Randomness thread, part two.

[OngBonga]

True story... I've evicted wasps from my back garden before using a flamethrower.

[OngBonga]

To elaborate... It was a shared house back in my party days, and we had a wasp problem, they were under the tiles on the roof at the back door... and we used the back door to come and go, since the front room was someone's bedroom. So they had to go. We could have paid someone to do it properly, but I was quick to realise that meant less alcohol and weed. So I decided to deal with it myself. It was a hot day in late May, and I was covered head to toe in multiple layers of clothing. Scarf across my face, wooly hat, gloves, the lot. All that was exposed were my eyes. My method of dealing with the nest was to boil the kettle, throw boiling water onto the nest, and then torch the wasps as they came out using a can of deodorant and a lighter. It was a massacre. It took several rounds of water before they realised this was a battle they could not win, and the survivors finally fucked off.

Best day of my life.

[Poopadoop]

You mean a real one or one you made with a can of WD-40?

Edit: Ah, ok you ninja posted me.

[OngBonga]

To drift back into the realm of the topic, a flamethrower is not really a weapon you can regulate. Squirt flammable liquid, light it, hey presto you have a flamethrower.

[OngBonga]

You mean a real one or one you made with a can of WD-40?

Edit: Ah, ok you ninja posted me.

Yeah but it's a flamethrower. Just a small one.

[Poopadoop]

To drift back into the real of the topic, a flamethrower is not really a weapon you can regulate. Squirt flammable liquid, light it, hey presto you have a flamethrower.

You'd have to be completely lacking a soul to use it on a person though.

[Poopadoop]

That's even worse than throwing acid in someone's face. To just hideously burn someone. I'd rather be shot I think.

[OngBonga]

Damn you quoted that before I edited "real" to "realm". It's an odd sentence with that typo!

I felt pretty soulless that day, tbh. Most of the wasps didn't die quickly, they merely had their wings singed and fell to the floor where they would die slowly. Still, it was definitely fun.

[OngBonga]

That's even worse than throwing acid in someone's face. To just hideously burn someone. I'd rather be shot I think.

Indeed. So if we can make an unregulatable weapon with household equipment, what's the point of regulating weapons that at least are capable of showing mercy?

[Poopadoop]

Indeed. So if we can make an unregulatable weapon with household equipment, what's the point of regulating weapons that at least are capable of showing mercy?

You can also strangle them with your shoelaces, or put anti-freeze in their soup.

If you really want to kill someone, you don't NEED a gun. But it certainly makes things easier. And again there's no other purpose for having a gun, unlike deodorant, shoelaces, or anti-freeze.

[Poopadoop]

Damn you quoted that before I edited "real" to "realm". It's an odd sentence with that typo!

I felt pretty soulless that day, tbh. Most of the wasps didn't die quickly, they merely had their wings singed and fell to the floor where they would die slowly. Still, it was definitely fun.

I've gone genocidal on a wasp nest before. It was a nasty thing to do, but it sure felt good. And I was definitely glad they were gone.

[OngBonga]

There are very few animals that I will happily kill without a shred of guilt. Wasps are top of that small list.

Mozzies, moths, and ants that bite. They're the others.

If I kill a hornet I feel bad about that. They're badass. But they're also a threat to bees, and a lone hornet is likely a scout looking for bees. So if you see a lone hornet, kill it.

[Jack Sawyer]

Antimatter could be used as a weapon against someone who's trespassing on your property. It could also be used as an energy source if you're clever enough. I'd imagine 1kg of antimatter would boil a metric fuck ton of water. In fact it's probably the metric measure of a fuck ton. How much water boils when we throw a kg of antimatter in it.

If I figured out how to safely create antimatter, and safely turn it into energy, should I not be allowed to? Because, if I'm mentally unstable, I could threaten trespassers with it?

What if I want a rocket launcher for fun? Maybe I've got a cow that needs culling.

