 |
| Register | Login | |||||
 |
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| Calendar
| Chat
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | ACS | Stats | Color Chart | Search | Photo album |
|
| | ||
|
| Register | Login | |||||
|
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| Calendar
| Chat
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | ACS | Stats | Color Chart | Search | Photo album |
|
| | ||
| Acmlm's Board - I3 Archive - - Posts by Jomb |
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 |
| User | Post | ||
Jomb Deddorokku                    Since: 12-03-05 From: purgatory Last post: 5910 days Last view: 5910 days |
| ||
| Maybe when launching things into space becomes more affordable we could just send the nuclear waste on a one way trip to the sun? I dont think it would hurt anything there. | |||
|
Jomb Deddorokku Since: 12-03-05 From: purgatory Last post: 5910 days Last view: 5910 days |
| ||
| Personally, I think making an opinion a crime is absurd, and is just as much a slippery slope to fascism as denying the holocaust. People who we consider to hold wrong beliefs should'nt be jailed, their belief should be shown to be conclusively wrong using facts and evidence. These are the sorts of laws which make me wonder if next the government will pass a law saying to disagree with them is treasonous and dangerous, and thus illegal, then cite this law as the legal precedent for being able to do it. Unless the population is ridiculously ignorant, some things are obvious ridiculous to debate. I dont think people would suddenly think that there is no such thing as the statue of liberty, just because a group of oddballs decide to deny it's existence anymore than people would suddenly disbelieve the holocaust just because a bunch of nazi-wannabe's want to claim it did'nt happen. There may even be another segment of the population who distrust the government so much that the very fact that the idea was made illegal would actually lend credence to it as a government cover-up. | |||
|
Jomb Deddorokku Since: 12-03-05 From: purgatory Last post: 5910 days Last view: 5910 days |
| ||
| I'm still against making an idea, ANY idea, illegal. Just as I'm against making a thought, ANY thought illegal. It's understandable that the Holocaust can cause people to get extremely upset, very understandable, but locking people up for simply disagreeing is not going to prevent this sort of thing from happening again. I think that everyone should be made to watch Schindler's List in school, and be taught about the Holocaust. But using laws to prevent people from questioning things is wrong-headed. And if we start down the slippery slope of illegalizing ideas, why stop at the Holocaust? Every single genocide or major human tragedy should be given equal protection. It should also be illegal to say that the Spanish Inquisition never happened, or to question how the Japanese treated the Chinese during WW2. Then why would we stop there? Maybe it should be illegal to question whether or not people convicted of crime did it or not? Because maybe we are hurting the victim/family of the victim to question whether or not the person charged is really the actual murderer or rapist. But then maybe lets take it further, maybe if you are an American and you question whether or not we should be in Iraq, you are hurting the troops by lowering morale, potentially causing people to die, so that should be outlawed to.
Instead of making Holocaust denial illegal, lets make advocating violence illegal. That way someone who is innocently questioning history and honestly looking for evidence will not be jailed over it, while the hate groups you want to target can still be prevented from trying to organize another genocide. Intent and actions are more important than simply questioning the Holocaust or any other tragedy. On an unrelated tangent, I saw hannity & Colmes a few days agao and there was a Jewish Rabi on there who attended the Holocaust Deniers Convention in Iran, and is a Holocaust Denier. I thought that was very strange. |
|||
|
Jomb Deddorokku Since: 12-03-05 From: purgatory Last post: 5910 days Last view: 5910 days |
| ||
It's good, yes.. but greated album ever? Not in my books. I'd be hard pressed to even put it on my top 20 greatest albums ever. It'd probably make the top 100 though  |
|||
|
Jomb Deddorokku Since: 12-03-05 From: purgatory Last post: 5910 days Last view: 5910 days |
| ||
| It's not really about criminals or children... it's about having a fighting chance if we ever have to rise up and overthrow the government again. | |||
|
Jomb Deddorokku Since: 12-03-05 From: purgatory Last post: 5910 days Last view: 5910 days |
| ||
| Maybe make it mandatory to pass a gun safety class in order to own firearms? No amount of laws are going to keep guns from criminals, who will not register them. And its just not worth giving up your constitutional right to own a firearm over fear about criminals having guns, and most likely would do little to stop the criminals anyway. I think our problems with violent crime in this country stem from a glorification of violence and violent people in the society as a whole, mixed with a justice system which does more harm than good in the long run by not even attempting to rehabilitate most criminals, and infact making most of them more violent than they origionally were. | |||
|
Jomb Deddorokku Since: 12-03-05 From: purgatory Last post: 5910 days Last view: 5910 days |
| ||
| That sort of justice would make us worse than the criminals who we are torturing. | |||
|
Jomb Deddorokku Since: 12-03-05 From: purgatory Last post: 5910 days Last view: 5910 days |
| ||
| Our current system is bordering on Barbaric, and it contributes to the problem more than it helps. Why? Because something about being locked up, raped repeatedly, and treated like dogshit for years on end makes people bitter and hateful towards life. They get out with a "me against the whole world" mentality, are already hardened against and used to violence, and feel like they no longer have anything to lose as everything was taken from them. Bitter, hateful, and violent people commit even worse crimes and have even less empathy than they did going into the system. You have some serious misconceptions about what it's actually like to live in a prison.
