I am sooo much smarter than you!!!!

klinky · Post by **klinky** » Sat Jun 28, 2003 3:29 pm

I missed one line, where you said it was a joke.

You did continute to debate tho...

Maybe you should take things seriously for once before you start shoveling shit to have fun.

Your replies in no way resembled a joke.

fyrtenheimer · Post by **fyrtenheimer** » Sat Jun 28, 2003 3:34 pm

Don't roll your fucken eyes at me, I'll kill you over the internet.

Maybe you should stop taking things so seriously? You're just using that as an excuse. Even after that, I was STILL talking about how I felt about that situation, and not how YOU shouldn't be doing these things.
I was done "debating" by the way, which I said, until you went and wrote a fucken essay about it. I'll let you be the man you so hope to be one day by allowing you to "be the first one" to say 'this is stupid'.
You of ALL PEOPLE should know when I joke, considering how much we talked about it.

emp|typ|athetic · Post by **emp|typ|athetic** » Sat Jun 28, 2003 4:00 pm

Whatever. I'm totally serious.

I remove my previous argument on account of it being just a bunch of shit I made up to spur this conversation.

Klinky makes an excellent point.

klinky wrote:Around teenage years people are more mature and there is a actual physical change in the bodily structure that starts to make girls more attractive around that age.

I'll go further and state that yes, even nine-year-olds can become an object of attraction.

This can be proven historically, when we look back a couple of centuries and see that marrying child brides was common place. We can even look around us at 3rd world cultures where this custom is still taking place, and will probably continue to be for quite a while.

You can argue, of course, that that may not be a good example as such customs have been replaced for a reason in our 'enlightened' society. I suspect it became more an more inappropriate as the feminist movement grew in influence, and fought to stop female exploitation.
You may be correct, in the sense that carrying out one's attraction to under aged females into a concrete relationship is immoral, as the the female will become a likely victim of exploitation -in some for or other- because she's not old enough to see things rationally. However what's 'moral' in our society and what's 'instinctive' are seldom the same.
Nor should they be, because then we'd have anarchy, and that would just complicate stuff.

klinky · Post by **klinky** » Sat Jun 28, 2003 5:32 pm

fyrtenheimer wrote:Don't roll your fucken eyes at me, I'll kill you over the internet.

Maybe you should stop taking things so seriously?

Maybe you should take things more seriously. Maybe the internet isn't the shit hole of 'pathetic' losers you make it out to be. Maybe the "internet" or "web" isn't "real" but there are real people who make it up. There are real people on the other end. It's as real as writting a letter to grandma.

You were not done debating you were still bringing up points and I was counter-pointing them. That's how a debate works. It ends when one person shuts up.

The internet is not Rachel's funhouse, not everyone is going to know you're joking. I don't know if you're joking half the time.

klinky · Post by **klinky** » Sat Jun 28, 2003 5:34 pm

emp|typ|athetic wrote: [Stuff that makes sense]

8)

fyrtenheimer · Post by **fyrtenheimer** » Sat Jun 28, 2003 6:14 pm

emp|typ|athetic, I know kids younger than 13 can become attractive, infact, I'm pretty fucken sure I even used that as an example in my previous post. But would you fuck a 9 yr old? No. Just because back then some 70 yr old married a 13 yr old doesn't mean it's right. If you remember correctly, it was because she had to.

Second, what you just posted Gabe proves again, that when we talked about that 'loser' thing, you didn't pay a god damn cent of attention. As always, you skimmed through everything I fucken said to you, like right here

I missed one line, where you said it was a joke.

Also, yet again, you missed this:

Now that I've said my piece, I'm going to say that this is all one big funny conversation. It's not worth it. I want EC's cookies

I wanted to end it right there, but you kept going. And obviously I take things seriously or we wouldn't be having this kind of conversation. Not that our previous conversation about the internet has nething to do with this topic.
And now since it's detered into personally attacking me and way off subject of the fact that I just don't agree with what you agree with, I'm not going to say anything and I sorely suggest that you shut the fuck up about it.

emp|typ|athetic · Post by **emp|typ|athetic** » Sat Jun 28, 2003 6:41 pm

emp|typ|athetic wrote:You can argue, of course, that that may not be a good example as such customs have been replaced for a reason in our 'enlightened' society. I suspect it became more an more inappropriate as the feminist movement grew in influence, and fought to stop female exploitation.
You may be correct, in the sense that carrying out one's attraction to under aged females into a concrete relationship is immoral, as the the female will become a likely victim of exploitation -in some for or other- because she's not old enough to see things rationally. However what's 'moral' in our society and what's 'instinctive' are seldom the same.
Nor should they be, because then we'd have anarchy, and that would just complicate stuff.

It's all in there.

fyrtenheimer · Post by **fyrtenheimer** » Sat Jun 28, 2003 6:55 pm

Ok, I see that, but you didn't add to anything

I thought I said I'd stop but look at me go!

Well, I can't be the one to say it's immoral, I just disagree with it.

Instinctive? Instinctive isn't even the word for it. The way you're saying can basically be summed as, well, since it's instinctive, it's not wrong. And that is very wrong. That makes it sound like an urge, and yet again, children have urges. Just because you have the urge to do something, doesn't mean it's right. That's pretty fucken obvious.

Just because a 13 yr old is old enough to stay in the house by themselves and make a box of fucken macaroni, doesn't necessarily mean that they're old enough to take something as a relationship seriously, it's well known that kids like to pose as adults, but you have plenty of fucken years to grow up, and if you're that age where you're considered a fucken adult, then you should alteast show the responsibility
to let that kid realize that there's more they need to be worried about than a relationship, especially with someone who's 7yrs experience to their age.

Also, that's great gabe that you were 15 and making so many dollars an hour. You were also a drop out, and later on, even though you got paid good, you bitched and moaned about your job and then finally got fired, and look where you're at now? Not that I'm saying that when you're an adult, adults make the right choices, but every child should take the oppurtunity to take it easy and not worry about things like that just yet.

Would you have sex with a nine yr old? No, you would not.

emp|typ|athetic · Post by **emp|typ|athetic** » Sat Jun 28, 2003 7:37 pm

Let's make it simple.
I did'nt say it was right.
I actually supported how our society sees that as immoral.

However, I didn't say it was wrong either.
I think it's beyond us to descide on that.
Hell, I don't know if murdering someone is wrong. Doesn't nescesarily mean I'm gonna murder someone, though.
Anyway, my point is that just cause you've been fed soemthing all your life it's no reason to take things for granted.

Besides, I think morality is completely subjective, and cannot be defined as a constant value.

and I really didn't get this part:

Just because a 13 yr old is old enough to stay in the house by themselves and make a box of fucken macaroni, doesn't necessarily mean that they're old enough to take something as a relationship seriously, it's well known that kids like to pose as adults, but you have plenty of fucken years to grow up, and if you're that age where you're considered a fucken adult, then you should alteast show the responsibility
to let that kid realize that there's more they need to be worried about than a relationship, especially with someone who's 7yrs experience to their age.

fyrtenheimer · Post by **fyrtenheimer** » Sat Jun 28, 2003 8:25 pm

That was more or less directed towards klinky, what he said about a 13 yr old being responsible because they can stay at home by themselves

Well, I was just telling you how I felt on the issue, and I did just say in the previous post that I can't be the one to say it's immoral.

But what does

my point is that just cause you've been fed soemthing all your life it's no reason to take things for granted

have nething to do with having a relationship with a child?