A gram of antimatter is Hiroshima. A kilogram of antimatter we are talking apocalypse, split-the-planet-in-half kind of power.

[Jack Sawyer]

Once you split the planet in half, all the water on the surface would escape and boil really, really fast. So yes, you would boil a metric fuck ton of water w/ a kg of antimatter.

[OngBonga]

Split the planet in half? That would surely require strategic locating of antimatter around a geodesic. You're much more likely to create a moon-sized crater if you only have one ground zero.

[MadMojoMonkey]

My bad, I should have stressed the hypothetical. I meant, like, the hypothetical and somehow miraculous accumulation of 1kg of antimatter.

If anyone (with the appropriate knowledge and equipment) can make it and have it, then no one has the right to outright ban it from being made and had, IMO.

Fair enough. Should the killing be facilitated too? A handgun facilitates these.

A normal kitchen fork facilitates it, too. Should those be illegal? What about a slingshot? Bow and arrow? Nail gun? Cattle prod?

"Every tool is a weapon if you hold it right" -Ani DiFranco

Her intent makes the tool a weapon, not the tool itself. It's cliche' to say "guns don't kill people, people kill people," but it's a real, rational view of the facts on the ground.
If I'm in a room with someone who wants to kill me, then I don't care what's in their hands or pockets, I just want out of that room and away from that person. If I'm in a room with someone who doesn't want to kill me, then I don't care what's in their hands or pockets, only that they're appropriately safe with whatever they're using.

I could swear she would not pull out a jackknife on the people she threatened with the piece, though.

I don't know her, or what she would do under different circumstances. She's shown me that she cannot be trusted with a gun, but not that she can't be trusted with a jackknife. If there's a deeper pattern of her threatening people with bodily harm, then more severe restrictions of her rights are in order, up to and including a prison sentence, IMO

[Jack Sawyer]

A normal kitchen fork facilitates it, too. Should those be illegal? What about a slingshot? Bow and arrow? Nail gun? Cattle prod?

"Every tool is a weapon if you hold it right" -Ani DiFranco

Excellent, we are getting somewhere. How many fatalities can we attribute to kitchen forks, compared to handguns?

Do you believe that, if there were no handguns and all things being equal, the homicide rate would be the same? Can you hold a person at forkpoint to rob them?

My point this whole time has been that guns were designed to specifically kill easier, while other things which can also be used to kill were designed for something else, and therefore would is of varying degrees as to how they can be used to kill.

Her intent makes the tool a weapon, not the tool itself. It's cliche' to say "guns don't kill people, people kill people," but it's a real, rational view of the facts on the ground.
If I'm in a room with someone who wants to kill me, then I don't care what's in their hands or pockets, I just want out of that room and away from that person. If I'm in a room with someone who doesn't want to kill me, then I don't care what's in their hands or pockets, only that they're appropriately safe with whatever they're using.


I don't know her, or what she would do under different circumstances. She's shown me that she cannot be trusted with a gun, but not that she can't be trusted with a jackknife. If there's a deeper pattern of her threatening people with bodily harm, then more severe restrictions of her rights are in order, up to and including a prison sentence, IMO

OK, give me your opinion on this:

DO you think killing a person with a handgun and killing a person with a jackknife requires equal amount of skill or are they different? Why?

[OngBonga]

You're not going to deter a burglar with a fork, either.

[MadMojoMonkey]

Excellent, we are getting somewhere. How many fatalities can we attribute to kitchen forks, compared to handguns?

Which of my beliefs are you trying to address?
Because this has nothing to do with any of my stated reasons for what I believe.

IMO, no number of deaths caused by criminals is reason to curtail the rights of non-criminals.

Do you believe that, if there were no handguns and all things being equal, the homicide rate would be the same? Can you hold a person at forkpoint to rob them?

I don't have any way to answer that speculative question.
I believe the human will to commit homicide will be the same, and that whatever tools a homicidal human chooses will be deadly.

