Pedophiles should be locked up without any parole for life.

[Dan]

How can a father want to send his daughter to a brothel? Does poverty turn people into animals?

 

[tboy]

First off, I'd like to say "yes, this sounds absurd by our standards" and as a society progresses hopefully things will change. BUT who are we to judge? You have to remember it wasn't long ago that women in our society were treated as not much more than chattel. Worse still, not so long ago the prime marrying age for women in North America was 14.....

So before you jump on the horse and condemn another albeit different society, for their practices, take a good long hard look in the mirror....

(and don't forget many of the EE nations who are so poor their women are sent into porn and prostitution to this very day)......

 

[meist]

You're kidding? I'M JUDGING!
Like I said before, all religion/worship should be abolished. It's just stupid people that blindly listen to perverted fables.

BUT who are we to judge? You have to remember it wasn't long ago that women in our society were treated as not much more than chattel. Worse still, not so long ago the prime marrying age for women in North America was 14.....

So before you jump on the horse and condemn another albeit different society, for their practices, take a good long hard look in the mirror....

 

[BEER]

not so long ago the prime marrying age for women in North America was 14.....

Huh?. When the hell was that?.

 

[tboy]

I will try and dig up exactly when, but towards the end of the 1800's I am sure.

BUT did you know that (while it varies from province to province) with parental and judicial consent you can still in this day and age, get married at 12?

here's some info:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marriageable_age#North_America

 

[a 1 player]

not so long ago the prime marrying age for women in North America was 14.....

Huh?. When the hell was that?.

This is still not uncommon in many parts of the world where the average life span is 40.

The difference here in North America is that we let our children be children. They play with toys, go to school, and are pampered by their parents. In some places, (as we all know), there is an exceedingly high mortality rate, famine and extreme poverty. Children do not get to be children in these parts of the world. They are working for food, or looking after their siblings by the time they are ten years old. In essence, these kids grow psychologically into adults at a much earlier age due to their external environment.

Further, often because of the high mortality rate, women choose to have several children in the hopes that one or two will survive to become adults, knowing full well that the probability is high for one or more of their children to die. It would be my guess, (though I have no proof), that the children who are being sold into either slavery or prostitution are being from a low caste, where the family is on the brink of starvation and they require the money for nothing more than the necessities of life, to keep the family alive. When the choice is either evil or starvation, people tend to do whatever is necessary to survive.

I am not justifying it, nor do I believe it is right and proper for this to be happening, it just is.

 

[tboy]

Good analysis there Playa....you said it better than I ever could. This alludes back to my comment about the EE girls too. They are in such a mess economically that this may be their last resort.

What gets me about the indian situation is that along comes Melinda Gates spending millions helping poor families keep more babies alive instead of teaching them proper birth control. So instead of helping, IMO she is actually making matters worse.

This also harkens back to what I've always said about the super rich. For eg: that idiot who built an 56 story skyscraper for his immediate family right in the poorest area of....bombay?....I think, to be considered at least a little decent, he should have built a 27 story luxury skyscraper instead and spent the rest on educating the poor and maybe building a company and putting these people to work so their daughters wouldn't have to be forced into prostitution......I mean, it cost him $1 billion dollars. a B I L L I O N can you imagine how many people he could have helped if he'd only spent $500 million?

 

[a 1 player]

I understand what you are saying tboy, but there is one problem. Most charities (and donations to the poor), help the symptom but not the cause. For many of the people to be helped many things have to happen, (which never will happen). Governments need to be overturned, beliefs and stigmas need to change, infrastructure needs to be built, etc. We in North America have donated billion and billions to Africa over the years, in terms of both money and food, but the problem of poverty still remains. When the food is being distributed to the military, rivers are still being polluted, and tribal wars still rage, much of what we are doing is mute.

