Vegetarian Discussion: Ball's Interest In The Subject Of Child Abuse

Ball's Interest In The Subject Of Child Abuse
Posts: 11

Report Abuse

Use this form to report abuse or request takedown.
The requests are usually processed within 48 hours.

Page: 1 2   Next  (First | Last)

Rupert
2008-08-29 06:08:27 EST
Ball has long displayed a keen interest in the subject of traumatic
child abuse. He used to illustrate one of his arguments about veganism
with a thought experiment in which a seven-year-old boy was brutally
sodomised with a broomstick six times a week.

Lately he has been expressing an interest in the question of whether
my psychotic episodes were caused by some sort of child abuse trauma.
He certainly seems very interested in the question; he won't let go of
it.

Ball, as it happens I would be perfectly happy to give you an honest
and frank answer to this question, but I would be worried someone
might come along in a similar situation who might want to keep a
matter like that private, and I would be undermining their right to
keep that matter private. So I won't be able to satisfy your
curiosity, Ball. Sorry about that.

Why do you have so much interest in the subject of traumatic child
abuse? Do you get some kind of perverse gratification from
contemplating traumatic child abuse? Do you fantasise about abusing
children yourself, or do you actually do it?

You're an interesting case, Ball.

Rudy Canoza
2008-08-29 21:34:59 EST
On Aug 29, 3:08 am, Rupert <rupertmccal...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Rudy has long displayed a keen interest in the subject of traumatic
> child abuse.

No, actually I haven't.


> He used to illustrate one of his arguments about veganism
> with a thought experiment in which a seven-year-old boy was brutally
> sodomised with a broomstick six times a week.

Right, but only to illustrate as shockingly as I possibly could that a
sense of virtue based on a comparison with others is disgustingly
cynical and evil. The conclusion of the thought experiment in no way
- and you know this, Your Wobbliness - in no way depended on child
abuse in order to establish the central conclusion: that one does
not demonstrate virtue by doing less of a loathsome act than someone
else, while still doing some non-zero amount of it.

My point in that thought experiment stands, and is correct.


> Lately he has been expressing an interest in the question of whether
> my psychotic episodes were caused by some sort of child abuse trauma.
> He certainly seems very interested in the question; he won't let go of
> it.

You know that's a lie, rupie. I've asked something about it two,
maybe three times, all in the last week. That hardly qualifies as a
"keen" interest in it, rupie. And, of course, and as you well know,
it has nothing to do with the aforementioned thought experiment.


> Rudy, as it happens I would be perfectly happy to give you an honest
> and frank answer to this question,

No, that's quite clearly a lie, rupie.

> but I would be worried someone
> might come along in a similar situation who might want to keep a
> matter like that private, and I would be undermining their right to
> keep that matter private.

In no way would you be "undermining" this purported right, rupie. You
could, if you wished - and if you were capable of it, which you
clearly are not - give an honest and frank answer, and that would in
no way oblige anyone else to answer a similar question at all.

So, in order to establish the grounds for your wobbly whiff-off,
you've just lied - again.

> So I won't be able to satisfy your
> curiosity, Rudy. Sorry about that.

No, in no way are you *unable* to answer the question, rupie. You are
unwilling, because of fear and fundamental dishonesty.


> Why do you have so much interest in the subject of traumatic child
> abuse?

I don't, rupie, and you have no reason to think I do. This is just a
debate tactic, rupie - an attempt to go on the offensive. You're as
transparent as one can be in this, rupie.

Rupert
2008-08-29 21:43:01 EST
You do have an unhealthy interest in the subject of child abuse, Ball.
Accepting your argument that I would not be undermining anyone else's
right to privacy, I am happy to tell you that I had an extremely happy
childhood, with a loving and caring family, and I was never abused.

Rudy Canoza
2008-08-29 21:54:00 EST
On Aug 29, 6:43 pm, Rupert <rupertmccal...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> You do have an unhealthy interest in the subject of child abuse, Rudy.

No, rupie - and you don't even think I do. As noted, that's just a
debate tactic; trying to go on the offensive; completely transparent.

Rupert
2008-08-29 22:13:00 EST
On Aug 30, 9:54 am, Rudy Canoza <notgen...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Aug 29, 6:43 pm, Rupert <rupertmccal...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > You do have an unhealthy interest in the subject of child abuse, Rudy.
>
> No, rupie - and you don't even think I do. As noted, that's just a
> debate tactic; trying to go on the offensive; completely transparent.

I think that someone who repeatedly asks whether someone had their
life destroyed by child abuse, as a way of trying to score a point
against them on an Internet discussion board, is not very well. My
revulsion, nausea, and moral disgust are quite genuine, I assure you.
Everyone who had a reasonable understanding of how decent people see
the world would see this immediately. But think what you like.

Derek's very concerned about protecting the interests of children, and
you're responsible for the care of a child. Perhaps Derek should bring
this conversation to the attention of the authorities.

Rudy Canoza
2008-08-30 10:56:38 EST
On Aug 29, 7:13 pm, Rupert <rupertmccal...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Aug 30, 9:54 am, Rudy Canoza <notgen...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > On Aug 29, 6:43 pm, Rupert <rupertmccal...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > You do have an unhealthy interest in the subject of child abuse, Rudy.
>
> > No, rupie - and you don't even think I do. As noted, that's just a
> > debate tactic; trying to go on the offensive; completely transparent.
>
> I think that someone who repeatedly asks whether someone had their
> life destroyed by child abuse,

Who has done that, Your Wobbliness? No one that I've seen participate
here.