Successfully dealing with crime is not about scaring people, it's about showing them the error of their ways, instilling a sense of empathy towards other people, etc. If you merely scare people it wont stop them if they dont think they will get caught (and most criminals dont believe they'll ever be caught), when you're not looking they'll be doing the same things again. If you can instill empathy in someone, then they wont do crime again even if no one is watching them, because they have a sense of the impact of their actions on other people. If we began with public torturing, we'd be traumatizing and emotionally scarring people. Like our current system it's likely to make them bitter, hateful, and unproductive as citizens. On top of that, we'd be desensitizing the whole society to acts of sadism and violence. Next time someone wronged you, maybe you'd just go chop their fingers off, feeling that that is the proper way to deal with things, seeing as thats how we do it officially. Criminality is not a black and white subject. Most criminals dont exist in a vaccuum where they are pure evil vs our pure good. They have families and good points about them to. What if its your son or your brother who is to be publicly tortured and killed? And your neighbors are whooping it up like its prime entertainment to watch this? Now we got whole families who hate the government for what it did to their relative who messed up and committed some crime. Ultimately I think this system would cause far more problems than it could possibly solve. Plus, it would be a national embarassment. |
|||
|
Jomb Deddorokku  Since: 12-03-05 From: purgatory Last post: 5910 days Last view: 5910 days |
| ||
| The potential problem with true democracy is the possibility that the masses can be easily manipulated or can be ignorant, leading to terrible laws. Imagine a true democracy in a very racist nation for example, you'd get very racist laws. Or what if the majority of the nation were one religion and decided to vote to outlaw all others, and make it a capitol offense to speak against the majority religion? I think before that sort of government could be truly successful you'd have to have a large majority of people who are well educated.
The idea that the US is a christian-only based nation is kinda far-fetched. Sure there were some people who were influential and also christian, but so what? The basic idea is not christian at all, it is Greek, from a time when people were worshipping Zeus and his pantheon of deities. That does'nt make it Greek religion based, its more based on the rational thinking of the time. Most laws based on common sense, are just that, based on common sense. If common sense corresponds with christianity on any given topic, that does'nt automatically make it a christian law. Having respect for your fellow man is a far older idea that Christianity, most likely older than any of us can conceive. We only have a written record going back 5000 or so years in some areas, but mankind has been around much much longer than that. Common sense has been with us considerably longer than 2000 years. |
|||
|
Jomb Deddorokku Since: 12-03-05 From: purgatory Last post: 5910 days Last view: 5910 days |
| ||
| What people need is empathy for other human beings, not really religion, to let them know what is obviously right and wrong. I dont go around murdering people, but that has nothing to do with a "God", it has to do with having enough empathy to imagine what it would be like to be murdered myself and not wanting to inflict that on someone else. If the only reason you are'nt going around murdering anyone who pisses you off is because "God said it was uncool in his latest book", then you have serious problems and should seek help at once. Caring for your fellow humans is an evolutionary trait, any tribe that was into killing each other rather than helping each other would'nt survive long enough to pass on its genes. Now on the issue of who came up with the basic ideas of not killing, robbing, maming, raping, and generally treating each other like shit, we will never know. Most likely it was some distant ancestor of mankind, probably not even yet a modern man, because these principles make good evolutionary sense for any tool-using animal which lives in tight knit groups.
