(G) Somewhere, Jsc just got a boner (G)

[poptart]

You've said it is a victimless crime twice - So the natural assumption is you support prostitution

You're a bigger idiot than M Dumb, and that takes some serious doing.

Did you read my conversation with M Dumb?

Go to page 4 and give that a go, you completely ridiculous dumb@ss.


He and Van were claiming that the true rape rate is 6 or 7 times the official rate - and they wanted to back that take up by noting that women, in a survey of 4008 of them, said they were raped at that rate.

I said I don't believe it, there are no hard facts at all to back up that kind of a jacked up rate, but we do have hard facts telling us the the number is 95,000 a year.

M Dumb responded with this...

Really, you're that dense? I suppose we can know just how often prostitution occurs by examining reported crime, right?

He was talking about estimates on HOW OFTEN THE ACT OF PROSTITUTION OCCURS - NOT about how many of the prostitutes were human trafficking victims.

I then told him that prostitutes and johns almost never report their sex act to the police (and they don't, correct?), because there is no victim there - but to the contrary, and the POINT of our discussion, rape victims DO report their act to the police in very large numbers.

So we have almost no baseline reported numbers telling us how often PROSTITUTION ACTS take place, but we DO have solid baseline numbers regarding how many rape ACTS take place.


If a store owner is held up at gunpoint, does he report the crime?
Yes, almost always. Because he is a victim.

If a man is carjacked, does he report the crime?
Yes, almost always. Because he is a victim.

If a woman is raped, does she report the crime?
Yes - 95,000 times a year.

If a prostitute and a john have sex, do they report the crime?
No, almost never. Because there is no victim.

THAT is the context in which I used no victim, dipshit.



M Dumb is a laffable joke of an idiot and
you, KC Scrot, are an industrial strength
DUMBFUCKING@SS.

[Van]

So we have almost no baseline reported numbers telling us how often PROSTITUTION ACTS take place, but we DO have solid baseline numbers regarding how many rape ACTS take place.

No, we DON'T. No one really has any idea how many rape ACTS take place because most of them go UNREPORTED.

[poptart]

Prove it.

[Dinsdale]

[Yes, it is known as the Fifth Amendment perhaps you've heard of it?

nor shall any person be

Hmmm.... confusing.

If only there was an amendment that defined who these "people" were that were covered by the BoR/Constitution.

Too bad no one thought to write one of those, eh?

Once again, mv -- that argument is a nonstarter, and you know it.

Which is the same reason SCOTUS never should have even heard Roe v Wade, much less issue a ruling... no jurisdiction whatsoever.

[Moving Sale]

Have you found Constitutional authority by which any citizen is to be required to remain pregnant and give birth against her will?

Yes, it is known as the Fifth Amendment perhaps you've heard of it?

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; or shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

You can save your intellectually dishonest arguments that 'Now isn't good time for Mommy' constitutes due process of law or that abortion doesn't not destroy human life.

Total horseshit from our resident racist paralegal. If you had fewer black cocks in your ass you might have The time to actually learn something about the USC before to posted crap like that.

[Dinsdale]

An ad campaign championing Obama as the bastion of "small government"?

Good luck with that stupidity.

Where's Dr. Ron Paul when you need him?

[Moving Sale]

Where's Dr. Ron Paul when you need him?

Sucking Ayn Rand's cock?
Looney bin?

[Dinsdale]

Sad state of affairs whn someone who merely wants you to live your own life and make your own decisions without the help of Big Brother is labelled as "loony."

[Moving Sale]

I thought I was on your ignore list you fucking pussy.

[Dinsdale]

You are, and I generally stick to it -- but if I'm bored, and you post after every post I make (quite predictable), I'll occasionally deign to hit the "Display This Post" -- which rarely fails to do anything but disappoint.

[Dinsdale]

Right wingers are for less government, except when they aren't.

Depends on your definition of "right wing," since "right" and "left" have become meaningless -- staunch political idealism has been replaced with selfishness.

[Derron]

Total horseshit from our resident racist paralegal. If you had fewer black cocks in your ass you might have

So midget boy, please explain how your comment is not racist, when you call him a racist, and then you go right to the black cock in the ass reference.

[Derron]

Where's Dr. Ron Paul when you need him?

Probably looking for the Constitution that Obama and his administration seems to have misplaced.

[Van]

Derron, merely pointing out the color of the cock doesn't make it racist. Did TVO offer any judgment on said cock due to its color? Did he offer any additional negative judgment on mvscal for taking a cock of that color?

Nope. He just said it was a black cock. In no way is that racist.

If you do want to hit him with the racist tag, you'd be better off going after his constant references to "mud people" when talking about mvscal's supposed ethnicity.

[Moving Sale]

you'd be better off going after his constant references to "mud people" when talking about mvscal's supposed ethnicity.

