1,756
edits
Talk:Brongersma: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
no edit summary
Leucosticte (talk | contribs) (re) |
Leucosticte (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
On the one hand, Leucosticte has been trolling for this response. On the other, WikiIndex has a mission. I suggest we follow the mission. I linked to the Wikipedia article because it is ''relatively neutral.'' I avoided adding clarification because I do not want to create a debate here over the definition of pedophilia. RationalWiki was nearly torn apart by that debate, stimulated by Leucosticte, between many who wanted to stand for free speech, and others who could not tolerate the presence of a "child rapist," even though Leucosticte has never been charged with any child-sexual offense, is clearly not a pedophile (from extensive writing about his own sexuality), but described fantasies, fantasies that, from objective research in the field, are not uncommon. (Which does not establish norms. It might be common to fantasize murdering your boss, it would not make it right!) --[[User:Abd|Abd]] ([[User talk:Abd|talk]]) 16:18, 7 January 2015 (UTC) | On the one hand, Leucosticte has been trolling for this response. On the other, WikiIndex has a mission. I suggest we follow the mission. I linked to the Wikipedia article because it is ''relatively neutral.'' I avoided adding clarification because I do not want to create a debate here over the definition of pedophilia. RationalWiki was nearly torn apart by that debate, stimulated by Leucosticte, between many who wanted to stand for free speech, and others who could not tolerate the presence of a "child rapist," even though Leucosticte has never been charged with any child-sexual offense, is clearly not a pedophile (from extensive writing about his own sexuality), but described fantasies, fantasies that, from objective research in the field, are not uncommon. (Which does not establish norms. It might be common to fantasize murdering your boss, it would not make it right!) --[[User:Abd|Abd]] ([[User talk:Abd|talk]]) 16:18, 7 January 2015 (UTC) | ||
:Don't forget what Louis Brandeis [http://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/274/357 wrote], "Every denunciation of existing law tends in some measure to increase the probability that there will be violation of it." If you say "This law is wrong, because the behavior it proscribes is harmless and ethically acceptable" then it could make people think, "Why shouldn't I violate it, then, if I think I can find a way to get away with it?" [[User:Leucosticte|Leucosticte]] ([[User talk:Leucosticte|talk]]) 20:51, 7 January 2015 (UTC) | :Don't forget what Louis Brandeis [http://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/274/357 wrote], "Every denunciation of existing law tends in some measure to increase the probability that there will be violation of it." If you say "This law is wrong, because the behavior it proscribes is harmless and ethically acceptable" then it could make people think, "Why shouldn't I violate it, then, if I think I can find a way to get away with it?" Denouncing a law tends to make that law less popular, and there's often less stigma attached to breaking an unpopular law. Where there's less stigma for lawbreaking, there may be more lawbreaking. [[User:Leucosticte|Leucosticte]] ([[User talk:Leucosticte|talk]]) 20:51, 7 January 2015 (UTC) | ||