I'm certain people get robbed at forkpoint, though the rate of which and success thereof are probably questionable. Just because there are much better tools for the task doesn't mean it wouldn't happen. The point is that the act of robbing someone is already criminal, so criminalizing whatever tool they choose to coerce you into letting them take your stuff is both missing the point, and criminalizing the victim.

My point this whole time has been that guns were designed to specifically kill easier, while other things which can also be used to kill were designed for something else, and therefore would is of varying degrees as to how they can be used to kill.

If that matters to you, then that's great.
I don't even see what point you're making or how it's relevant to anything.

OK, give me your opinion on this:

DO you think killing a person with a handgun and killing a person with a jackknife requires equal amount of skill or are they different? Why?

It requires murderous intent and the action of attempting to murder, with is already a crime.
Taking the gun away from the person being murdered is beyond my ability to endorse.

[Jack Sawyer]

I believe the human will to commit homicide will be the same, and that whatever tools a homicidal human chooses will be deadly.

I believe this as well.

But if you have a tool that can facilitate the desires of said will, do you understand how easily it can go wrong? All things being equal?

Easy analogy: if yoiu have that will yet all you have is a fork, the chances of it being manifested as a death goes near zero. If you have said will and are armed with a gun, the chances of it manifesting as a death goes up. If you have said will, and yet are armed with a assault rifle, the chances of it manifesting as deaths go dramatically up. If you have said will, and are armed with a nuke, the chances of unfathomable deaths go way up. And we can go on.

This is the question

OK, give me your opinion on this:

DO you think killing a person with a handgun and killing a person with a jackknife requires equal amount of skill or are they different? Why?

It requires murderous intent and the action of attempting to murder, with is already a crime.
Taking the gun away from the person being murdered is beyond my ability to endorse.

You are not answering the question IMHO. Does it or does it not require a different amount of skill, killing a person with a handgun or with a jackknife? If they are different, which one woiuld require more skill to pull off?

[Jack Sawyer]

You're not going to deter a burglar with a fork, either.

How about a Rottweiler? How about an alarm system at home? How about a few prominent but fake cameras all over your property? Would those deter burglars?

Because the burglar would only know that you had a gun once you chose to brandish it, right?

[OngBonga]

How about a Rottweiler? How about an alarm system at home? How about a few prominent but fake cameras all over your property? Would those deter burglars?

Because the burglar would only know that you had a gun once you chose to brandish it, right?

A rottie and some fake CCTV certainly decreases the chances you'll have to brandish a weapon at a burglar. But if someone neutralised my rottie, I'd want a gun.

[OngBonga]

And a spade.

[CoccoBill]

Ends by stating a position much closer to Oskar/Jack/Poop than to Mojo's.

I'm not so sure that's the case. O/J/P have been supportive of a total ban of certain firearms, M has been against it. However, I've not seen M clarify who and on what terms should be allowed to have a gun or a nuke, just that it shouldn't be impossible under every circumstance. I've seen no reason to think M thinks fundamentally different from what I stated. M, care to elaborate?

[oskar]

I'm not so sure that's the case. O/J/P have been supportive of a total ban of certain firearms, M has been against it. However, I've not seen M clarify who and on what terms should be allowed to have a gun or a nuke, just that it shouldn't be impossible under every circumstance. I've seen no reason to think M thinks fundamentally different from what I stated. M, care to elaborate?

I'm not super interested in extreme hypotheticals. I think there's a level of gun control that's reasonable, and I'm trying to argue why and when that line should be drawn differently. I think MMM's argument is a continuation fallacy on a slippery slope crashing into a dumpster fire. I say: countries that restricted the sales of semi automatic rifles with high capacity magazines as a response to school shootings all but eliminated school shootings, therefore I think it would be a good idea for the US to restrict the sales of weapons that facilitate mass murder to reduce the number of school shootings.
MMM says: WhAt YoU WanT FoRkS OuTlaWeD Or wUt?!?!?!?!?!!