Here is a pic of a multi-layered cake.

Lights yet?

[Van]

Oooh, check out TVO channeling Latter Days Bace!

[Moving Sale]

You are.

At least you admit you are a pussified cunt.

[Moving Sale]

I don't know what that means van.

[Dinsdale]

I just wish there was a way to block your posts when I'm not logged in.

If finding you to be the least entertaining, monotonous, droning, no-take having douchetwaddle here makes me a "pussified cunt," then I'll change my screenname to King Vagina.

[Van]

Well, they say you are what you eat.

[Dinsdale]

Don't be a dick.

-------------------------

Hey, we called and left you a voice mail -- apparently, you didn't get it. We'd like our joke back, ASAP.

Thanks for your consideration in this matter.

Sin,
The 4th Grade, and TVO

[Moving Sale]

I just wish there was a way to block your posts when I'm not logged in.

How dastardly of you. Let me guess you have a yellow lab and live in a yellow house.

[poptart]

poptard totally evaded the question:

You've said it is a victimless crime twice - Do you support prostitution?

Have you ever been the client of a prostitute?

Answer the questions

Can you read?

If 100 prostitutes and johns engage in sex, how many of these... vict... errr, people, then report their act to the police?
I think it's usually zero, isn't it?

How many rape victims report their act?
95 THOUSAND a year.


The context of my no victim comment is 100% clear, you fool - if you are simply able (or willing) to read.

You came in, plucked the comment out, brought it into an entirely different context which YOU want to assign it to.

The fact that you now persist in pressing on with your stupidity, even though it's been shown to you, is beyond belief - but not really, since your overwhelming self-inflicted foolishness is very well documented by now.
Steam it up, big boy!

You're embarrassing yourself BADLY here, Scrot, and you are a HUGE dumb@ss.


Am a human service, I recommend KC Scrot get a timeout.

Ban him for 6 or 8 months to save him from his own stupidity. :grin:

[poptart]

Pop, when considering an insignificant point on a message board: prove it.

Pop, when considering a Bronze Age book that conflicts with science and our life experience: I believe it with no proof necessary.

You can feel free to take this question to the appropriate forum and I'll be glad to reply with more, Jsc, but I'll just say this...

It's known that my (or anyone's) trust in Christ is based on FAITH - and I've never sought to prove it to you - but just to relay what the Bible says, and what my own testimony and understanding is.

You can believe it or not.
Up to you.

[mvscal]

This extreme right crap is backfiring.

Nobody gives a fuck about abortion, moron.

Poll: Social Issues Unimportant to Most Voters

Abortion, birth control and gay marriage ranked lowest on issues of importance to registered voters, according to a new Pew Research Center poll.

Only 39 percent of the 3,008 respondents said abortion was "very important" to their vote, in the April 4-15 poll. Thirty-four percent ranked birth control, and 28 percent ranked gay marriage, as very important.

Read more at http://www.christianpost.com/news/poll- ... s7hVIS3.99

[Van]

Not quite sure how you figure nearly 40% is the equivalent of "nobody," but okay.

[mvscal]

Not quite sure how you figure nearly 40% is the equivalent of "nobody," but okay.

The economy and jobs are over 86% and 84% respecitively and when asked to prioritize the issues, abortion doesn't even crack 5%.

The Republican candidate is pro-life, the Democratic candidate is pro-death just as they've been for the last 30 years. It simply makes absolutely no difference whether a President supports or opposes abortion. The dog barks, the caravan passes and nothing changes.

The election hinges on the economy which is why Dems are so desperate to try to paint social issues into the frame.

[poptart]

Why do you continue to evade answering these questions?

Evade??

haha


They are completely irrelevant to the discussion.

You're a GIGANTIC dumb@ss.


Anything else?

[Felix]

the Democratic candidate is pro-death

nobody is pro-death and you know it.....democrats just believe women have a right to choose, and for asshats like you to stay the fuck out of THEIR business....besides, didn't you yourself say that social issues didn't matter?

according to you abortion is a nonstarter

so the conservatives are prolife? then why did they vote to cut funding for low income children's insurance to the tune of 400 million in May?

[poptart]

Because I am a very patient man, one last chance for KC Scottplug to get it.


The comparison M Dumb was making was... how often prostitution takes place v. how often rape takes place - and how we can/can't know what the real numbers on those two things are.

I said we have numbers showing us that 95,000 rapes occur in a year - because victims report the crime.
In contrast, I said that in a prostitution act, the john and the prostitute almost never report their crime - so determining the the numbers of prostitution acts in a year is a more cloudy thing.

Rape - victims report in large numbers
Prostitution - typically, neither participant reports

With carjacking, assault, armed robbery, rape, etc., we have victims of those crimes coming forward to report the crime - but with prostitution, you almost never have anyone involved in the crime coming forward to report the crime.

