Yes, you said that, but that isn't all you said, and it isn't the statement of your making to which I responded. In Post 8407, dated Oct. 18 [responding to Janadele] you wrote: "Again, I ask the question you have never answered: How can anything that happens among consenting adults lin the privacy of my home affect you, in any way at all" [emphasis added].
I don't know anything about your home, but1 inasmuch as you were using it to make a representative, universal point, what I know or don't know about your home is irrelevant. The fact is, events can and do transpire between consenting adults in the privacy of their homes that affect the citizenry at large. Examples: 2they run a drug business out of their homes. . .they grow pot in their basements. . .they set up a counterfeiting operation. . . they design and implement an internet scam. . .they hack their way into sensitive government documents. 3 Perhaps, however, you had sexual relationships in mind when you wrote what you did. 4I assume you are aware that near-suffocation of a female during intercourse is believed to heighten erotic pleasure. Sometimes that practice, carried too far, leaves the woman brain damaged. She ends up on in a long-term care facility on a ventilator. They have no medical insurance, nor do they have the resources to pay out-of-pocket. 5Who then finances the woman's care?
Your statement (the one to which I responded) simply isn't true. It's both simplistic and naive.
When do you intend to apply for the MDC? At
1, you pretend to be able to read my mind, and divine my thougths, even discern my motives--in contradistinction, in fact, to what I have said, and repeated, and continue to say. Just for the record, this is not the first time you have pretended to know, better than I know myself, what I "really meant" by what I have said. It would probably be a good idea for you to wean yourself of this uncivil and transparent habit.
For the purposes of this discussion, I have intentionally limited my question to A.) consenting B.) adults C.) in my demesne. Whatever you imagine may be going on, it is up to you to demonstrate how the fact that you are forced to imagine it demonstrates that is affects you in any way.
Starting at
2, you list a parade of horrors...not one of which happens on my demesne. You probably ought to consider an apology for the suggestions.
The desperation and futility of your argument is evidenced by a subtle truth. Suppose, just suppose, I were, in fact, cooking meth on my property (I do know how), or making explosives out of household chemicals (even easier) or distilling moonshine. How does what happens (pay attention) On MY PROPERTY, among consenting adults, affect you (or anyone else)? Think--it's an exercise for the student. Be careful not to substitute your ire and indignation, and your perfervid imagination, for reality...
At
3, I must respond by pointing out that you are not reading my scenario, at all. Do consider paying attention.
At
4, I have to ask: is it your experience that erotic asphyxiation is a female-specific activity? Just curious.
At
5, I must alter your scenario somewhat. Rather than fuel your prurient fantasy, consider instead a scenario where a companion and I are felling a tree (with permission--it is private property
surrounded by Nat'l Forrest)--and I am using the experience to give the companion the opportunity to learn how to fell, well. Suppose something goes unexpectedly wrong, and, instead of dropping the snag in the selected bald, my companion, following my instructions, is under the timber when it falls; worse, my companion's pelvis is crushed, and my companion is never able to walk again, much less complete the master's in dance that brought companion to the area in the first place. Who will pay for companion's care? First, I carry excellent homeowner's insurance, for scenaria such as this. Second, companion has insurance. Third, I have my sense of loyalty, propriety, and responsibility.
...I do not know how things work within your ambit, nor care I to speculate.
So once again, your inventions founder on the reefs of reality.
Do note that I am not suggesting (nor have I ever suggested) that
you should be expected to live up to my standards; instead, I insist that your sect has no right to impose the standards of your superstitions against me and mine, particularly among consenting adults in my demesne.
...and do consider improving your hypotheticals.
Now:
About the patent historical errors in the
BoM: Do please explain how your sect's eschatological superstitions are supposed to repair factual error, in the "end times".
About the transparent fraud of the
BoA: Do please explain how Abraham's autographic anti-Egyptian screed came to be included in standard Egyptian funerary texts.
Oh, yes: do please explain how homosexual activity is supposed to result in a flood of welfare orphans. I must have missed a chapter in the Bio textbooks from which I was teaching.
.
