|
Post by rational on Nov 16, 2016 9:02:45 GMT -5
Hi rational Firstly I may have misled you in stating victims are now 40<70 years old. When assaulted the greater majority would have been minors with some young adults also. I am not sure of how old his eldest victim was From what you say this person is not a pedophile although you keep referring to him as one. That doesn't explain why you feel they are abusing you by ignoring the situation. That is a decision only you can make. I have questioned many times why people would continue to trust their salvation to criminals but it is, I guess, a matter of belief. Again, this is a decision only you can make. You need to do what is right for you. As do I but it is difficult to explain belief since there are no facts to support it. OK.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Nov 16, 2016 9:05:54 GMT -5
Only 2 weeks left until the devious paedophile and sex offender gets his sentence. Again, if the person is a pedophile iit could be argued that it is a medical condition that the person was born with and should be treated as such. If the person is just a criminal then the legal system if the route to go. By calling someone a pedophile you are offering them a plausible excuse for their actions. Not sure that this is what was in mind when followeds were told to turn the other cheek.
|
|
|
Post by LITTLEPADDY on Nov 16, 2016 10:24:11 GMT -5
Hi Rational The ongoing abuse I referred to was abuse of the ABUSED not of abuse of me
I refer to him as a paedophile because of continuous assaults of CHILDREN in their every early teens therefore MINORS I apologise if I under UK laws have used the wrong interpretation
I did state "that I am trying to follow Christ's teaching and walk in his way The love I lack for the ABUSER and my longing I have to see him receive a just stiff sentence is one of my shortcomings among others I wish I could have the right spirit to him but I don't
|
|
|
Post by rational on Nov 16, 2016 23:27:22 GMT -5
Hi Rational The ongoing abuse I referred to was abuse of the ABUSED not of abuse of me Explain the abuse of the abused, please. It is not a legal definition but a medical definition. Pedophilia or paedophilia is a psychiatric disorder in which an adult or older adolescent experiences a primary or exclusive sexual attraction to prepubescent children. The International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10) defines it as a sexual preference for children of prepubertal or early pubertal age.
Emotions will do that to a person. Clouds thinking.
|
|
|
Post by LITTLEPADDY on Nov 17, 2016 13:14:27 GMT -5
Well I noted that 2 men were jailed for double figure terms of imprisonment for paedophilia. They had sexually assaulted a 13 and a 14 year old in the past number of months
Regarding ongoing abuse of the abused I have àlready stated that shunning lack of concern and the say nothing and the cover up THIS IS ABUSE to the ABUSED
|
|
|
Post by rational on Nov 17, 2016 18:32:02 GMT -5
Well I noted that 2 men were jailed for double figure terms of imprisonment for paedophilia. They had sexually assaulted a 13 and a 14 year old in the past number of months That's the news. I was just posting the international medical description I can't help but think that hebephilia would have been a more accurate term but I do understand the need for some to use the more shocking term. If you were part of an organization that condones and covers up sexual abuse why would you want anything to do with them? Wouldn't this be like saying the rapist and his legal team were abusing the victims because they didn't want to associate with the victims?
|
|
|
Post by LITTLEPADDY on Nov 18, 2016 10:31:51 GMT -5
You expect more Love & Care & Encouragement from any one who would claim to be manifesting Christ as their Guide As I have said their are some very caring and loving people in the church but not at the top
My thoughts are with the abused and their friends and family
|
|
|
Post by rational on Nov 18, 2016 10:50:18 GMT -5
You expect more Love & Care & Encouragement from any one who would claim to be manifesting Christ as their Guide It would seem unrealistic expectations are resulting in what you are calling abuse.
|
|
|
Post by LITTLEPADDY on Nov 18, 2016 20:33:05 GMT -5
I don't agree and I know neither do the abused I know
So I guess we just agree to differ on this
|
|
|
Post by rational on Nov 18, 2016 22:01:01 GMT -5
I don't agree and I know neither do the abused I know You don't agree? I was just quoting what you had posted.
|
|
|
Post by LITTLEPADDY on Nov 19, 2016 8:19:28 GMT -5
"It would seem unrealistic expepectation"
This is what we will have to agree to differ on as I believe it is the least one could expect
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Nov 19, 2016 13:51:16 GMT -5
Well I noted that 2 men were jailed for double figure terms of imprisonment for paedophilia. They had sexually assaulted a 13 and a 14 year old in the past number of months That's the news. I was just posting the international medical description I can't help but think that hebephilia would have been a more accurate term but I do understand the need for some to use the more shocking term. I think the sexual crimes of hebephiles are shocking enough to normal people.
|
|
|
Post by Grant on Nov 19, 2016 14:40:30 GMT -5
I was wondering if Rational thought it even fitted the category of abuse minimising it like he did. Glad he is not the judge in this case. Everything Little Paddy says Rational comes and attempts to undermine it.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Nov 19, 2016 14:56:58 GMT -5
I was wondering if Rational thought it even fitted the category of abuse minimising it like he did. Glad he is not the judge in this case. Everything Little Paddy says Rational comes and attempts to undermine it. But isn't that Rational's role on TMB?
|
|
|
Post by Grant on Nov 19, 2016 15:45:46 GMT -5
I think he should rename himself to Irrational. It would suit him better.
