ATTN: Paul Morphy:

Damn, you love to stir up controversy.

 

12:41 PM Go away--shouldn't you be buying plywood or something?

whoever PMed me this is a dumbass. What the fuck would I need plywood for? A hurricane? Those already passed whorebag. If you're going to give someone neg. rep and try to come up with a comeback, at least make it a good relevant one if anything. What a douche.

 

This guy reminds me of the woman in my hometown who got all upset about the monkeys in the zoo. Apparently while she was there, she saw the cute little creatures doing the things that monkeys do and of course children go to the zoo, and this woman threw a fit. She wrote several letters to the local paper and made such a stink that they put diapers on the monkeys (how cruel). Needless to say the monkeys didn't take that very well. Today, that part of the zoo has been closed down. No more monkeys.

He'd probably have National Geographic and the animal channel banned if he could get away with it.

 

he certainly fits that description. maybe he'll be ok after his period passes. you know how they get.



i know this girl that dosnt get periods but every 3 months. isnt that weird??

 

Isn't that because of a certain kind of birth control? The shot maybe? ( I am not up on these new fangled ones, I don't use any)

 

Fem-bots can't get pregnant, can they? Maybe only when they are programmed to? :H

 

Not really, I just expressed an opinion that I felt was valid, and was set upon by certain threatened members. They're the one's who have escalated the matter beyond reason.

 

Sorry, but there's no comparison between that and the issue at hand here. Try to find more suitable analogies in the future, otherwise your argument is undermind and hence not taken seriously.

 

Set upon? We only expressed opinions that we thought were valid. What is more, we didn't try to get anyone's freedom of expression taken away, as you did. In my opinion actively working to supress the right of others to express themselves is unreasonable. In your opinion, expressing oneself in a way that you don't like is unreasonable. Who has the moral high ground, I wonder?

 

yea, those do that too, but she's not on anything. she said its been like that since she was 12. i think thats just fuckin weird.

 

Being quoted makes my daddy part swell.

However, being called a tramp makes me charge double.

 

Yeah, who has the moral high ground?... hmmm... Well, I think the problem here is the abuse of the term "freedom of expression". Posting pictures of one's breasts on a website, I hate to tell you, is not a form of expression. If it's not a form of expression, then obviously my questioning whether it's appropriate is not an attempt to suppress anything, is it? If I question the "right" of a brother and sister to get married, or for a man to have ten wives, am I attempting to "suppress" their right to live the lifestyle that they choose? Well, as you may know, there's much sympathy for homosexuals to be allowed to marry, so if this is the case, why can't a brother marry his sister, or a man have ten wives. The problem is, considering posting pictures of one's breasts "freedom of expression" contributes to the blurring of the boundaries between right and wrong, to the point where what is right and what is wrong is solely determined by what best suits the individual. This in turn results in the selfish, materialistic, hedonistic, consumeristic, etc. society that we have now. So really what these "hippies" are doing by "expressing themselves" is not shattering arcane mores, rather they are exemplifying the most unfortunate aspects of our society.

 

Paul Morphy, go away. If you think your going to save us, your wrong . we are are saved or we arent and all you accomplish is looking like an ass. God dont like asses. Pride is one of them deadly sins. and your soaking in it. or is it vanity? I dunno I am not catholic. there is but one god, but many prophets. not a single human has gotten it right, I am positive, so go fuck yourself and your moral highground.

 

Why does someone come into a forum and start critisizing what they see and read? If you don't like it go to another thread or forum. I'm not sure who named you moderator.

 

I don't see why the mods took him so seriously. Because he was loud about it? Fuck that. I've been loud about many things, and all I get is a "Shut the hell up." Honestly, the mods are becoming pussies these days.

 

I recommed mass suicide. That will solve all of your problems.

 

me ?

 

Hey, I know you. You used to be Juiceman3000. How ya doin little buddy? Get tired of getting your butt kicked in the Philosophy and Religion forums and decide to try your luck elsewhere? Well, no dice, kid. You have a lot to learn about freedom of expression. Lemme throw some names at you: Annie Liebowitz; Madonna; Robert Maplethorpe; Janet Jackson; Vanessa Williams. For that matter, how about the statuary of ancient greece, or the work of Michelangelo... Egyptian pictographs? The nude has been around a long, long time and you are in absolutely no position to define whether these pictures, are or are not artistic or whether the nude boy, itself isn't artistic, for that matter. Your concern with body modesty is out of date.

