It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Quentin Tarantino defended Roman Polanski's pedophilia

page: 2
9
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 6 2018 @ 05:12 PM
link   
Personally, I think you should all try just a little to understand the meaning of pedophilia. This case is not pedophilia.

In many countries, 13 is above the age of consent.

In times not that long ago, girls at 13/14 were getting married.

On the other hand, there are sick bastards that need throwing in jail.

Countries and in fact States in the US all have different age of consents. Are they all right?

It is all one big cluster#.

P




posted on Feb, 6 2018 @ 05:22 PM
link   
a reply to: SilverOwls

Well, she is no longer a 13 year old girl. She is an adult who has asked things to be dropped because she's over it.


She said she has felt that the media have wanted her to play the role of victim for the last 40 years, even though she had long ago gotten over it.


She was 13 when Roman Polanski sexually assaulted her. Forty years later, she wants a judge to drop the case against him



posted on Feb, 6 2018 @ 09:47 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

Your argument makes child prostitution and pornography legit. Child signs consent and the adults are off the hook.

You, Richapau and rockdisjoint are saying it's okay for adult men to sleep with 13 year old girls in certain situations. You're putting responsibility in the hands of the child.



posted on Feb, 6 2018 @ 10:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: SilverOwls
Your argument makes child prostitution and pornography legit. Child signs consent and the adults are off the hook.

No because the "victim" isn't a child and is speaking on her own behalf as an adult.


You, Richapau and rockdisjoint are saying it's okay for adult men to sleep with 13 year old girls in certain situations. You're putting responsibility in the hands of the child.

I don't know about anyone else but I'm not saying it is OK. I'm saying that when the 13 year old girl is old enough to speak for herself, whatever age the law might settle on where she lives, that what she has to say should be taken into consideration.



posted on Feb, 6 2018 @ 10:10 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

She was 13 and not old enough. Retroactive consent doesn't fly. It leads to predatory men grooming kids into giving consent. That's why grooming is a bigger thing than physical rape.



posted on Feb, 6 2018 @ 10:16 PM
link   
a reply to: SilverOwls

What you posted doesn't even make sense. Grooming to give consent while children is still statutory rape so how does retroactive consent lead to that.

Funny how even though she is a 54 year old woman she still can't weigh in on what happened to "her".



posted on Feb, 6 2018 @ 10:35 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

It makes perfect sense. You think he gets a pass because she said it was ok. She was 13 and not old enough to give consent. She can't give retroactive consent.

The courts are full of cases of grown men who slept with 13 year olds. They broke laws that protect 13 year olds. It doesn't matter how you cut it.

There are no special circumstances. Your defence is a justification for adults to sleep with children.



posted on Feb, 6 2018 @ 10:39 PM
link   
a reply to: SilverOwls

No, I am saying that he gets a pass because she is 54 and she wants it that way.

She could give retroactive consent if the laws were set up that way. They are set up that way in some places.
edit on 6-2-2018 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 6 2018 @ 10:44 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

You are saying it's okay in certain circumstances for men to sleep with 13 year olds. It's the extension of your argument whether you see it or not.



posted on Feb, 6 2018 @ 10:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: SilverOwls
You are saying it's okay in certain circumstances for men to sleep with 13 year olds. It's the extension of your argument whether you see it or not.

No, I'm not saying that. That is just what you want to see.

I'm saying that when a victim is an adult, they should then have a voice and choice in the matter. Who are you to tell a 54 year old woman she has no say in the matter?

ETA: You are no longer protecting a child but dictating the choices of an adult.
edit on 6-2-2018 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 6 2018 @ 10:57 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

You said he gets a pass. Her consent does not make it right. Grown men should not exploit children. Not even grown, famous men. No exceptions, no special circumstances.

I'm not spending all night arguing with an apologist for sex with minors. You've made your points. Good day sir.



posted on Feb, 6 2018 @ 11:02 PM
link   
I think Polanski lost it completely after death of his wife,Sharon Tate and unborn son.
Not excusing him but do question his mental competence.Still..



posted on Feb, 6 2018 @ 11:04 PM
link   
a reply to: SilverOwls

I said she wants to give him a pass and I could respect that since she is now an adult making that choice.

Sorry if you can't disengage your emotions enough to see what is actually being said.


edit on 6-2-2018 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 7 2018 @ 03:03 AM
link   
'European morals'? So he just labelled an entire continent as pedos?




top topics



 
9
<< 1   >>

log in

join