I was saying that in THAT CONTEXT, prostitution IS victimless, you friggin' dimwit.

Do you know what context is? lol


The fact that a prostitute may or may not be a victim of human trafficking is NOT something that was at all relevant to the comparison between the NUMBER OF RAPE ACTS and the NUMBER OF PROSTITUTION ACTS which occur in a year - and how we can know what the real numbers are on those acts.

No relevance.
Zero.


The 'no victim' thing are just words you plucked out, put in a totally different context, and have tried for some strange reason to harp on.

You're not bright, bottom line.


Is this seriously difficult for you to grasp?

[poptart]

nobody is pro-death and you know it

Jsc has been party to three fetus killings.

Wtf are you babbling about?

[Felix]

Jsc has been party to three fetus killings.

and that makes him pro-death?

I've known women that have had abortions and everyone of them have been emotional train wrecks afterward.....you wouldn't have the slightest idea...

so why are the pro-life republicans continually proposing new legislation designed to hurt those lives they hold sacred? why cut out insurance for indigent and poor children....why cut out food stamps....

Ryan's budget plan is tantamount to a scorched earth campaign against those who can least afford it, yet they insist they hold life dear....that is one crazy fucked up platform....

[poptart]

Of COURSE it makes him pro-death.

That's what he DID, THREE times, assclown.


Typical response.

Blatant denial of reality ---> followed up by blaming republicans for something.


Go to sleep, Foolix.

[M Club]

As if this argument isn't about a douchebag Christer on the same team as you making some psuedo-scientific claim about reproductive defenses against rape. Told you you don't even know what you're arguing about.

You're lying again... because that's what liars do.

I have not argued even one word in defense of Akin's dumb 'scientific' claim about the body's 'natural' defense against rape.

NOTHING.

In fact, the only time I mentioned his comments (page2), I called them awkward and stupid.

I posted initially in this thread as a response to Van posting the OJoOG's survey info - and that's been what I've been talking about throughout.

Seems you're cross-eyed and can only look at one thing at a time. Pray tell why this thread was even started. All the ensuing arguments have begun from there, including the extent rape actually occurs because the pro-life side of this argument wants to portray rape-pregger as but a marginal issue. And yes, you responded to Van's study because hahahahahahaha there's no way 0.0001% of the population becomes pregnant via rape because "that just doesn't sound right," which obviously carries more legitimacy than actual social scientists carrying out social research.

Let's see...4008 women...34 cases of rape-related pregnancy account for 5% of rape victims....20 x 34 = 680...answered your question, moron.

lol

We can both READ the results of their survey, numbnuts - and I didn't ask you to recite their findings.

I asked YOU how many women (out of 4008 random) YOU think would get raped over the course of a three year period.

To begin with, out of 4008 random women, how many do you think get raped over the course of a three year period?

if 4008 random women were chosen, how many do you think would get raped over a three year period?

You agreed with their 608 number.

Unless you didn't?

Unless maybe you did?

Unless...


Yeah, you're the #1 'tard.

You mockingly asked how many of the 4008 women studied could have possibly been raped over a three-year period and I provided an answer using numbers from the abstract. Perhaps you were really asking what I thought rather than what the study said, which, uh, fucking stupid since what expertise do I or you actually have here other than I'm willing to defer to experts while you think it's a valid argument to merely guess.

How about you try to use something other than lol to explain to us why the numbers in the survey are inaccurate.

[M Club]

The comparison M Dumb was making was... how often prostitution takes place v. how often rape takes place - and how we can/can't know what the real numbers on those two things are.

I said we have numbers showing us that 95,000 rapes occur in a year - because victims report the crime.
In contrast, I said that in a prostitution act, the john and the prostitute almost never report their crime - so determining the the numbers of prostitution acts in a year is a more cloudy thing.

I was comparing the prevalence of rape to prostitution? :? I was actually just using prostitution to illustrate the fact that the official police data you either do or don't hold so dear depending on whom you're talking to doesn't accurately reflect the true scope of crime. Of course, your response to that was to point out people involved in prostitution don't make reports to the police, which brilliant since that's what I'd just said.

I said I don't believe it, there are no hard facts at all to back up that kind of a jacked up rate, but we do have hard facts telling us the the number is 95,000 a year.

How is this a hard fact if even you've said those numbers aren't accurate. Pure intelligence.

So we have almost no baseline reported numbers telling us how often PROSTITUTION ACTS take place, but we DO have solid baseline numbers regarding how many rape ACTS take place.

No, we DON'T. No one really has any idea how many rape ACTS take place because most of them go UNREPORTED.

Prove it.

You're own unsubstantiated belief is that about 50% of rapes are going unreported yet now you want Van to prove his own numbers???? Not even the guys who made up the Bible can make this shit up.