[oskar]

I believe the human will to commit homicide will be the same, and that whatever tools a homicidal human chooses will be deadly.

Then what's the big deal with gun laws? You can kill with a fork so taking away your nuclear warhead is not a violation of your presumption of innocence anymore, right? The slope goes both ways.

[MadMojoMonkey]

But if you have a tool that can facilitate the desires of said will, do you understand how easily it can go wrong? All things being equal?

What things are equal, here? Murderers and non-murderers?

Easy analogy: if yoiu have that will yet all you have is a fork, the chances of it being manifested as a death goes near zero. If you have said will and are armed with a gun, the chances of it manifesting as a death goes up. If you have said will, and yet are armed with a assault rifle, the chances of it manifesting as deaths go dramatically up. If you have said will, and are armed with a nuke, the chances of unfathomable deaths go way up. And we can go on.

I don't disagree with any of this, but I don't see why it's an argument to treat non-murderers like murderers.

This is the question

The answer is that the presumption of innocence means a lot to me and the suggestion that non-criminals should be treated like criminals 'cause maybe they'll become criminals someday is immoral.

You are not answering the question IMHO. Does it or does it not require a different amount of skill, killing a person with a handgun or with a jackknife? If they are different, which one woiuld require more skill to pull off?

I haven't answered the question because the answer is irrelevant to my position.

Both require skills, both have different strengths and weaknesses. If you don't know how to load a gun, it's not much more than a cudgel. Same for the safety. A gun has advantage in range, but that's useless in close quarters. The ready use and lack of any prep work to use a knife has advantages.

It's a stupid question, but even if it was the question you want... some statement that gets me to say that guns are easier to kill a lot of people in a short time than knives, then fine.
Guns are a lot easier to kill a lot of people in a short time than knives.

If you want to draw some line about whether a known murderer should be allowed to have guns and/or knives in their life, then maybe I can see some utility in this discussion. However, if you're trying to say that since a murderer can kill people easier with a gun than a knife, so non-murderers can't have guns, then I simply disagree.

[MadMojoMonkey]

I'm not so sure that's the case. O/J/P have been supportive of a total ban of certain firearms, M has been against it. However, I've not seen M clarify who and on what terms should be allowed to have a gun or a nuke, just that it shouldn't be impossible under every circumstance. I've seen no reason to think M thinks fundamentally different from what I stated. M, care to elaborate?

I'm not interested in clarifying any specific terms. That's the job of whatever regulatory agencies, public or private, to decide.

I think I agree with what you've said, up to the point where you're postulating what the regulatory lines should be.

[Poopadoop]

tucker.jpg

notsureifserious.jpg

[Poopadoop]

Tucker: "I think you give a lot of us heart to keep fighting against the global tyrrany of the metric system, and I thank you for that."

rofl.

[oskar]

Complains about the metric system, but uses base 10. What a hypocrite. Duodecimal or gtfo!

[Poopadoop]

It's the whole idea that the world's trying to take away America's freedom, like it did with the rest of the world, by imposing the metric system on it. That's what gets me.

[oskar]

I don't think Tucker believes that, but that they would produce that even as a semi-serious segment is bizarre... If you even have the most rudimentary education, you know about the international system of units and why you really want it over feetsies and furlongs.

[Poopadoop]

Hahahahaha.

[spoonitnow]

What's up dipshits

[spoonitnow]

I guess I'll do one of those life update type things since none of you assholes seem to be around.

I built up to and ran a 5k this past fall. I've hated running my entire life, even when I was heavily involved in sports growing up. I proceeded to fuck up my knee not long after, and I've had trouble giving a shit about getting back into running since. I've found that I dislike people who run more than I dislike running, and that makes things complicated.

On the work/career end of things, I'm still doing my whole content creation and consulting thing in the gambling industry. I'm pretty solid with a few of the top affiliate networks and software companies in the industry, and I guess I've been doing this for about 10 years or so now. I'm also still building out my own sites and whatever, just not in the gambling industry because that's so shaky from the US (imo). Instead, I'm doing the other legal crack, which is the self-help and life coaching thing. It's a lot of fun and is more of a total hustle than poker ever was. I love it.

