Explicit Writing Democrat Scandal

[Devastatin Dave]

That was pretty smart.

However, the difference is that homosexuality practiced between consenting adults does not hurt anyone.

Pedi does.

If I was attracted to kids I would just deal with it. I would not act on it nor glorify it in writings.

If this guy is a pedi, it sucks for him. He shouldnt be hated for that, but he should be condemned for supporting it through his writings.

However, I dont think he is. His other explicit stuff has a lot more to do with girls than guys, which puts them in a very negative light.

But the definition of pedifilia these days, according to Lemur and many democrats, is graphic conversation with 16 year olds over the internet (age of concent is 16 in DC BTW). This guy is writing this stuff, it hasn't been proven that he's acting out on this.
Prince, btw, who are you to judge this man. If two homosexual guys, 16 years old, have sex, isn't that consenting? Are you discreminating against youths now? Strange how you can get all pissed when someone discusses your sexual orientation but yet you call someone that has a different preferance than yours, they're "sick". Judge not lest ye be judged.
Remember, its not that we choose who we love, I believe I read that from a GLADD pamplet or something.

[Lemur]

But the definition of pedifilia these days, according to Lemur and many democrats, is graphic conversation with 16 year olds over the internet (age of concent is 16 in DC BTW).

Wow, you're just slingin' the lemur's name all over the place. Here's what I've said on this issue, so's you can slander me correctly:

I'm all for gay rights, but that has zero to do with this situation. I would feel the same way if Foley was having sex with a sixteen year old female. As for age of consent, I have never made any arguments on the subject, largely because I have no strong views on the matter. I don't think kids should be prosecuted for having sex with roughly same-aged kids (further direction should be on the parents, not the cops), but I do think there should be legal protection for kids from adults. The laws, as they stand, do a pretty good job.

Pedophilia is the sexual attraction to pre-pubescent children. The forbidden fruit that tempted this Congressman were teenagers, so technically his disorder would be known as ephebophilia, which is the sexual attraction to kids who've reached or passed puberty. A distinction that will be entirely lost on the public at large, but there it is.

And most importantly:

Who here really believes that dirty IMs were the (pardon the pun) long and the short of it? What about that message about remembering San Diego (or wherever)? Let's get real for a minute, shall we? The odds are extremely high that Foley found opportunity to do more than type with these lads. If all he had done was exchange cyber-fantasies, I doubt he would have resigned in such a hurry.

There ya go, DevDave. If you're going to misrepresent me, please do so with accurate quotes.

[Ser Clegane]

Somewhat on topic - there recently was an interesting article on (the treatment of) pedophilia in Der Spiegel

"I Hate My Desires - They Make Me Sick"

[Don Corleone]

No, Ser C, I don't think this story makes Webb a pedophile per se. I do think it makes me seriously question the values and the judgement of an author, regardless of his own desires, that would think this makes for good reading.

What's more, context is everything, and having read the passage in context, the father is a farmer, selling his rice at a agricultural collective. He blows his son in front of the buying agent, and proceeds to have a discussion about his rice harvest. Nobody bats an eye.

What does that say about the author's views? That in a normally funcitoning world, thinking adults wouldn't really bat an eye when a father publicly performs oral sex on his child?

Is this really the judgement we want to put into leadership in the Senate?

[Ser Clegane]

What does that say about the author's views? That in a normally funcitoning world, thinking adults wouldn't really bat an eye when a father publicly performs oral sex on his child?

I do not know the book - I have only read the review at "Publishers Weekly" on amazon:

Webb's cultural and political portrayal of Vietnam 25 years after the war's end is delivered with such bold strokes and magical detail that it really doesn't matter that the plot itself is relegated to the backseat. This is a highly personal and empathetic look at today's Vietnam, a land of misery and inequity, yet one still vibrantly alive. The story follows the experiences of Brandon Condley, an ex-Marine whose job it is to find missing American soldiers, dead or alive. Condley is trying to track down Theodore Deville, an army grunt who not only deserted his unit in 1969 and killed a fellow serviceman, but then joined the ranks of the enemy. Condley is convinced Deville is still alive, operating somewhere in southeast Asia's underground economy. Webb introduces a rich cast of supporting characters as Condley pursues his quarry across Vietnam, Australia, the former Soviet Union and Thailand. Among the most delicately etched is Dzung, a former South Vietnamese officer now relegated, like thousands of others on the losing side, to a menial station in life, one that he and his family have no hope of escaping. Such characters, as well as the highly textured mood and atmosphere that Webb creates, tend to further eclipse the main narrative and shift the focus to the moral consequences and social fallout of the war. This detailed, lovingly drawn portrait of Vietnam reveals a sad, tortured country that has never recovered from the horrifying events of a quarter-century ago. Major print and radio advertising. (Sept. 4)Forecast: Webb (Fields of Fire) is no stranger to the bestseller lists; endorsements from heavy hitters like Sen. John McCain will help put him there once again.

Perhaps he wanted to show that it is not a functional world were a father performs oral sex on his son and nobody bats an eye?

[Don Corleone]

Don't you think there's less dangerous ways to convey the moral fallout of a post-war society then offering up graphic descriptions of pedophilic incest?

[Ronin]

Don't you think there's less dangerous ways to convey the moral fallout of a post-war society then offering up graphic descriptions of pedophilic incest?

one may think that be the author decided to use it....if one doesn´t like that...then don´t read it.....the truth is that the GOP is embarassed over the page scandal so they are trying to make the democrats look bad also...no need to own up to their own black sheep if they can shift the public´s attention.

and as for "dangerous"....no book is dangerous...people are...

[Devastatin Dave]

Wow, you're just slingin' the lemur's name all over the place. Here's what I've said on this issue, so's you can slander me correctly:



And most importantly:

There ya go, DevDave. If you're going to misrepresent me, please do so with accurate quotes.

Well, when the Lemur starts slinging the mud towards more than just republicans and conservatives, then the Dave will give the Lemur a break.

You and the Prince should start a club and call it the "Ministry of Selective Tolerance".
You should get a lot of members.

[Lemur]

Well, when the Lemur starts slinging the mud towards more than just republicans and conservatives, then the Dave will give the Lemur a break.

You and the Prince should start a club and call it the "Ministry of Selective Tolerance".
You should get a lot of members.

Show me a genuine conservative, and I'll happily tolerate him. I don't see any in the GOP; all I see is big-government hypocrites with an expansive social agenda. I'm supposed to be nice about them?

I don't need for you to "give me a break," heaven forbid. As I stated clearly, I would prefer if your attacks on my beliefs, person and integrity were grounded in things I have actually expressed.

[edit]

If you want to take this further, we should probably move into PM to avoid excessive thread hijacking.