In the case of the billionaire who built his 56 story residence... Suppose he did build a factory to employ lets say 500 impoverished people for an example, a number of problems still arise. Can he get the necessary skill set to be productive and competitive? Will people of a higher caste buy his product knowing it was produced by lessers? If he sold his product in North America will we be screaming about jobs going to India, or the evils of child labor? I know of one factory in South America where the owners changed to piece work with the hopes of increasing production. When the workers made the same wage in three or four days they stopped coming into work for the remainder of the week.

Unfortunately the problems are larger than they appear to be.

 

[tboy]

Hey Playa, all those point I agree with 100%.

The thing about africa is really a bee in my bonnet. Namely Ethiopia and the almost annual famines that take place.

The thing about the 500 million, even if they never sell what they're making, it's still better than simply handing someone dollars. I forget the numbers but I did a calculation and seem to recall that a donation of $500K or something like that would keep someone employed, at $50K per year for 20 yrs. Now if you figure that is huge money in india, drop that down to $10K per year and that's 5 people, employed for 20 yrs.

Now take major urban centers in India. They have refuse overflowing in the streets. Take that $500K, put it towards constructing a recycling/processing facility and paying workers. Even if it's only $1.00 per day, that's better then a kick in the pants.

Similar to workfare that died here. The thing is, people here didn't want to work for their welfare. I say/said: outside every McDonalds the sidewalk is covered in discarded gum. Give them a pair of gloves and a scraper....there are literally thousands of farmers who need help...put em to work. I did when I was a kid.

 

[Auggie]

Nothing wrong with tradition as long as it evolves and doesn't exploit the weak. Girls need to be seen as being equal to boys and being allowed the same freedoms, doesn't matter what their past culture dictated - just like here. These are educated societies yet often stuck in the past.

Would they allow their sons to be prostitutes?

 

[treefort]

not so long ago the prime marrying age for women in North America was 14.....

Huh?. When the hell was that?.

Jerry Lee Lewis married a 13 or 14 year old girl who I think was a cousin of his. It ruined or at least put a big damper on his career. It seems that it was not all that uncommon in those days in the southern US.

 

[tboy]

Nothing wrong with tradition as long as it evolves and doesn't exploit the weak. Girls need to be seen as being equal to boys and being allowed the same freedoms, doesn't matter what their past culture dictated - just like here. These are educated societies yet often stuck in the past.

Would they allow their sons to be prostitutes?

You have to remember, it's easy to sit back and criticize yet it wasn't until 1916 that women had the right to vote in Canada and 1920 in the US. Even after that up until the late 1950's women didn't have equal rights to men. And then it wasn't fully adopted until the (as I recall) the 1980's. I remember it was rare to see a woman in any position other than secretarial or menial.

The thing about traditions is that for the most part, they DO exploit (in our definition) someone. In italian and other mediterranean families it is traditional for the woman to be the homemaker/mother and the husband the bread winner. In farming communities it is tradition for the sons to work the farm, with no pay I might add.

Again, before you get all up on other cultures, we all should take a good hard look at our society before condemning others....

 

[Auggie]

Again, before you get all up on other cultures, we all should take a good hard look at our society before condemning others....

No, they're nothing wrong with telling other cultures where they should change even if we aren't perfect. We still need to change in many areas and I welcome someone else pointing that out to us.
Apartheid had become a new tradition in South Africa, it was right to point out that it was a wrong direction even if they felt it was none of our business and that we had a poor record of dealing with our own aboriginal people.

 

[tboy]

No, they're nothing wrong with telling other cultures where they should change even if we aren't perfect. We still need to change in many areas and I welcome someone else pointing that out to us.
Apartheid had become a new tradition in South Africa, it was right to point out that it was a wrong direction even if they felt it was none of our business and that we had a poor record of dealing with our own aboriginal people.

That my friend is the purest definition of hypocrasy and explains to me why I think the way I do about you.....:shock:

 

[Auggie]

I don't see my stance as hypocritical.

If we aren't allowed to criticize other people because we aren't perfect, then you can't say anything negative about me because you also have faults. :he:
That would shut down all discussions about how we might improve the world.