I believe there are some misconceptions floating around about what it means to be pro-choice or pro-euthanasia. This position does not mean you advocate aborting every unborn baby and euthanizing every elderly person. It simply means that you value the right of an individual to have the final say in such an important and weighty decision in their life, and respect whatever their decision may be. Who is using abortion as birth control? Are you? I'm not. What woman would want to go through a potentially complicated medical procedure and be ridiculed by rabid pro-lifers as a form of birth control, when the pill or other contraceptives are readily available (or should be in areas where they are not). This would be like suggesting that there are people who decide its quicker to just jump out the window rather than use the elevator, figuring they can just go to the hospital later and get patched up. The funny thing is that I've actually done back flips on the sidewalk before. And in the middel of the street. I was on the gymnastics team when i was younger. I never got injured doing it either. I see nothing wrong with people experimenting with sex at 14, as long as they are safe and responsible about it. Sex is a natural biological urge that is getting pretty strong right about then. No amount of laws are going to prevent 14 year olds from desiring sex. They sure as fuck did'nt stop me when I was 14. Sex ought to be more of a personal or family issue than something the state is involved in regulating. Except in cases of incest or force being used. I'd say that our laws regarding sexuality here in America are far too puritanical, rather than Europe's being far too liberal. I think they have it just about right over there. As for the US being an 80% christian nation, that is also misleading. clearly christianity makes up the greatest majority, I dont deny that, but you must take into account how many of the people said to be christians are actually apathetic christians at best who never attend church. Well below half of all the people I know attend church even on holidays, let alone regularly. But on a census they'd mark off christian because they vaguely remember being in a church once or twice in their lives and dont really understand or care to understand what an agnostic or atheist is. Most people in this country care about religion about as much they care about politics. At least thats how its been at the dozen or so locations around the nation I've lived at various times. (edit - Koryo posted while i was writing this. so i changed some things) (edited by Jomb on 01-11-07 08:58 PM) (edited by Jomb on 01-11-07 09:13 PM) |
|||
|
Jomb Deddorokku Since: 12-03-05 From: purgatory Last post: 5910 days Last view: 5910 days |
| ||
| Aborting an embryo is not killing a human being because an embryo has no capacity for sentient thought or awareness yet. This is because the brain has not yet developed. Once the brain has developed significantly I'd be on your side of this argument. I'm againt late-term abortions. This was discussed not to long ago in a different thread which me Silvershield and Arwon debated seemingly forever in
Right, and most Americans by a large margin dont vote at all. More people did'nt vote, than voted on all candidates combined. As for not having sex at 14, i edited my last post about that. As for that being a Christian value, I'd find that very odd considering that the people who wrote the Bible were marrying girls who were generally 13-14. Mary was pregnant with Jesus in earlier versions of the bible at 14. So is God a rapist then? Until very recently people were commonly married and living their own lives at 14, especially in the middle ages in christian europe you spoke of earlier as an influence on the US. |
|||
|
Jomb Deddorokku Since: 12-03-05 From: purgatory Last post: 5910 days Last view: 5910 days |
| ||
| If the person in question had no brain activity, and we knew they were going to be born that way, then I'd leave it up the parents what they want to do as far as euthanizing goes. It would be a painful decision either way. If someone is in an accident and becomes a vegetable with a miniscule chance of ever recovering, I'd also feel it is the family's tragic decision to make as far as euthanizing goes. If it were me who was brain-dead, I'd want to be killed as to not be a burden on my family.