Cry all you want, but we're never going back to wearing the "sacred underwear" or whatever it is you think we should cover ourselves with. Even Afghanistan had a representative in the swimsuit competition of the Miss World beauty contest this year. Barriers are being knocked down left and right.

You can piss and moan about it all you want, but you will get nowhere. That's right - NOWHERE! Things aren't going to change back. Society will continue to become more open and accepting of each other and our beautiful differences and you are going to have to deal with it, because you can't stop it. Accept that now, and you may be able to save yourself from looking even more foolish than you already do. You are nothing but a really stubborn and ungraceful sore loser. Now, stop acting like a spoiled child and grow up.

 

Try answering the question, buddy. Or am I to infer that you're okay with incest and bigamy, then? I mean, they are cultural, aren't they? A form of free expression? My guess is that you'll totally avoid this issue now because you believe that incest and bigamy is wrong, and that by saying so, you'll show yourself to be a complete hypocrite.

As for Liebowitz, Madonna, Michelangelo, etc. just because someone undertakes something doesn't mean that it is correct or proper. The Nazis killed 6 million Jews, does that make it okay then for other nations to kill 6 million people? According to German law during the Third Reich, what they did was perfectly legal. And seeing that Hitler was a democratically elected statesman, the law was valid (this caused the Allies some problems during the Nuremberg trial), wasn't it; if it isn't, then how can you argue the legitimacy of laws now that all pornography as a means of "free expression"?

You see, you're arguments can be easily countered, and you know this, so you have to resort to putting me down, calling me "foolish" etc. The typical recourse of the person who knows that they can't win an argument. It's happened to me numerous times, especially when I take on right-wing crackpots, radical feminist zealpots, and racist bigots. And I guess I can add sexual deviants to my list.

 

Let’s look at the statements and questions that you want me to answer:

Really? What ever gave you that idea (or did you just make it up because it was convenient to do so)? I beg to differ. The mere fact that people are posting their pictures to this site without regard for some kind of monetary compensation makes it nothing but expression. So that makes your second claim that challenging the right of people to make such posts is not a form of suppression. It very blatantly is, especially when you created the following thread:

http://www.hipforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=32339

That is a textbook example of an attempt to suppress expression.

You’re barkin’ up the wrong tree where group marriage is concerned. I’m all for it, as long as the right to marry multiple people extends to both genders. The more the merrier, I always say. Incest, on the other hand has scientifically proven harmful repercussions in terms of potential genetic damage, so I’d have to say that it would at least need to be carefully monitored (I have this unresearched, untested idea that incest played a huge role in the evolution of all species on the planet, but we won’t get into that here, I’m already too aware of your thoughts on the whole evolution thing, and I’m sick of hearing your circular crap about it).

Your questioning of the rights of others in itself isn’t suppression, but taking action to get others to support you is stopping it is (see the above example).

Other countries do allow bigamy. It’s impossible to answer your question about why bigamy isn't allowed, because the facts say that it is (it’s simply a matter of geography).

This is a matter of opinion. Your concept of what is right or wrong is not the only concept. It is arbitrary. I can point to a widely accepted document called “the Universal Declaration of Human Rights” (http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html) as my guide to determining right and wrong. You would point to a different document, I’m sure. The document I have chosen is far more widely accepted than yours, having been adopted by the U.N. General Assembly (a group of 120 nations). And I can guarantee that my concept of expression is not forbidden in this document.

This statement simply parrots the unfounded beliefs of a small-minded group of people, of which you are one. I have seen no real proof to support this. Simply because someone says that it is so, doesn’t make it so.

Are you really making a comparison between the behavior of Hiltler's Third Reich and pornography? That's too much! In answer, I'll refer you to the Declaration of Universal Human Rights (see link above). The statements contained therein should make perfectly clear just why this is not a valid comparison. One group kills people, the other is a form of media. Big, big difference.

My arguments are not so easily countered as you had hoped, eh? I didn't call you foolish, I said that you were making yourself look foolish, and I stand by that statement. I called you a "stubborn, ungraceful sore loser" (which history has shown you to be) and told you to grow up. I stand by that as well.