Merely retaining the same subject line does not automatically mean the same old thread is still being discussed.
I tried to make a distinction for you between a person and a child molester. If you don't want to follow me down that new path, that's fine. But don't use your timidity, lack of comprehension or obstinance to criticise me because of your own failings.
I said "you have not specified what 'actions' you are talking about" because you said "So are you quite happy with the actions of a person?"
My comment had nothing to do with whatever was said way back at the beginning of the thread, it was directed at what you specifically said immediately prior.
I sure as hell need no lectures from you.
As opposed to a normal loveual attraction, I suppose.
First half OK. Second half, no.
Essentially, a child molester is a person who engages a child loveually, without the consent of the child.
A person is one who has a loveual desire for a person below the age of puberty. That desire might or might not be translated into action. (The world has many celibate persons who break no laws and therefore never come to the attention of ther authorities.)
If the desire is acted upon and the deed is consnsual, the person remains a person but now also becomes a law-breaker. If the deed is non-consenual, the person was never just person, he was a child molester-in-waiting who has now become a child molester in fact.
Why is he sick? Like homoloveuals, you mean?
Not if the act was consensual.
Sarcasm contributes nothing to any debate. Please stay within the confines of your intelligence.