I started playing Runescape like six months ago. I'd played the older version some as a kid. I've mostly just been doing it fucking off in the evenings while hanging out before bed or having afk-able stuff going off to the side that I only have to click the screen once every 5-6 minutes to keep from being idle logged out. It's stupid, and I wouldn't recommend it, but I'm kind of pot committed at this point.

I'm still seeing the same girls and half-ass added one since I posted last. I had my anniversary of seeing the one for seven years last week, and last week was also a birthday for the other, so we go out together and do it as all one thing. The other I've half-ass added is a girl I've known a long time (15+ years) who moved to my area about six months ago, and she wanted some direction and that kind of thing. They all get along really well, and we all play Pokemon Go together sometimes and shit like that, but she's not really getting that relationship status as much as a fwb kind of thing.

I'm still MAGA as fuck.

I caught an online incel stalker on Reddit for a while. That was interesting but uneventful.

[OngBonga]

I work one day a week as a volunteer for a charity. Other than that, I'm still an annoying twat.

[spoonitnow]

I work one day a week as a volunteer for a charity. Other than that, I'm still an annoying twat.

That's cool.

I don't really do the volunteering for charity thing. I think it's a waste of time and resources. I also don't donate to charity because fuck em.

I might be a prick.

What kind of volunteering are you doing?

[OngBonga]

I either sit on the till and serve customers, or sort through donations. I do it because I've been mostly unemployed for a decade and might actually want a job in the future, so it looks good on my CV. I also don't have a problem giving up one day of my week when I do fuck all for the rest of it, it keeps me from being isolated. So it's fairly selfish.

[OngBonga]

The charity I work for are getting really bad press at the moment, since one of their directors went to Haiti in 2011 after the earthquake and fucked underage prostitutes, and the charity tried to cover it up.

[spoonitnow]

So it's fairly selfish.

There's no other kind of charity.

The charity I work for are getting really bad press at the moment, since one of their directors went to Haiti in 2011 after the earthquake and fucked underage prostitutes, and the charity tried to cover it up.

That's awesome.

[OngBonga]

It's not really something I give a fuck about. They do good work for people in disaster zones, and for people in poverty. Perhaps they should've thrown him under the bus instead of trying to protect their brand, but whatever. They're still a net gain for people in need.

[spoonitnow]

Yeah I feel you on that.

What age is underage in that scenario anyway? 16?

[OngBonga]

I'm not even sure, in fact a quick googling of the story shows they "may" have been underage. Age of consent in Haiti is 18, but here in the UK (where the charity is based) it's 16.

Fuck knows how old they were. One thing isn't disputed, they were prostitutes. So... not really as shocking as nailing some innocent virgin child.

[OngBonga]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxfam#...Haiti_and_Chad

I'm not even that clued up on it, turns out it was 7 guys, not one. It only came to light last year, despite this happening in 2011.

[spoonitnow]

He fucked 7 guys? No wonder they're pissed.

Happy pride month.

[spoonitnow]

Does "pride month" seem kind of vague to anyone else? Does white pride count? Asking for a friend.

[OngBonga]

I dunno, are you that proud of being white that you'll get your fat ass out, stand on a cop car and twerk like you're in a strip club? Because if so, yeah, white pride ftw.

[OngBonga]

Also, zoophilia is the news trans. Apparently. Not sure if it's a well orchestrated trolling exercise, or if the crazy fuckers of the world are seriously suggesting that bestiality is a legitimate kink.

It's a fucked up world.

My pronoun is ptang!

The exclamation mark is important, leave that out and it's a hate crime.

[spoonitnow]

I dunno, are you that proud of being white that you'll get your fat ass out, stand on a cop car and twerk like you're in a strip club? Because if so, yeah, white pride ftw.