 

[tboy]

I don't see my stance as hypocritical.

If we aren't allowed to criticize other people because we aren't perfect, then you can't say anything negative about me because you also have faults. :he:
That would shut down all discussions about how we might improve the world.

Here's the point >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> .
and here you are >>> .

There's a difference between saying something negative and telling someone else to change. For eg: I think you're a retard but would never tell you to STOP being a retard......see the difference?

You specifically said "No, they're nothing wrong with telling other cultures where they should change even if we aren't perfect" You didn't say "I don't agree with what they are doing".

BTW: anyone else find it funny how someone who took part in a GANG BANG is preaching morality?

 

[Auggie]

Sometimes you preach morality on here as well, tboy. There's nothing wrong with saying something is wrong in some cases.
Whenever there's a story about a paedophile, don't you make a judgment to the effect that it's a bad thing for adults to have sex with minors?

Or do you respect their culture and say it isn't for us to judge?

BTW, what is immoral about a gangbang?

 

[a 1 player]

One thing to remember about morality, is that it is liquid and fluid in that it will change according to circumstances. We all agree that murder is immoral, yet many of us agree in a death penalty when a person have been tried and convicted of certain offenses. We mover further down the road when we are happy a person such as Osama Bin Laden has been assassinated, and let us not forget that he did not stand trial for his crimes. When we agree with statements such as the above, we are really saying, I agree that murder is sometimes acceptable and justified. The same goes for all morals. There are times when something we believe is completely wrong can be right and justified.

Lets go back to the women being sold into prostitution. The morals of the fathers and brothers are different than we have here in North America, and chances are good we will never understand why they believe their doings are acceptable, as we will more than likely never be in a similar situation. Similarly, when we talk about our aboriginal peoples rights being violated, (which indeed they were by today's standards), we must remember that the laws were quite different 200+ years ago, and many at the time thought the aboriginal people nothing more than a nucence that had to be eradicated if England and France were to colonize. The same can be said through all of history, from the Romans, Spanish..., every country who has tried to claim land.

When it comes to apartheid, it is our morals brought into being through experience and the laws that we created that we try to share with the rest of the world. Canada, USA, England, and very few other countries have a legal system as complex and all-encompassing as the majority of countries in the rest of the world. What we see as 'right' and 'normal' are often not seen that way by others. Many countries such as Afghanistan and Iraq are not much more than dozens of tribes surrounded by a border in a geographic area. Laws are built upon other laws, and with the rudimentary legal systems of these countries in place, which vary from tribe to tribe, it is not likely that our laws can even be comprehended, let alone the meanings behind them and why they were put in place. South Africa is what I would call a 'second world nation', where they have the comprehension to understand these laws, but at the same time enough tribes, and poverty that it is a struggle to enforce, among both the black and white communities; where there is to be a balance and equality with neither side fighting to attain power for the race.

I say there is nothing wrong with judging, but our judgements might be incorrect and clouded without knowing, (let alone being a part of), the societies, cultures, and the laws of the societies that we are opinionated on.

 

[meist]

not so long ago the prime marrying age for women in North America was 14.....

True. But, normal life expectancy was 30

 

[tboy]

Sometimes you preach morality on here as well, tboy. There's nothing wrong with saying something is wrong in some cases.
Whenever there's a story about a paedophile, don't you make a judgment to the effect that it's a bad thing for adults to have sex with minors?

Or do you respect their culture and say it isn't for us to judge?

BTW, what is immoral about a gangbang?

Again, you totally miss the point: there is nothing wrong with stating your opinion in any way shape or form, what is W R O N G is feeling morally superior enough to say "you're wrong, you must change". Throughout all my arguments on here please point out ONCE where I said to my opponent: you must change. I have tried ad nauseum to convince them to, but never once said they have to change....KNow why? Because I would never do that.

As for pedophiles, I also would never tell them to change. I would lock them up forever, but never tell them to change......

As for your question: "what's immoral about a gangbang", I rest my case.