catsmate
No longer the 1
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2007
- Messages
- 36,952
What are you referring to?Clearly, opinion is just fine here.
What are you referring to?Clearly, opinion is just fine here.
"Every knows" are wallpaper words, intended to cover over the gaping holes in your "argument".Everyone here knows that porn is a disgrace.
Oh look another strawman. You're attempting to move the goalposts from 'porn' to 'misogynistic porn'.Loads and loads of - that's correct isn't it?
And trying badly....Stop trying to be socratic.
Please tell the thread what you would be protecting a child from if you had the chance to intervene where an adult was about to (or was having sex) with a child. We know that you do not know if there is any material difference between the above scenario and an adult scratching the child's back. I mean, you wouldn't intervene if the adult was doing the latter would you? - so it follows that you wouldn't with the former either. You'll CMIIW.Nope
Again, you double down on individualism even when we are talking about an adult having sex with a child.Society has a way of taking meaningless things and influencing people to give those things meaning. Everything from awards to money to sex. Nothing unusual there.
No, I'm not. Any meaning the act may have is a result of the individuals involved.
Yet another strawman.Or you could have answered the question(s). You won't answer because it means acknowledging that simulation (of CSAM) does influence behaviour which would force acceptance that all porn is doing so.
You're not asking questions , you are making insincere assumptions and creating strawman arguments upon them.This is a debating forum; asking questions is normal is it not?
You aren't going to answer are you?
How so.Yet another strawman.
But no demonstration of such.You're not asking questions , you are making insincere assumptions and creating strawman arguments upon them.
Darat's opinion amounts to the law?That it's Darat's opinion is a distraction which you are using to avoid answering; in the UK it is the law and amounts to the same thing. Quit wasting my time.
This is utter rubbish.Not my ethics - but it proceeds directly from the nihilistic pov.
Or well could embrace the subtle options of accepting that different people have different standards. But thats crazy talk .....I'm beginning to suspect the reason Poem is hung up on objective morality is because as long as everyone gets to decide their own moral boundaries, the position that "if some couples agree that watching porn is cheating, and other couples don't think of watching porn as cheating, then SOMEBODY has to be WRONG" is incoherent.
A time waster. Nice.This is utter rubbish.
You aren't following are you.Darat's opinion amounts to the law?
![]()
No you haven't.Maintaining it's me against everyone is a fantasy- and I have presented lots of evidence
Evidence?It's what can happen when one watches porn with actors of legal age who are presenting as underage...which is a point you have been resisting.
... a logical fallacy where someone misrepresents, exaggerates, or fabricates an opponent's argument to make it easier to attack or refuteHow so.
Then stop posting time wasting nonsense.A time waster. Nice.
Then stop posting time wasting nonsense.A time waster. Nice.