Heh.

Also, zoophilia is the news trans. Apparently. Not sure if it's a well orchestrated trolling exercise, or if the crazy fuckers of the world are seriously suggesting that bestiality is a legitimate kink.

It's a fucked up world.

My pronoun is ptang!

The exclamation mark is important, leave that out and it's a hate crime.

Pedosexual is another fun piece of that whole clusterfuck pie.

[MadMojoMonkey]

Heya, spoon.

Nice to hear the rest of your life is chugging along with relative ease. Nice to hear your home life is stable and enjoyable.
Still into carpentry? Made anything lately?


I saw this the other day, Finding Equilibrium, and it reminded me of you, somewhat. Even if the guy is primarily using a poker analysis software, he's actually trying to dig into the what's and why's of it all. It's nice that though he's pretty new and only has a few videos up, he's digging into hands that are interesting. It's not your typical cooler situations, but complicated hands where the thought process switches gears on each street.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC7a...sbnaESJe94d-tg
It's the first I've seen of this software, PioSolver, but I'm notably out of the loop. You heard of it? Thoughts?

[spoonitnow]

Heya, spoon.

Nice to hear the rest of your life is chugging along with relative ease. Nice to hear your home life is stable and enjoyable.
Still into carpentry? Made anything lately?


I saw this the other day, Finding Equilibrium, and it reminded me of you, somewhat. Even if the guy is primarily using a poker analysis software, he's actually trying to dig into the what's and why's of it all. It's nice that though he's pretty new and only has a few videos up, he's digging into hands that are interesting. It's not your typical cooler situations, but complicated hands where the thought process switches gears on each street.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC7a...sbnaESJe94d-tg
It's the first I've seen of this software, PioSolver, but I'm notably out of the loop. You heard of it? Thoughts?

I have no idea about any of that. I'm more interested in attending a women's rights rally as a supporter than I'm interested in anything poker-related at this point.

[OngBonga]

Pedosexual is another fun piece of that whole clusterfuck pie.

Is that even a real term? Have people stopped using the word pedophile because it's discriminatory?

[OngBonga]

I'm more interested in attending a women's rights rally as a supporter

Did you stop being a misogynist? Or were you just trolling us the whole time?

[OngBonga]

Oh wait, that was sarcasm.

Heh.

[spoonitnow]

Is that even a real term? Have people stopped using the word pedophile because it's discriminatory?

Yes, and yes.

Did you stop being a misogynist? Or were you just trolling us the whole time?

I'm a worse misogynist than I've ever let on.

[OngBonga]

Yes, and yes.

It's still ok to discriminate against gingers. All is not lost yet.

[OngBonga]

This "pedosexual" things seems to be to be a 4chan trolling exercise that has resulted in some pedophiles sticking their neck out.

The P in LGBTQP is for pansexual, isn't it? Whatever the fuck that means.

Fuck me it's even more now. LGBTTQQIAAP

For fuck's sake.

Where's the S for "straight"?

[OngBonga]

I might campaign for another A in there, for "autosexual". The cars fuckers will love that, but actually it means self loving.


I'm definitely autosexual. I want to be recognised by the queers and pan fuckers, dammit.

[OngBonga]

Dammit it's already a thing.

[MadMojoMonkey]

I have no idea about any of that. I'm more interested in attending a women's rights rally as a supporter than I'm interested in anything poker-related at this point.

Ah. Well, I really don't play or think about poker much at all these days, either.

Missouri is in a weeks long court case trying to keep our state's 1 abortion clinic open and operating.

It's some slippery slope bullshit. Like, there's nothing that says abortion is illegal in Missouri, but they've made such a morass of other hoops to jump through and other nonsense that the 1 clinic left in the state is having trouble getting its license renewed. AFAIK, it's all resting on one judge's decision at this point.

[MadMojoMonkey]

This "pedosexual" things seems to be to be a 4chan trolling exercise that has resulted in some pedophiles sticking their neck out.

