Originally posted by tsscls
Nope, I'm asking you to babysit my kids next week. What time should I bring them over?
[QUOTE=13037155]Originally posted by skekUng
[B]Then it is up to you to provide both the evidence of pedophile by proxy AND the instances of other illegal (for the time) activities that he researched and did not "turn in" -as you put it. You have an odd understanding of the scientific method, don't you? Again, it seems to me that all you're interested in doing is framing the debate so you can claim, now or later, that people are defending the rape of children. And you haven't said he was a pedophile by proxy. You've stated plainly that you think he was a pedophile.
Did Kinsey write a book in the '40's discussing human sexuality in which he discussed pre adolescent sexuality? Yes or no?
Originally posted by King Kandy
Non-sequester, this pathetic attempt only shows that you actually have nothing of substance to back your argument with. If you were interested in the actual truth of the matter, we could discuss it, but right not you will not even take a stand for your beliefs.
Non sequitur
Originally posted by King Kandy
Non-sequester, this pathetic attempt only shows that you actually have nothing of substance to back your argument with. If you were interested in the actual truth of the matter, we could discuss it, but right not you will not even take a stand for your beliefs.
Don't try to suquester me. I hate being alone!
Originally posted by King Kandy
So now you're claiming that no one should be able to research pre adolescent sexuality?
No,
Kinsey sought out 9 men who had sexual relations with children. He then questioned them about their experiences as I would question you about your adult sexual experiences with a man or a woman. He chronicled it and did nothing about it. This was the '30's-'40's at the time, so I guess it didn't matter if kids were being molested.
The important thing is, that after his research, Kinsey did nothing for these kids. To minimalize the significance of this, the number nine has been retroactively reduced to one by Kinsey sympathizers.
People get angry discussing this because he has something to do with some sort of medical justification of homosexuality, but they shouldn't.
Originally posted by King Kandy
Cool, you caught a typo! I notice that you still are avoiding the actual topic.
I thought it was non sequitor?
D*mn, and all these years I've been posting "non sequitor". Like...for almost a decade, now. And no one corrected me?
I wish I could ctrl F and replace all, now. 🙁
Originally posted by tsscls
That's far from a tyyoopioooy!
It looks like it was the "auto-correct" that did that to him. That's sort of a typo.
So let's say today, you were a Doctor who has knowledge of nine children being molested. You do nothing about it, but you're like House good and are writing an awesome paper about it. I'm sure the Cops and parents would be totally understanding of the fact that you wanted to be the next pervert Freud.
Originally posted by tsscls
No,
Kinsey sought out 9 men who had sexual relations with children. He then questioned them about their experiences as I would question you about your adult sexual experiences with a man or a woman. He chronicled it and did nothing about it. This was the '30's-'40's at the time, so I guess it didn't matter if kids were being molested.
The important thing is, that after his research, Kinsey did nothing for these kids. To minimalize the significance of this, the number nine has been retroactively reduced to one by Kinsey sympathizers.
People get angry discussing this because he has something to do with some sort of medical justification of homosexuality, but they shouldn't.