http://winduprubberfinger.com/blog1.php?disp=comments en-US http://backend.userland.com/rss 60 Thu, 01 Oct 2009 18:01:39 +0000 OGRE [Member] c97@http://winduprubberfinger.com/ Greg (athrillofhope):<br /> <br /> I agree with you 100 percent!<br /> <br /> One of the problems plaguing Europe is "morality by consensus." Morality is <i>not</i> defined by consensus. This alone is probably Europe's largest problem. I'm thinking about posting an article simply about moral consensus.<br />
I agree with you 100 percent!

One of the problems plaguing Europe is "morality by consensus." Morality is not defined by consensus. This alone is probably Europe's largest problem. I'm thinking about posting an article simply about moral consensus.
]]> http://winduprubberfinger.com/blog1.php/2009/09/30/filmmakers-demand-united-states-postpone#c97 Thu, 01 Oct 2009 17:15:28 +0000 Greg (athrillofhope) [Member] c96@http://winduprubberfinger.com/ A further comment, if I may (this is the "same Greg"), concerning the "HOLLYWOOD HIGH SCHOOL" mentality.<br /> <br /> Last night (after the above post was made), I heard playbacks on a radio station of comments made by Whoopi Goldberg defending Polanski raping the 13 year old girl. She stated that is was not "rape-rape" and that Polanski only "pled guilty to having sex with a minor" (the inference that it was "consensual"). <br /> <br /> She justified Polanski fleeing the country because Polanski was afraid of being sentenced to "100 years." <br /> <br /> Goldberg then floats the argument that it is okay to rape a 13 year old girl, or even have "consensual sex" with a 13 year old, because U.S. standards are "wrong." She states that "the world sees things differently" (from the U.S.), that "Europe ... the rest of the world ... sees 13 year olds and 14 year olds" ... she does not finish her statement, but in the context, it seems she is saying that Eurpose sees 13 year old girls as adults who can make their own decisions and that U.S. law is backwards and needs to be changed to fit the sexual addictions and abuses of Roman Polanski.<br /> <br /> Where to begin?<br /> <br /> Just what is "rape-rape?" Is this like "murder-murder" as opposed to just "murder?" The mental gymnastics liberals go through to justify their sexual perversions never cease to amaze me.<br /> <br /> Perhaps Goldberg's notion of "rape-rape" means there the sex was not consensual. Let's pretend that Polanski did not intoxicate the girl with multiple substances before sodomizing her. Even if a 13 year old "consents" to sex with an adult, does this make it "right?" Does a 13 year old have the emotional maturity to be an "equal" with an adult in a compromising situation?<br /> <br /> This is the crux of the U.S. "age of consent" laws. Our law says NO: A minor can never "consent" to sex in the same way an adult woman does simply because the emotional and societal maturity, and hence, POWER, is completely against the minor. A minor is NOT EQUAL to an adult in the sense of having the capability of understanding what "consent" is, what emotional sexual implications "consent" has, and therefore, is not able to "consent" to sex.<br /> <br /> Current U.S. "age of consent laws" are in place to protect minors because of this. Are we, like Goldberg infers, to throw out our morally-superior age of consent laws simply because Europe does not have them? Is Europe, the Middle East, the "rest of the world" (as she states) any example of proper sexual mores for the U.S.? Of course not.<br /> <br /> But aside from the "rightness" of U.S. age of consent laws, there is the little detail of "Rule Of Law." Polanski violated U.S. law. What if Polanski violated French law? Would we be debating the "rightness" of that law or France's jurisdiction over actions performed within the borders of France? I don't think Goldberg would be questioning it, if only because, in her view, France is a "progressive society." "Progressive society" is liberal-speak for "has no absolute morals/anything goes/I'm okay-you're okay."<br /> <br /> But, at the end of the day, Polanski drugged and raped a 13 year old girl. Even if "consent" was a defense when it comes to a minor (which it is not), how "consensual" can sex be with a girl that you just drugged? How "equal" in societal power can the 13 year old girl be when she is being pressured by her mother to have a career in Hollywood and to do whatever she needs to do to "get a foot in the door?" This poor 13 year old was placed--BY ADULTS--in a compromising situation where she thought she had to do whatever she needed to in order to please her mother. She is incapable of "consent."<br /> <br /> Hence, we see how rape is not really about sex, but about POWER. Let me finish this post by saying that my wife was raped by someone she knew when she was thirteen years old. She was scared to death and was threatened that if she told anyone she would be killed. The man almost suffocated her during the act to keep her from screaming. This all took place in the home of a "friend," someone she knew. That my wife failed to say the word "No" does not mean it was consensual. That my wife failed to run or fight does not constitute "consent." My wife was overpowered by fear and pressure to "perform" and was not old enough to understand what was actually going on before it was too late.<br /> <br /> Minors are incapable of giving "consent" the same way they are incapable of grasping global ideologies and complex moral/political issues in order to vote or have a lucid opinion. They are still emotionally and intellectually developing. Any nation or set of laws that fails to protect underage women (even from themselves) is a bankrupt nation.<br /> <br /> What Whoopie Goldberg is suggesting is morally bankrupt and anti-woman. If ever there was an example of reverse-sexism from a fake-feminist, this is it.<br /> <br /> PS: For a true example of feminism, I refer you to Jesus Christ. He defined feminism as ascribing equal worth to the feminine nature as is ascribed to the masculine nature (which astounded first-century, Middle Eastern sensibilities and did not help win Him any sympathies during His mock trial). Fake feminism is what "modern feminism" is: believing that women have to be men to be equal and in the process, must emasculate men due to women's innate insecurities.
Last night (after the above post was made), I heard playbacks on a radio station of comments made by Whoopi Goldberg defending Polanski raping the 13 year old girl. She stated that is was not "rape-rape" and that Polanski only "pled guilty to having sex with a minor" (the inference that it was "consensual").

