to demonstrate how unbelievably fucking stupid they are, but then again, most pedophiles also like to keep that fact hidden away rather than spam pot forums about it
you must be literally mentally retarded or something. that's the only explanation
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
I seem to have missed your astute answer.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
never reply to my posts you fucking pedophile
londonfog
Well-Known Member
He called you a pedophile and believes you are rather dumb.
I tend to agree with the dumb part. You just mask it with proper English.
Far as pedophile, what do you call a person who thinks a 12 year old can be mature enough for sex with an adult...or any body for that matter ?
you were raped. it was not ok. a 12 year old can not consent to sex.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
I understand that you'd prefer young people don't have sex with adults. I have a cultural and personal bias against that too. But like I said when I was 13 I would have boned the lady from I Dream of Jeannie if she would have consented.
Could you explain how our present bias against something makes the something we don't like an impossibility? Your "argument" seems based in emotion and you haven't really made a case for why your argument is accurate.