The P in LGBTQP is for pansexual, isn't it? Whatever the fuck that means.

Fuck me it's even more now. LGBTTQQIAAP

For fuck's sake.

Where's the S for "straight"?

I thought there was supposed to be a QA in there for "queer advocates" which is straight people that are like, "so long as you're not trying to make the sexxy time with me, then I don't care who you try to make the sexxy with."

Shit I don't know what half those letters are supposed to stand for.
Lesbian
Gay
Bisexual
Transgender
T ?
Queer (?)
Q ?
I ?
A ?
A ?
Pansexual (?)

Why it gotta be so complicated?

Do you want to have the sexxy time with me? No? Oh. What if I...? No? You're into what? Well... That's cool. Got it. Doesn't really work for me. Thanks. Bye.I

EDIT: It'd be funny if QIA was "Questioning It All." That could apply to my profession. Everyone always told me physics was gay. lol.

[OngBonga]

(lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, transsexual, queer, questioning, intersex, asexual, ally, pansexual)

"Ally" is a heterosexual who actively promotes gender equality. I had to google that.

To be fair, that long string of letters is not common usage, it's generally LGBT+, but naturally your pansexuals and whatnot feel left out.

[spoonitnow]

This "pedosexual" things seems to be to be a 4chan trolling exercise that has resulted in some pedophiles sticking their neck out.

The P in LGBTQP is for pansexual, isn't it? Whatever the fuck that means.

Fuck me it's even more now. LGBTTQQIAAP

For fuck's sake.

Where's the S for "straight"?

Despite it starting off as trolling, the pedosexual thing has actually gained some steam from non-trolling entities. I'm personally in favor of pedosexual rights, but I'm not in favor of children being sexually assaulted.

Ah. Well, I really don't play or think about poker much at all these days, either.

Missouri is in a weeks long court case trying to keep our state's 1 abortion clinic open and operating.

It's some slippery slope bullshit. Like, there's nothing that says abortion is illegal in Missouri, but they've made such a morass of other hoops to jump through and other nonsense that the 1 clinic left in the state is having trouble getting its license renewed. AFAIK, it's all resting on one judge's decision at this point.

Glad to know that the killing of unborn children is still alive and well in Missouri.

(lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, transsexual, queer, questioning, intersex, asexual, ally, pansexual)

"Ally" is a heterosexual who actively promotes gender equality. I had to google that.

To be fair, that long string of letters is not common usage, it's generally LGBT+, but naturally your pansexuals and whatnot feel left out.

There's an interesting thing with those types where being bisexual is sometimes seen as offensive because it implies that there are two genders with pansexual being the preferred term.

[OngBonga]

I'm personally in favor of pedosexual rights

*pedophile. I'm not going to go down the route of using their preferred word.

Such as? I mean, if someone admits to being an inactive pedophile, then I don't see how that's a crime. People have the right to not be criminalised for what they think. Gay people can't help being gay, I have to assume the same applies to pedos, that they don't choose to sexualise children. But they have to have absolute control of their behaviour.

but I'm not in favor of children being sexually assaulted.

As long as we live in a world where children are not capable of giving consent, then all is well. Adults may not have sexual relations of any kind with a child.

There's an interesting thing with those types where being bisexual is sometimes seen as offensive because it implies that there are two genders with pansexual being the preferred term.

I actually once went on a trolling campaign on Twitter claiming this, that the B should be dropped from LGBT since "bisexual" implies two genders. I argued I was dodecasexual, that I was sexually attracted to all the genders that have pussy.

[spoonitnow]

Gay people can't help being gay, I have to assume the same applies to pedos, that they don't choose to sexualise children. But they have to have absolute control of their behaviour.

There's an argument often made that even though you can't help being gay that you shouldn't do gay things because it's immoral. It's not completely unlike the same argument applied to pedosexuals. I don't necessarily agree with it, but it's worth noting.