She justified Polanski fleeing the country because Polanski was afraid of being sentenced to "100 years."

Goldberg then floats the argument that it is okay to rape a 13 year old girl, or even have "consensual sex" with a 13 year old, because U.S. standards are "wrong." She states that "the world sees things differently" (from the U.S.), that "Europe ... the rest of the world ... sees 13 year olds and 14 year olds" ... she does not finish her statement, but in the context, it seems she is saying that Eurpose sees 13 year old girls as adults who can make their own decisions and that U.S. law is backwards and needs to be changed to fit the sexual addictions and abuses of Roman Polanski.

Where to begin?

Just what is "rape-rape?" Is this like "murder-murder" as opposed to just "murder?" The mental gymnastics liberals go through to justify their sexual perversions never cease to amaze me.

Perhaps Goldberg's notion of "rape-rape" means there the sex was not consensual. Let's pretend that Polanski did not intoxicate the girl with multiple substances before sodomizing her. Even if a 13 year old "consents" to sex with an adult, does this make it "right?" Does a 13 year old have the emotional maturity to be an "equal" with an adult in a compromising situation?

This is the crux of the U.S. "age of consent" laws. Our law says NO: A minor can never "consent" to sex in the same way an adult woman does simply because the emotional and societal maturity, and hence, POWER, is completely against the minor. A minor is NOT EQUAL to an adult in the sense of having the capability of understanding what "consent" is, what emotional sexual implications "consent" has, and therefore, is not able to "consent" to sex.

Current U.S. "age of consent laws" are in place to protect minors because of this. Are we, like Goldberg infers, to throw out our morally-superior age of consent laws simply because Europe does not have them? Is Europe, the Middle East, the "rest of the world" (as she states) any example of proper sexual mores for the U.S.? Of course not.

But aside from the "rightness" of U.S. age of consent laws, there is the little detail of "Rule Of Law." Polanski violated U.S. law. What if Polanski violated French law? Would we be debating the "rightness" of that law or France's jurisdiction over actions performed within the borders of France? I don't think Goldberg would be questioning it, if only because, in her view, France is a "progressive society." "Progressive society" is liberal-speak for "has no absolute morals/anything goes/I'm okay-you're okay."

But, at the end of the day, Polanski drugged and raped a 13 year old girl. Even if "consent" was a defense when it comes to a minor (which it is not), how "consensual" can sex be with a girl that you just drugged? How "equal" in societal power can the 13 year old girl be when she is being pressured by her mother to have a career in Hollywood and to do whatever she needs to do to "get a foot in the door?" This poor 13 year old was placed--BY ADULTS--in a compromising situation where she thought she had to do whatever she needed to in order to please her mother. She is incapable of "consent."

Hence, we see how rape is not really about sex, but about POWER. Let me finish this post by saying that my wife was raped by someone she knew when she was thirteen years old. She was scared to death and was threatened that if she told anyone she would be killed. The man almost suffocated her during the act to keep her from screaming. This all took place in the home of a "friend," someone she knew. That my wife failed to say the word "No" does not mean it was consensual. That my wife failed to run or fight does not constitute "consent." My wife was overpowered by fear and pressure to "perform" and was not old enough to understand what was actually going on before it was too late.

Minors are incapable of giving "consent" the same way they are incapable of grasping global ideologies and complex moral/political issues in order to vote or have a lucid opinion. They are still emotionally and intellectually developing. Any nation or set of laws that fails to protect underage women (even from themselves) is a bankrupt nation.

What Whoopie Goldberg is suggesting is morally bankrupt and anti-woman. If ever there was an example of reverse-sexism from a fake-feminist, this is it.

PS: For a true example of feminism, I refer you to Jesus Christ. He defined feminism as ascribing equal worth to the feminine nature as is ascribed to the masculine nature (which astounded first-century, Middle Eastern sensibilities and did not help win Him any sympathies during His mock trial). Fake feminism is what "modern feminism" is: believing that women have to be men to be equal and in the process, must emasculate men due to women's innate insecurities.]]> http://winduprubberfinger.com/blog1.php/2009/09/30/filmmakers-demand-united-states-postpone#c96