forum Debate. Debate. Debate.

Started March 14, 2019 by Deleted user

tune

Edit topic

But there's a line between romantic love, and just love in general. So love is still love, but there are definitely boundaries and such to where and when it should be considered romantic or not.

Pedophilia is not love. It's not love if it's just about sex.

Good point.

Well I'm sure plenty of adults thought they were in love with the kid while the kid believed the same.

"Love is love" is a statement used by the lgbtq+ community. Again, please don't group the lgbtq+ community with pedophiles.

Okay okay, wait I just thought about this more. Are you seriously putting love into this equation? This horrible horrible equation? I know you're only saying its perceived love, but no. I understand that you like to debate but that was taken too far in my opinion. Whether or not there is love when a pedophile r*pes a child is not something we should be debating.

I would definitely not be the first to use that saying to promote pedophiles. Plus, what if it was consensual? Yeah I see the flaws but I want to see what you say. If I answered all the questions myself I would get bored.

Dude children are not legally old enough to give consent

IT IS

WRONG

there is no love, because in the eyes of the law, there is no love! It's fucking harassment! It can harm a child's mind!

Also even if the child did consent, it's still statuary rape.
'Love sees past age' means that two middle-aged people can fall in love, not a 40 year old and a 13 year old.
It's simple logic.

I would definitely not be the first to use that saying to promote pedophiles. Plus, what if it was consensual? Yeah I see the flaws but I want to see what you say. If I answered all the questions myself I would get bored.

Well get ready to become real bored son, cuz that shit is wrong and absolutely disgusting and you know it. And the fact that you'd rather uphold debate instead of your own morals is questionable at best and psychotic at worst.

So dude, do us all a favor and just drop the subject. You took it way too far.

Just because you're not the first person to use it, doesn't mean it's right or okay. Racist people nowadays aren't the first people to be racist, but does that make modern racism okay? Are you asking if the pedophilia was consensual? That's . . . not how it works. Dude if you're bored then read a book or come up with a new topic or something, don't debate the technicalities whether or not pedophilia is love. You have to see how thats wrong

Go read The Opposite Of Innocent by Sonya Sones if you want to see how a child is not capable of consent and realizing what they're getting into. It's a first person pov told by the child, and it sure as hell doesn't leave a grey area, because pedophilia isn't a grey area matter, it's disgusting and wrong.
And if anyone actually does think pedophilia is okay, well…

Whoa my peeps. Chill out. I'm the really strict Christian dude. I just like to hear what people think. And see how they work.
But anyways, to comment.
The law has nothing to do with love. Also yes it will seriously harm children.
Gotta agree with you Jyn. Except for the simple logic part. Excuse my pettiness but common sense would work better. Wow I am petty.
For Red. What do you mean by "uphold debate instead of morals" if I only ever argued from my perspective I would be very limited. I think learning to defend all sides is the best way to both find fault and empathy with the position.
Very true Moxie. Yeah I know it's wrong. And books are awesome. But humans are even better.
Honestly Jyn I probably don't have the stomach to read it, but I am sure it tells the tale excellently.

For Red. What do you mean by "uphold debate instead of morals" if I only ever argued from my perspective I would be very limited. I think learning to defend all sides is the best way to both find fault and empathy with the position.

I've never seen you argue for the LGBTQ+ community. I've never seen you argue for women. I've never seen you argue for atheists. I could go on and on, but the fact is you're saying you find more empathy for rapists, murderers, manipulators, and abusers more than you find empathy for regular people who haven't committed any of those horrible atrocities.
So at this point you have to ask yourself.
"Have I taken this too far?"

Spoiler alert: the answer is yes. No one wants to argue with you because we are all fucking disgusted.

For Red. What do you mean by "uphold debate instead of morals" if I only ever argued from my perspective I would be very limited. I think learning to defend all sides is the best way to both find fault and empathy with the position.

I've never seen you argue for the LGBTQ+ community. I've never seen you argue for women. I've never seen you argue for atheists. I could go on and on, but the fact is you're saying you find more empathy for rapists, murderers, manipulators, and abusers more than you find empathy for regular people who haven't committed any of those horrible atrocities.
So at this point you have to ask yourself.
"Have I taken this too far?"

Spoiler alert: the answer is yes. No one wants to argue with you because we are all fucking disgusted.

Woah. That's the only way I can react. Holy crap.

_{That is possibly the most inaccurate thing I've read about anyone in months, however, I don't know every detail and if I tried to defend him I might get something wrong, so I'm letting it slide for now.}

Incorrect how? Ace makes a good point.

Yeah I have not seen Al (however understanding he is) not defend the othr side of which he argues.

But Red has an incredible point. It's nasty as hell.

Different places, different positions. Obviously I wouldn't argue for the lgbt side here because you all can do a better job than me. what would I argue for women? Equality? That song has been sung. The votes are in favor. For atheists? What about them? I might actually try arguing the validity of it, but right here there is no point as (I think) the majority (or at least a large chunk) of people are atheists themselves.
Of course I find more empathy for regular people. But do you not have empathy for murderers? I certainly do. Rapists… No. But also empathy doesn't mean I agree with the position. I have a great deal of empathy for the lgbt movement while also objecting to it. The two are not mutually exclusive.
Have I taken it to far? I don't think so. These encounters only serve to strengthen my mind.
As for being disgusted with me, you wouldn't be the first.

My point was that there are some things that don’t need to be debated. Love in pedophilia is one of those things. If you don’t see how that’s wrong or too far, you need to reevaluate your life. When I brought up to Ella what she did, she apologized and we were able to move on. You however, never apologized. Instead, you asked “what if the pedophilia was consensual?” Do you honestly not see how that’s wrong. I know you like to debate, I know it’s how you work. I realize you wanted to see what we had to say on the subject, and what that had to say about us. But the fact that you still continued to debate this says more about you than it ever will us.

Let me restate that yes I know it is wrong. You have spoken well. I withdraw any rebuttal.

_{(And thank you Nutella. I appreciate it. You also made the good call of not getting involved.)}

My dears, I am not comfortable talking pedophilia considering most of the users on this site are underage. I would prefer if we did indeed drop this particular subject.
It is completely wrong and disgusting and truly not something to be discussed among impressionable minds.

https://teens.lovetoknow.com/High_School_Debate_Topics

Ya'll take a look at this and let's figure out a new subject yea? There are a few that caught my eye.

Obviously ignore the ones that we have talked to death

I think there are certain things about pedophila that can be debated. However, whether or not pedophilia is consensual can’t be. Its not consensual and that can’t be argued. There is NO valid argument you can make for it.