It's not ok to kill babies, I'd be horrified if someone walked into the maternity ward and started butchering infants. An embryo is not a baby though. Big difference. I'd not want to watch any surgical procedure up close, but that does'nt mean surgery should be outlawed. Edit - I had to make this an edit because I cant post twice in a row
I used the edit because you posted while i was replying and i thought I'd edit it before you even read my reply... but you beat me to it! Most 14 year olds are'nt going to make rational decision about sex or dating. But thats part of life, sometimes mistakes are going to be made, and have to be made in order to learn. All we can do it try to teach them about safe sex, instill whatever our values may be into them, and make birth control available. Telling a 14 year old not to have sex is going to end with them laughing at you behind your back and doing it anyway. That's how it worked for me and many of my friends at 14 anyway. That said, there will be a some teenagers who genuinely can handle it and will make responsible decisions. Seems like its working out for them in Europe if teen pregnancy rates are any indication. I find it distasteful for someone much older to be having sex with a teenager (though there is a grey area in how much older is too much older). But, unless force, or threat of force, is being used, it comes back to people growing up and having to at some point be responsible for their own behavior. Life is sometimes the greatest teacher. When we make it a near capitol offense to have consentual sex with teenagers, we end with nightmare situations such as honest well-meaning 18-19 year olds who have sex within a committed loving relationship with their 15 year old girlfriends and get 14 years in a maximum security prison, plus a lifetime as a registered sex offender out of it. (edited by Jomb on 01-11-07 10:04 PM) (edited by Jomb on 01-11-07 10:09 PM) |
|||
|
Jomb Deddorokku Since: 12-03-05 From: purgatory Last post: 5910 days Last view: 5910 days |
| ||
| I've been away a few days, so some of this reply is a little late.
Abortion has been debated already. I'm bored with the topic right now. But i will say that I've never met anyone who had an abortion as a form of birth control or who took the decision to abort frivolously. I'm thoroughly unconvinced that most people who have abortions do it for kicks. As for teenagers and sex.. Its like this; people are growing up much faster today than ever before, yet laws are forcing them to be treated as if small children for longer than ever before. Basically for as long as mankind has existed up to just relatively recently, there has been a big distinction between a woman who can bear children and a small child who cannot. Traditionally (even in the great christian society you have been touting as the be all end all), a female is no longer a girl after her first period. It's sketchier with a boy, but generally it was around 13-14 when he became a man, and usually after a right of passage. We dont do it like that anymore. I'm not saying we should continue to do it like that, but we need to take into account that there were also biological reasons why it was done that way. After a person becomes sexually mature they will develop sexual needs, and its perfectly normal and natural to find yourself sexually attracted to a person who is capable of having children, it is the primary purpose of sex in the 1st place. Making someone legally into a deviant sexual rapist who will more or less lose their life over something which is perfectly natural is the not only absurd, but just fucking tragic. Now, if violence or threat of violence is involved, there is incest, or one partner is pre-pubescent, then we have a sexual deviant who needs to dealt with in some manner, but preferably humanely because I really believe those people are mentally ill and did'nt necessary choose to be that way. But, if none of those conditions are met then all we have is someone who violated a social more. If the parents did a good job raising their kids, they will make responsible decisions about deciding to have sex or not and to use birth control. But whether or not you taught them well and whether or not you make it illegal, teenagers will be having sex. And thats perfectly normal and natural. "Lets say a 14 year old has sex with a 21 year old man. She gets pregnant, and immediately has an abortion." Why would she immediately get pregnant and instantly have an abortion? Thats the worst case scenario, and actually kinda rare. Plus, its happening anyway, only right now she may feel like she has to have an abortion because the father cannot claim his child without being labeled a sex offender and doing a decade or so behind bars. Right now if she admits who the father is then the father is gone and does'nt even have the option of raising his child. If this was treated as a family issue rather than an issue of criminality, then the 21 YO in your example could be made responsible for caring for his child, and that child might get a father rather than being forced apart from him. I've actually worked around these sorts of situations before, and often times what you'll find actually happens, is the couple develop feelings for each other, the law insists the girl is a victim, and she becomes severely depressed when she finds out the guy she loves has had his life throughly destroyed over her. She'll never be the same, and it has more to do with someone she cares about being hauled off to prison, most likely raped in there with the sex offender label, and forever branded. She will see it as her fault because she was an even partner in the relationship and