I think he has missed his calling though. He should have been a scientist. He loves dissecting things even if it is only people's posts.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Nov 19, 2016 17:19:10 GMT -5
I think the sexual crimes of hebephiles are shocking enough to normal people. From a legal standpoint one could claim that being a pedophile was a mental illness and use that as a reason for their behavior and perhaps have their sentence reduced. Labeling someone as a pedophile when this diagnose has not been confirmed does not benefit anyone.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Nov 19, 2016 23:31:45 GMT -5
"It would seem unrealistic expepectation" This is what we will have to agree to differ on as I believe it is the least one could expect If you stay in the presence of someone who you feel is abusing you by not showing a christ-like spirit the question must be asked - "Why would you stay?" You expected a certain behavior but when that expectation was not met why remain and suffer what you consider abuse?
|
|
|
Post by rational on Nov 19, 2016 23:42:07 GMT -5
I was wondering if Rational thought it even fitted the category of abuse minimising it like he did. I didn't minimize the sexual abuse. Just applied what seems to be the correct term. I would not call a person a pedophile who was not and perhaps provide a reason to get a reduced sentence.I am just trying to understand the reality of the situation. From everything that has been posted the criminal does not seem to be a pedophile so why provide the excuse of mental illness? Regarding the additional abuse, if the people you are associating with are continuing to act in ways that you disapprove of and you view their behavior as additional abuse would it not seem to be good to remove yourself from that situation? According to what has been posted the people in consideration are adults. No one is dismissing the experience of the victims but there are solutions to stop the continuing abuse. BTW - I'm glad I am not the judge as well. I am not filled with the milk of human kindness in regard to situations like this.
|
|
|
Post by rational on Nov 19, 2016 23:45:38 GMT -5
I think he has missed his calling though. He should have been a scientist. Are you sure I am not?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 20, 2016 5:11:22 GMT -5
I was wondering if Rational thought it even fitted the category of abuse minimising it like he did. Glad he is not the judge in this case. Everything Little Paddy says Rational comes and attempts to undermine it. But isn't that Rational's role on TMB? Yes, but it can be a pain in the ass sometimes. So bloody irretating. Somewhat akin to parasitic behaviour. He Aught to find another hobby, maybe one on a science forum?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 20, 2016 7:53:19 GMT -5
But isn't that Rational's role on TMB? Yes, but it can be a pain in the ass sometimes. So bloody irretating. Somewhat akin to parasitic behaviour. He Aught to find another hobby, maybe one on a science forum? What is it in particular that irritates you about rational? Is it him pointing out factual errors? Or is it him pointing out flaws in arguments? Or is it him questioning questionable statements made by other posters? Or is it merely because you often disagree with him? Would you prefer the TMB to be a place where people could post whatever they like without fear of contradiction? Personally I find rational to be one of the (few) TMB posters from whom I actually learn things. Do you think the board is better or worse for the participation posters such as rational from whom people (like me) can expand out knowledge and understanding of the world? Matt10
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 20, 2016 10:24:41 GMT -5
Yes, but it can be a pain in the ass sometimes. So bloody irretating. Somewhat akin to parasitic behaviour. He Aught to find another hobby, maybe one on a science forum? What is it in particular that irritates you about rational? Is it him pointing out factual errors? Or is it him pointing out flaws in arguments? Or is it him questioning questionable statements made by other posters? Or is it merely because you often disagree with him? Would you prefer the TMB to be a place where people could post whatever they like without fear of contradiction? Personally I find rational to be one of the (few) TMB posters from whom I actually learn things. Do you think the board is better or worse for the participation posters such as rational from whom people (like me) can expand out knowledge and understanding of the world? Matt10 Ok, you are a satisfied customer, good for you. We all have our taste, our likes and our dislikes;one man's meat can be another man's poison. The PM system is a good way to communicate information privately too, it can avoid public embarrassment of others: putting people in the spot light as a sort of redicule - scoring points, is that the motive or is it to educate and enlighten? Your guess is as good as mine.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 20, 2016 11:57:57 GMT -5
What is it in particular that irritates you about rational? Is it him pointing out factual errors? Or is it him pointing out flaws in arguments? Or is it him questioning questionable statements made by other posters? Or is it merely because you often disagree with him? Would you prefer the TMB to be a place where people could post whatever they like without fear of contradiction? Personally I find rational to be one of the (few) TMB posters from whom I actually learn things. Do you think the board is better or worse for the participation posters such as rational from whom people (like me) can expand out knowledge and understanding of the world? Matt10 Ok, you are a satisfied customer, good for you. We all have our taste, our likes and our dislikes;one man's meat can be another man's poison. The PM system is a good way to communicate information privately too, it can avoid public embarrassment of others: putting people in the spot light as a sort of redicule - scoring points, is that the motive or is it to educate and enlighten? Your guess is as good as mine. I can't tell what his motives are but it is a fact of life that when participating on a public forum there is always the potential for others to disagree with you publicly and to point out errors or flaws in what you have written. If this causes you to become irritated or to feel embarrassed then I suggest using the following handy guide when participating on the TMB. It is free to use and is guaranteed to ensure that the potential for any embarrassment or irritation is minimised. It seems to work for me. Matt10 1. Check your facts before posting them. 2. Don't present your beliefs as facts. 3. Make sure you can stand over any statements you make. 4. If rational points out what he deems to be an error or flaw in your post, start from the premise that he is likely to be correct (even if he isn't always). 5. If you post something that is foolish, be prepared for your folly to be pointed out. 6. If you are not comfortable with having your folly pointed out then don't post anything foolish.
