test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

net neutrality up date sort of

2»

Comments

  • spinnytopspinnytop Posts: 16,450 Arc User
    edited December 2017
    gradii said:

    Oh I'm sure someone somewhere likes one or the other but I'd hope they're a minority.​​

    Reasons why you would hope that aside, it is interesting that you went from stating something as a fact to hoping it was a fact.
    aesica said:


    Roy Moore (a pedophile)

    Technically no, pedophiles go after prepubescent children so Roy Moore doesn't qualify - keep in mind that this is not a catch-all term for anyone who shows sexual interest in somebody under the age of consent. Also while there is a very convincing set of testimonies surrounding the accusations against him they are still just that, accusations. With due process and all that it is in fact unconstitutional to label someone with a crime that they have not been convicted of committing. There are plenty of things to vilify Roy Moore for, but until the matter has been settled in court it only makes you look rabidly disingenuous to insist that inappropriate sexual contact with a minor is one of them unless you have some hard proof to substantiate the claim. After all, there's a certain someone who loves to make unsubstantiated claims all day every day and then enact policy based on them and we wouldn't want to be following his example would we?
  • jonsillsjonsills Posts: 6,317 Arc User
    Spinny, in legal terms the word "pedophile" applies to anyone who commits sexual acts with an underage person. You're discussing psychological terms, which tend to be more exact, and under which Moore would be classified as a "hebephile" (which is still not a good thing).

    Legal terms also include the word "insanity", which is meaningless in modern psychology. Specific disciplines can use career-specific terminology. (I'm pretty sure you don't go to the store to pick up a quart of bovine lactic fluid for breakfast, for instance.)
    "Science teaches us to expect -- demand -- more than just eerie mysteries. What use is a puzzle that can't be solved? Patience is fine, but I'm not going to stop asking the universe to make sense!"

    - David Brin, "Those Eyes"
    Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
  • spinnytopspinnytop Posts: 16,450 Arc User
    edited December 2017
    Let's dig into that a bit. Here's the legal definition:
    https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/pedophilia

    Since Roy Moore predominantly pursued girls over the age of consent, meaning they were not children legally, it means he's not obsessed with children. So, he doesn't qualify as a pedophile according to either definition.

    Also if we're going to talk about legal terms, we have to recognize the fact that he has been neither convicted nor even charged with a crime. Obsessing over calling Roy Moore a pedophile can only serve one purpose: lending credence to claims of a witch hunt.
  • jonsillsjonsills Posts: 6,317 Arc User
    At least one of his victims was 14 years old, Spinny. You're simply being deliberately obfuscatory, and I for one have had quite enough with people trying to drum up fights online over topics such as this.

    I will no longer be responding to you on this topic. This doesn't mean you're right, this doesn't mean you've "won", this simply means I have better things to do with my time than try to argue with someone who attempts to use (poor) pedantry to deflect from the true source of concern.
    "Science teaches us to expect -- demand -- more than just eerie mysteries. What use is a puzzle that can't be solved? Patience is fine, but I'm not going to stop asking the universe to make sense!"

    - David Brin, "Those Eyes"
    Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!
  • spinnytopspinnytop Posts: 16,450 Arc User
    edited December 2017
    Neat.

    Now speaking of deflecting, wtf does Roy Moore have to do with Net Neutrality? :D
  • aesicaaesica Posts: 2,537 Arc User
    spinnytop wrote: »
    Neat.

    Now speaking of deflecting, wtf does Roy Moore have to do with Net Neutrality? :D
    Not deflecting, just an example borne from the natural flow of the conversation and my seemingly-futile attempt to get people to stop treating politics as something that's either black or white. Seeing people give up on political involvement because they think all the players are corrupt breaks my heart because 1) it's not true and 2) they could be getting involved and making things better for themselves as well as those around them.​​
    (Hopefully) Useful CO Resources: HeroCreator (character planner), Cosmic Timers/Alert Checklist, Blood Moon Map, Anniversary Cat Map, and more (eventually, anyway).
  • spinnytopspinnytop Posts: 16,450 Arc User
    aesica said:


    Seeing people give up on political involvement because they think all the players are corrupt breaks my heart because 1) it's not true and 2) they could be getting involved and making things better for themselves as well as those around them.​​

    I agree o3o also ajit pai is a cringy tool
  • beezeezebeezeeze Posts: 927 Arc User
    look man I am going to eventually read what you wrote...but goddamn.

  • spinnytopspinnytop Posts: 16,450 Arc User

    Hmmm, I guess I could give my two cents, if only because, I've been thinking a lot of the various things I read about the romans. Most specifically, the Western Roman Empire, and how similarly I'm seeing the United States decline.

    This lets me know I don't need to bother reading anything that follows. Thank you o3o
  • aesicaaesica Posts: 2,537 Arc User
    edited December 2017
    "Mr Gorbachev, tear down this (text) wall!"

    Joking aside, I skimmed. No, I think the US is veering more toward the direction of post-Soviet-Union (aka modern day) Russia, and that's every bit as terrifying as it sounds. I say this because we've got an elite billionaire class that's doing everything they can to siphon money from the poor/middle class into their already-packed bank accounts. Putin and his oligarch buddies have been doing this to the rest of Russia for quite awhile now.

    Also, let's not forget, Trump and his goons are doing whatever they can to discredit any part of the press that isn't willing to bow down and act as their personal propaganda arm instead of actual news. When you look at how the press is treated in Russia, what Trump is doing is right out of Putin's playbook.

    Evidence that we're heading in this direction is painfully visible in that robbery of a tax reform the republicans are trying to ram through as quickly as possible. All without any craps given about the people they claim to represent or how it will impact the deficit, no less. Conservatives, the fiscally responsible party? Nope, not anymore. Not after they decided to collectively throw their soulless husks on top of that live grenade they call tax reform. Will they honestly have any values left other than their love of and loyalty to billionaires? Pigs at the trough indeed.

    Anyway, I'll just leave people with this nightmare fuel of a graph:

    msaXeFF.png
    The numbers at the bottom represent percentages of the nation's total wealth.

    Over the next few years, expect that big yellow bar to squish the others even more.​​
    (Hopefully) Useful CO Resources: HeroCreator (character planner), Cosmic Timers/Alert Checklist, Blood Moon Map, Anniversary Cat Map, and more (eventually, anyway).
  • spinnytopspinnytop Posts: 16,450 Arc User
    edited December 2017
    Republican voters vote for the interests of the wealthy because they think they're preparing for the future that their politicians swear is just around the corner where they're all wealthy. "If we can just defeat those darn Democrats who keep giving all your money to the poor, you'll all be rich!" they say to the poor. It's why you keep seeing politicians with a look on their face that you usually see on someone who can't believe their prank of getting someone to mush a pie into their own face is going so well.
  • spinnytopspinnytop Posts: 16,450 Arc User
    edited December 2017
    I don't think aesica was arguing that russia is strong, so not really sure what the point was of a lecture about them being in a shitty state. In fact she was making the point that the us might be headed to the same shitty state that they're in. I don't think so personally, since eventually dems will get back into power - hell eventually americans might actually start noticing patters and decide to put a stop to the constant back and forth in the country. After so many years of one guy threatening to tip your house over the cliff and the other guy butting in braces to make sure it doesn't fall, eventually people might notice that one of these two shouldn't be put in charge of house-sitting.
Sign In or Register to comment.