will be carrying around a great deal of guilt. Oftentimes she will be driven to drug use. "Most 15 year olds are far less mature than 19 year olds. So much so that there is very little chance for a relationship based on anything but sex." Your quite wrong here, a 4 year age difference does'nt always equate to a huge gap in maturity level. I grew up knowing many people with that very age difference (or greater in a couple cases), who got along well as couples. It has more to do with the individuals. Some people are shallow and only want sex out of a relationship, but they will be that way at any age. Those are the types of people you sometimes have to learn about the hard way. "The simple truth is that 14 year olds are not mentally mature enough to make life changing decisions. We shouldn't allow them to, and we shouldn't force them to. " In my home state, a 14 year old can legally go hunting with a rifle, and a 15 YO can drive an automobile. So they are responsible enough to be trusted not to blow my head off or kill me in a car crash, but not responsible enough to use birth control? force? why are you even using that term? I specifically said that cases of force should be handled in the court system, its cases of consentual sex involving teenagers that i feel should be a family issue rather than a state issue. |
|||
|
Jomb Deddorokku Since: 12-03-05 From: purgatory Last post: 5910 days Last view: 5910 days |
| ||
| I hope it works out for Sealand. In my opinion copyright laws have been made overly restrictive and go way beyond their origional intent due to big business and lobbying. Mickey Mouse should have entered the public domain decades ago. | |||
|
Jomb Deddorokku Since: 12-03-05 From: purgatory Last post: 5910 days Last view: 5910 days |
| ||
| Apparently oil is worth blood, but is copyright? How many people would be willing to fight and die over Star Wars, Pokemon, and Backstreet Boys? | |||
|
Jomb Deddorokku Since: 12-03-05 From: purgatory Last post: 5910 days Last view: 5910 days |
| ||
| Why am i not surprised by this sort of thing anymore? It just seems like we are moving backwards on most social issues in this country for a while now. | |||
|
Jomb Deddorokku Since: 12-03-05 From: purgatory Last post: 5910 days Last view: 5910 days |
| ||
| To give someone life in prison over adultery is just plain barbaric. Really, to give anyone any jail time at all over adultery is absurd. Cheating on someone is a sickening act in my opinion, but to make it a felony is a major step backwards. The punishment for cheating should be a quick divorce and everyone thinking you are a scumbag. Unless of course both members of the relationship agreed on an open relationship, but then it would'nt be cheating I suppose. I dont think anything should be a crime without it causing actual physical harm to someone, contained a serious threat of physical harm, or caused loss/damage to property. Everything else (like lieing, adultery, insulting people, generally being a jerk, etc.) brings its own punishment when the behavior comes back to bite the person on the ass later. The sooner we as a nation break away from our national obsession with the court system the better off we'll all be. | |||
|
Jomb Deddorokku Since: 12-03-05 From: purgatory Last post: 5910 days Last view: 5910 days |
| ||
| I thought this was a discussion of the seminal horror movie "House" featuring a brief role from the guy who played Norm on Cheers. Imagine my disappointment when it's this thing instead. |
|||
|
Jomb Deddorokku Since: 12-03-05 From: purgatory Last post: 5910 days Last view: 5910 days |
| ||
| Truthfully I'm not surprised at all. This is the basic injustice in the way our age of consent in this country works. It's just plain wrong, but nobody will do anything to fix the problem for fear of being seen as someone who is "friendly to sex offenders". I predict that the law will continue to get harsher and harsher, as everytime there is some high profile child-rape/murder, there will be a huge pull to make the laws even stricter for all charges that even vaguely involve sex, even though the main focus should be on whether or not violence was involved rather than on something as ridiculous as claiming it was automatically forced and violent just because the girl was slightly below the arbitrary (and too high) age of consent. This is'nt as uncommon as you think either, I've met several people who were sitting in jail or prison over consentual sex with a girl 14-16 years old, who were themselves 17-21 years old at the time of the "crime".
For starters, this girl is not a child, so child molestation is a very misleading name for the charge, when i think child I'm thinking under 12. Also, 10 years is a very long time. I dont see how anyone deserves 10 years unless there was a death or serious injury. I'm surprised they did'nt hit him with child pornography charges because it had been video-taped, then raise it from 10 to 20 or 30 years, thats another move unscrupulous DAs like to pull. Europe appears to be so much more enlightened than us on these sorts of issues when you see just plain barbaric shit like this going on. |
|||
|
Jomb Deddorokku Since: 12-03-05 From: purgatory Last post: 5910 days Last view: 5910 days |
| ||
| These sorts of laws vary wildly from state to state, what in one state may not even be a crime can get you life in prison in the next state. So obviously some states are more reasonable than others. But by and large the rule of thumb is that these sorts of laws are ridiculously over-the-top in the level of punishment they lay on the supposed "sex-offender", not to mention the anguish they oftentimes end up causing the "victim".
