Oh god. Poor argumentation somehow led to Spidey being okay with inserting a penis into a three year old, and he being called a rapist, however, Spidey denies that it is rape.
Definitely not, otherwise how would you have the concept of molestation to talk about?
Spidey is taking his position to a shocking and uncomfortable extreme. I don’t know that I should or shouldn’t approve of it, but no one has answered his position sufficiently. The whole natural rights thing breaks down when it comes to children and folks prefer to whistle past the graveyard, so Spidey keeps cranking the argument up.
Spidey, maybe you could be the bigger man and just ease back a little. There is a point where people’s puke factor kicks in, and nothing productive is going to come from pushing the extreme further.
Meanwhile, does anyone have a logical, consistent, natural rights refutation for his claims?
Please don’t misrepresent me. I never said that it is OK. I claim that it is not illegal.
So you claim that it would not be illegal if you inserted your penis into your 3-year-old daughter. What if she didn’t consent to it?
Well I’m willing to interpret you charitably and ignore the last slip up. I’m not going to what the law says, the law says suits those in power. So what is the natural reason that you should not, aka the reason it is immoral to, rape a child. Psychological problems and genetic problems. It messes up the human race to do it. So what is your contention.
Same rationale to not use drugs. Or drink. Or smoke. Or eat certain foods.
or even pick a certain reproductive partner.
To grant or withhold consent implies she has the ability to think critically. Do you think a three year old has the ability to think critically?
Great point.
All morality is subjective. Libertarians even justify murder. I would guess even you would justify murder. I know of lots of “libertarians” that think it is moral to kill someone who is being aggressive.
No. So how could you possible have mutually-consensual inserting of your penis into a 3-year-old? And, if it is not possible to mutually-consensually insert our penis into a 3-year-old, is that not rape?
Murder is the illegal killing of another person. How could be a libertarian and say that murder is not illegal at the same time? Btw, killing an aggressor is not the same as murder.
An infant can’t give consent either, so how do you put clothes on it? Move it around? Take it for medical examinations?
Or do parents simply toss some food in a bowl near the baby and hope the kid can drag themselves to it and faceplant in some mush?
Some might say murder is killing someone else without getting his express consent first.
I never said that he was saying murder is not illegal.
Really? A pacifist would disagree.
I’d say the parents have the responsibility to maintain the child. I fail to see how inserting Spidey’s penis into a 3-year-old fits (no pun intended) in that role of responsibility.
Really? So, if I think my neighbor is not raising his child like I think he should, I can steal his child from him?
Positive obligation? Are you ok with abortion?
Is this a role based on your preference, or something grounded in objective reasoning?
Some might say that murder is eating chocolate late at night while watching scary movies. However, that is an irrelevant definition. See this for the relevant definition: http://m-w.com/dictionary/murder.
That’s is what you implied when you said this, “All morality is subjective. Libertarians even justify murder. I would guess even you would justify murder. I know of lots of “libertarians” that think it is moral to kill someone who is being aggressive.”
Perhaps. So?
Come on, Spidey. What is the definition for “steal”?