> My "revulsion", "nausea", and "moral disgust" are

just things you claim to feel, as a debate tactic.

Rupert
2008-08-30 18:54:03 EST
On Aug 30, 10:56 pm, Rudy Canoza <notgen...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Aug 29, 7:13 pm, Rupert <rupertmccal...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > On Aug 30, 9:54 am, Rudy Canoza <notgen...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Aug 29, 6:43 pm, Rupert <rupertmccal...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > You do have an unhealthy interest in the subject of child abuse, Rudy.
>
> > > No, rupie - and you don't even think I do. As noted, that's just a
> > > debate tactic; trying to go on the offensive; completely transparent.
>
> > I think that someone who repeatedly asks whether someone had their
> > life destroyed by child abuse,
>
> Who has done that, Your Wobbliness? No one that I've seen participate
> here.
>

Oh dear. Going with the brain-damaged approach, are we?

> > My "revulsion", "nausea", and "moral disgust" are

... quite genuine,

Rudy Canoza
2008-08-30 19:43:08 EST
On Aug 30, 3:54 pm, Rupert <rupertmccal...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Aug 30, 10:56 pm, Rudy Canoza <notgen...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Aug 29, 7:13 pm, Rupert <rupertmccal...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Aug 30, 9:54 am, Rudy Canoza <notgen...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Aug 29, 6:43 pm, Rupert <rupertmccal...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > You do have an unhealthy interest in the subject of child abuse, Rudy.
>
> > > > No, rupie - and you don't even think I do. As noted, that's just a
> > > > debate tactic; trying to go on the offensive; completely transparent.
>
> > > I think that someone who repeatedly asks whether someone had their

*MORE* lack of pronoun agreement. "...someone had *his*...", you
stupid barking mad jackhole.


> > > life destroyed by child abuse,
>
> > Who has done that, Your Wobbliness? No one that I've seen participate
> > here.
>
> Oh dear. Going with the brain-damaged approach, are we?

Who has done it, Your Wobbliness? Who has "repeatedly" [sic] asked
someone if *he* has had *his* life destroyed by child abuse? Think
carefully, Your Wobbliness - think about what "repeatedly" means.


> > > My "revulsion", "nausea", and "moral disgust" are
>

...phony; nothing but words you say as debate tactics.

Rupert
2008-08-30 23:27:55 EST
On Aug 31, 7:43 am, Rudy Canoza <notgen...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Aug 30, 3:54 pm, Rupert <rupertmccal...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Aug 30, 10:56 pm, Rudy Canoza <notgen...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Aug 29, 7:13 pm, Rupert <rupertmccal...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Aug 30, 9:54 am, Rudy Canoza <notgen...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > On Aug 29, 6:43 pm, Rupert <rupertmccal...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > You do have an unhealthy interest in the subject of child abuse, Rudy.
>
> > > > > No, rupie - and you don't even think I do. As noted, that's just a
> > > > > debate tactic; trying to go on the offensive; completely transparent.
>
> > > > I think that someone who repeatedly asks whether someone had their
>
> *MORE* lack of pronoun agreement. "...someone had *his*...", you
> stupid barking mad jackhole.
>

It is legitimate to use "their" for the gender-neutral singular.

> > > > life destroyed by child abuse,
>
> > > Who has done that, Your Wobbliness? No one that I've seen participate
> > > here.
>
> > Oh dear. Going with the brain-damaged approach, are we?
>
> Who has done it, Your Wobbliness? Who has "repeatedly" [sic] asked
> someone if *he* has had *his* life destroyed by child abuse? Think
> carefully, Your Wobbliness - think about what "repeatedly" means.
>

Get to the point, clown. You repeatedly asked me whether I was abused
as a child. Go on, spout your pitiful moronic dribble.

> > > > My "revulsion", "nausea", and "moral disgust" are
>
> ...phony; nothing but words you say as debate tactics.

All of your usenet behaviour is phony and nothing more than an attempt
to get under people's skin. My revulsion, nausea and moral disgust are
obviously genuine, of course all decent people would be revolted by
your behaviour. Get a grip.

D*@.
2008-08-31 10:47:33 EST
On Fri, 29 Aug 2008, Goo boasted:

>On Aug 29, 3:08 am, Rupert <rupertmccal...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Goo has long displayed a keen interest in the subject of traumatic
>> child abuse.
>
>No, actually I haven't.
>
>
>> He used to illustrate one of his arguments about veganism
>> with a thought experiment in which a seven-year-old boy was brutally
>> sodomised with a broomstick six times a week.
>
>Right

"Taking moral credit for a livestock animal's very existence
is analagous to taking moral credit for the life of a daughter
you sell onto the streets." - "Dutch"

>My point in that thought experiment stands

Everyone had already suspected that it gets you aroused
Goo, but thanks for confirming it (you sick shit).
Page: 1 2   Next  (First | Last)


2020 - UsenetArchives.com | Contact Us | Privacy | Stats | Site Search
Become our Patron