No one having sex with a teenager is a pedophile, by the clinical definition of "pedophile", the object of the desire must be pre-pubecent. No teenagers are pre-pubecent, all of them have hit puberty. I've seen this sort of bullshit going on numerous times in several different states. Some young man is caught having consentual sex with his teenager GF, then a swarm of prosecuting attorneys, irate parents, "therapists", etc. come in, insist the woman was raped, and haul the poor scmuck away. 10 years is on the high end of the sort of time he can expect to get, but isn't that far off. 4-8 years is pretty common, at the very least the guy will be labeled a sex-offender, effectively ending his life. You see, all those laws meant to apply to extremely violent rape-murderers of small children apply equally to all sex-offenders, even the ones like Mr. Wilson in this example who only had consentual teen sex. When speaking of laws getting harsher and harsher, I'm looking at such things as Jessica's law as proposed in many states, which would make mandatory sentences for all sex crimes (including this type of bullshit one), some of which are exceedingly high (35 years anyone?, tracking bracelets for life anyone?). Not to mention the sorts of laws which Mr. Walsh want to make federal and apply to all states which would make sex offender registration even stricter and harsher, and yes that would even apply to Mr. Wilson here. You see, the law has decided that all sex offenders are equal, and Mr. Wilson will be officially as dangerous as Mr. Cooey (sp?) or Mr. Devlin. I've never seen any sex crime law actually get loosened yet. if it happens here, that will be the 1st I'm aware of. Pretty much since Megan's Laws it's been a political move to make them harsher and harsher to make a statement. Prosecutors will never be able to differentiate between a legitimate case of child molestation and a mutually agreed-upon encounter, because as it stands all encounters involving teenagers in most states, are automatically non-consentual, by law. So it's their duty simply to prove an encounter took place, not to prove it was forced or manipulated. If age of consent laws were eliminated or reduced several years this would solve much of the problem, because then prosecution would have to prove force or manipulation took place, not simply that something happened. Right now what we usually see happening is a man signing a birth certificate thinking he can take responsibility for his child, then being hauled away for that, as an admission that sex took place, or angry parents confronting their teen daughter and having her admit that her and her boyfriend were experimenting, and that admission is all thats needed to ruin lives. "So, a child older than 12 years should be free to have sex with whomever she pleases? What if it's a 45-year-old man who is sleeping with her? A 13-year-old is not a child, you say, so when that man convinces her to have sex with him (and she ultimately does so of her own volition), he has not committed a crime? Even if, when she's grown and matured, she realizes what a dire mistake it was? (More likely, she won't even realize how much of a mistake it is, but will instead just be psychologically damaged for the rest of her life.) " If no force was involved, then it fits into the category of distasteful. 10 years would still be very excessive. Something like that being a misdemeaner I could go along with, but a felony is very excessive when we are talking about consentual relations in which the younger partner is past puberty and was not threatened, attacked, or coerced. People make mistakes, everyone is going to make mistakes. Thats what we do when we're growing up. Usually its a learning experience. The girl in your example would not be alone at all in having selected a sex partner she later regrets. psychologically damaged for the rest of ones life? how so? I had sex at that age, it did'nt scar me for life. Generally i see it as having been a learning experience. "Don't pull the "Europe is an enlightened Mecca and America is a bunch of Puritanical barbarians" thing. I hate that. You make a sweeping generalization when, in truth, the only people responsible for this injustice are a group of uninformed jurors and a jackass district attorney." You may hate it, but it sure looks true when we go around locking up kids for perfectly normal experimentation. This case is not nearly as exceptional or rare as you seem to think. The only thing unusual about this case is that it got this much publicity. |
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 |
| Acmlm's Board - I3 Archive - - Posts by Jomb |