|
|
|
Post by Grant on Nov 20, 2016 12:48:07 GMT -5
Rational argues for the sake of arguing. If someone says something is black he will say it is white just for the sake of arguing or trying to appear intelligent.
If someone says it's raining he will say it's snowing because it was snowing an hour ago. He takes the opposite for the sake of it. If someone is trapped in an abusive situation he seems to think it is their fault for staying. He doesn't have any understanding or empathy for victims. To him the world is black and white when in fact a lot of life is grey. Hindsight is a great thing. Emotions are a fact of life and part of who we are.
You speak like everything Rational says is correct and statements that others say are wrong if Rational starts dissecting their posts of which he does for nearly everyones post, matt10. Rational is wrong on lots of fronts. We are not unemotional robots. Do others find it necessary to communicate like rational does? It is not communicating. What you are saying Matt10 is the way Rational communicates is fine. To you it is but to others it is annoying and people are allowed to have an opinion on it. There is nothing wrong with what Rational says, it is how he communicates it.
There is often no right or wrong answers but just opinions. We wouldn't have voting if there was not. Peoples thoughts and opinions are valid. To some God is real and proof is in nature to others like Rational it is not but it does not mean he is right and others are wrong. It means human beliefs and opinions are varied.
Most pedophiles are sent to jail and not psychiatric hospitals. They are criminals not mentally ill. They are not helped with medication like the mentally ill any more than the general population.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Nov 20, 2016 12:57:00 GMT -5
"It would seem unrealistic expepectation" This is what we will have to agree to differ on as I believe it is the least one could expect If you stay in the presence of someone who you feel is abusing you by not showing a christ-like spirit the question must be asked - "Why would you stay?" You expected a certain behavior but when that expectation was not met why remain and suffer what you consider abuse? Good question. You'll probably get your answer when you do some research on the behaviors of abused people. Yes, and that something is called trust, real trust. Trust is part of it. Anyone who sincerely wants to understand child sexual abuse can do the research themselves.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 20, 2016 13:02:40 GMT -5
Rational argues for the sake of arguing. If someone says something is black he will say it is white just for the sake of arguing or trying to appear intelligent. If someone says it's raining he will say it's snowing because it was snowing an hour ago. If someone is trapped in an abusive situation he seems to think it is their fault for staying. He doesn't have any understanding or empathy for victims. To him the world is black and white when in fact a lot of life is grey. Hindsight is a great thing. Emotions are a fact of life and part of who we are. You speak like everything Rational says is correct and statements that others say are wrong if Rational starts dissecting their posts of which he does for nearly everyones post, matt10. Rational is wrong on lots of fronts. We are not unemotional robots. Do others find it necessary to communicate like rational does? It is not communicating. Most pedophiles are sent to jail and not psychiatric hospitals. They are criminals not mentally ill. They are not helped with medication like the mentally ill any more than the general population. Is rational and matt 10 one and the same person? Ummmmmm! What is the likelihood of that possibility? Unlikely but who knows for certain?
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Nov 20, 2016 13:07:11 GMT -5
I did minimize the sexual abuse. I would not call a person a pedophile who was not and perhaps provide a reason to get a reduced sentence. Actually, a diagnosis of pedophilia can result in indefinite civil commitment.
|
|
|
Post by Grant on Nov 20, 2016 13:10:49 GMT -5
I added some more to my post above yours partaker. I don't think matt10 and Rational are the same person. I don't think matt10 is rationals style unless it's his more rational side
|
|