[poptart]

You mockingly asked how many of the 4008 women studied could have possibly been raped over a three-year period and I provided an answer using numbers from the abstract. Perhaps you were really asking what I thought rather than what the study said, which, uh, fucking stupid since what expertise do I or you actually have here other than I'm willing to defer to experts while you think it's a valid argument to merely guess.

I wasn't mocking.
I was asking YOU what YOU thought about 4008 random women over a 3 year period, because I had just gotten done illustrating to you how extremely high-side WACK the estimates of the OJoOG's were.

Look at their projections, digest them, and really think about them for a moment.

They are saying that out of 4008 women, 680 rapes will occur among them over a three year period.

That's 17% of them (if it's one rape/one woman).
:?

Do you really think that out of 10 women, almost 2 of them get raped during the course of three years?

I don't.

How about you try to use something other than lol to explain to us why the numbers in the survey are inaccurate.

That's what I've been doing.

Read my first post on page 6 - as a response to Smackie's post near the bottom of page 5.

Some sources cite a 60-70% estimated unreported rate for rape - others sources estimate lower.
The OJoOG projections take the estimate up to 86% unreported - and that is an EXTREMELY high estimate.

Understand that every percentage point UP the unreported pct. goes jacks the TOTAL number of rapes up SIGNIFICANTLY.

I've said that I believe the perhaps 50% of rapes go unreported - and that means that I'm saying I think perhaps 200,000 rapes occur each year rather than the 95,000 official number.

If you go up to the silly (imo) 86%, rate, as the OJoOG does, that means that they are saying that 642,000 rapes occur in a year.

You can buy that if you want, but I sure don't.

That number is SO far from the 95,000 official number that I consider it a joke, because even if we use, for example, a HIGH 70% unreported rate, we get just 316,000 rapes occurring in a year - and that is a lot.

I was comparing the prevalence of rape to prostitution? :? I was actually just using prostitution to illustrate the fact that the official police data you either do or don't hold so dear depending on whom you're talking to doesn't accurately reflect the true scope of crime.

You were comparing how often the acts take place in relation to the data we have/don't have for both.

Of course, your response to that was to point out people involved in prostitution don't make reports to the police.

That's right.
Prostitution participants don't report their crime, but people who are raped DO make reports, it's verified, and that is why we DO have some hard data to go by regarding rape numbers.

You shouldn't have tried to say prostitution numbers are murky the same as rape numbers are, because you K'dYOA.

I said I don't believe it, there are no hard facts at all to back up that kind of a jacked up rate, but we do have hard facts telling us the the number is 95,000 a year

How is this a hard fact if even you've said those numbers aren't accurate. Pure intelligence. ]

That IS the hard fact, goofball.

That's what's in the books, and I'm FINE with saying that 95,000 rapes occur in a year.

It's you and Van who are fighting vigorously to jack that number WAY up

Any number you or I think up other than 95,000 is based on some level of speculation.

My own speculation is that it might be 200,000+ - but the hard data we have is 95,000 (in 2006).

You're own unsubstantiated belief is that about 50% of rapes are going unreported yet now you want Van to prove his own numbers????

Yes, because Van didn't say his is a BELIEF.


Van: No one really has any idea how many rape ACTS take place because most of them go UNREPORTED.


He stated that as a fact (that more than 50% of rapes go unreported), and yet he has NO facts to back it up.

For all Van really knows, the unreported rate might be... 40%, 36%... 23%... whatever...

I've openly said that my 200,000 number is my belief.

[poptart]

Which is the same reason SCOTUS never should have even heard Roe v Wade, much less issue a ruling... no jurisdiction whatsoever.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/s ... en&ct=clnk


Rhenquist's dissenting opinion.

[Felix]

Of COURSE it makes him pro-death.

the only people I know that are pro-death are the ones that hoot and holler when told the governor of texas has presided over 234 death row executions and not one republican candidate had the intestinal fortitude to say something like "hey maybe this isn't something we should be celebrating"

Blatant denial of reality ---> followed up by blaming republicans for something.

what am I denying? I don't know the circumstances of jsc and neither do you....as far as blaming republicans, are you saying the republicans don't intend to enact legislation that would hurt the poorest children by severely cutting insurance and food stamp programs for them? maybe you should reread exactly what ryans bill proposes...I'd say read romneys, but he doesn't have one so we'll just have to wait to find out.....you gotta love a party that says "killing an unborn fetus should be outlawed" and then turning around and throw those who need it the most under the bus....don't you see how crazy that sounds?

[poptart]

the only people I know that are pro-death are...

Jsc and his ilk.

He's the guy who was, at least twice, was in a position to chose life or death... and he chose death.

That's pro-death.

what am I denying?

Don't you have some Cheez-Its and boxes of juice to go pass out now?

Happy Sunday, fliendo.

[Smackie Chan]