As long as we live in a world where children are not capable of giving consent, then all is well. Adults may not have sexual relations of any kind with a child.

Children not being capable of giving consent for sex is a pretty recent concept. Again, I'm glad that people aren't just going around fucking their kids all willy-nilly, but it's something to know about as a commonly used argument.

I actually once went on a trolling campaign on Twitter claiming this, that the B should be dropped from LGBT since "bisexual" implies two genders. I argued I was dodecasexual, that I was sexually attracted to all the genders that have pussy.

That's funny.

[OngBonga]

The fuzzy line for me regarding pedophilia is age of consent. I'm not going to lie, I've seen 15 year old girls that I think are hot. That's because they are post-puberty and look like young women. But once I know their age, I don't behave inappropriately towards them, I do not flirt in any way, I try not to imagine taking their knickers off.

You can't just say "puberty", you have to draw a numerical line somewhere. 16 is actually quite young; women they might be but they are not mature. 18 is better. But it's also unrealistic to think that 17 year old girls are going to behave themselves. I wouldn't date anyone under 18, but I'm 40 and even 18 is a somewhat morally questionable.

[OngBonga]

There's an argument often made that even though you can't help being gay that you shouldn't do gay things because it's immoral

Sounds like Christian bollocks to me. It's not for anyone else to morally judge the sexual behaviour of consenting adults.

[spoonitnow]

The fuzzy line for me regarding pedophilia is age of consent. I'm not going to lie, I've seen 15 year old girls that I think are hot. That's because they are post-puberty and look like young women. But once I know their age, I don't behave inappropriately towards them, I do not flirt in any way, I try not to imagine taking their knickers off.

Age of consent is a weird thing. I'll be 35 this year, and where I live, I can make a 16-year-old girl go ass to mouth while her twin sister licks my balls, and it's all good.

But if she sends you a picture of one of her tits, that's pound me in the ass prison time and being added to the sex offender list.

You can't just say "puberty", you have to draw a numerical line somewhere. 16 is actually quite young; women they might be but they are not mature. 18 is better. But it's also unrealistic to think that 17 year old girls are going to behave themselves. I wouldn't date anyone under 18, but I'm 40 and even 18 is a somewhat morally questionable.

I think 14 is a good, solid number.

Here's a neat map: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of...t_-_Global.svg

Sounds like Christian bollocks to me. It's not for anyone else to morally judge the sexual behaviour of consenting adults.

"...but I'm 40 and even 18 is a somewhat morally questionable."

I lol'd.

[spoonitnow]

Here's a spice rack I made a while back.

[OngBonga]

Age of consent is a weird thing. I'll be 35 this year, and where I live, I can make a 16-year-old girl go ass to mouth while her twin sister licks my balls, and it's all good.

But if she sends you a picture of one of her tits, that's pound me in the ass prison time and being added to the sex offender list.

I'm not sure about this, but good chance that applies here, too. Porn actresses must be 18.

I think 14 is a good, solid number.

Japan ftw

"...but I'm 40 and even 18 is a somewhat morally questionable."

I did notice that seemingly inconsistent comment of mine, but I'm the one morally judging my behaviour towards an 18 y/o. No fucker else has the right to do so, since it's perfectly legal.

[spoonitnow]

It is what it is. I like fucking teenage girls. I've liked fucking teenage girls for 15-20 years. I'll probably like fucking teenage girls for the rest of my life.

Enjoying fucking teenage girls is completely natural. We need a flag and a month to raise awareness.

[OngBonga]

Enjoying fucking teenage girls is completely natural. We need a flag and a month to raise awareness.

I can get behind this, even if I'm not actually fucking teenage girls. I can be an ally.

[spoonitnow]

I can get behind this, even if I'm not actually fucking teenage girls. I can be an ally.

I declare June 19 through December 24 as Fucking Teenage Girls Awareness Month.

[OngBonga]

If I don't get laid, I'll just spend every day watching teen porn. Lesbian, Japanese and Muslims.