Convicted paedophile found strangled and dumped in woods, page 4


Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5    6    7  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 9 times


reply posted on 10-10-2008 @ 01:21 PM by billyjoinedat2k8
reply to post by greeneyedleo



R u serious they have no right life ??? hows thatn right then everyone has a right live we dont get to choose who doesnt have one


reply posted on 10-10-2008 @ 01:21 PM by Dock6
reply to post by StevenDye




Are you deliberately derailing this thread ?

Or are YOU the only poster who chooses not to understand that this thread is NOT about teenagers having sex with each other ?


reply posted on 10-10-2008 @ 01:24 PM by Dock6
reply to post by billyjoinedat2k8





Yes we do. We most certainly do have the right .. because we make it our right .. to decide we do not want paedophiles at liberty to molest, rape, torture, kill our children.

If you want to put your views to the test, go amongst parents and tell them paedophiles have ANY 'rights', other than the right to exit this planet before they're tossed off it.


reply posted on 10-10-2008 @ 01:27 PM by StevenDye
reply to post by Dock6



No...I made it as a side point to my first post that people are using the word paedophile as a word of hate and disgust, When it is infact child molester they should be using... I was then in my second post replying to the poster who disagreed with what i said...if you read the thread you would see that.


And if we have the right to end someones life....why don't they have the right to ruin someones life. I'm not sticking up for this guy, but that point is highly hypocritical...

[edit on 10-10-2008 by StevenDye]


reply posted on 10-10-2008 @ 01:34 PM by Dock6
reply to post by StevenDye



YOU clearly prefer the term 'child molester'

'molestation' does not even begin to adequately describe the acts performed by paedophiles upon their child victims.

'Molestation' does not adequately describe the rape of a child. Rape is not 'molestation'.

Rape, mutilation, murder of a child victim by a paedophile far exceeds the term 'molestation'.

You will NOT persuade me to describe paedophiles as 'mere' child molesters, so stop trying, thank you. I regard your repeated attempts to push your point as being attempted minimisation of the heinous crimes perpetrated by paedophiles.

My own term for paedophiles is ' non-human evil filth'. But as that is lengthy and emotional and in any case still fails to articulate my utter loathing of those creatures, I use the term 'paedophile' more often within my posts in this thread.

The remainder of your post speaks for itself. Suffice to say, I do not agree with you.


reply posted on 10-10-2008 @ 01:50 PM by billyjoinedat2k8
Originally posted by Dock6
reply to
post by billyjoinedat2k8





Yes we do. We most certainly do have the right .. because we make it our right .. to decide we do not want paedophiles at liberty to molest, rape, torture, kill our children.

If you want to put your views to the test, go amongst parents and tell them paedophiles have ANY 'rights', other than the right to exit this planet before they're tossed off it.



Paedaphiles are in no way right about what they do they should be ashamed of it but they are still humans and theyrefore should have human rights still


reply posted on 10-10-2008 @ 01:50 PM by Dock6
reply to post by StevenDye





Both things .. are morally wrong




Stealing a ten cent chocolate is morally wrong

Stealing an old woman's bag containing her life savings is morally wrong.

So both are morally wrong.

It becomes the degree of 'wrongness'



Raping and killing a little child is morally wrong.

Killing the person who raped and killed the child is morally wrong.


Most would be of the opinion that the latter 'wrongness' is LESS 'wrong' -- would be of the opinion that the death of the paedophile is justified.

Whereas snatching a helpless child, raping and killing it cannot be justified.

Again, it's about the degree of 'wrongness'.



The State executes killers.

But the State, the judiciary and compromised legislators are failing to appropriately deal with paedophiles and are ALSO failing to adequately protect children.

So, the public is executing paedophiles


Perhaps you should take your argument to those who decide which criminals on death row should be executed ... tell them you believe that the killer has just as much right to kill his victim as the State has to execute that killer. Bet you don't



reply posted on 10-10-2008 @ 01:51 PM by Dock6
reply to post by billyjoinedat2k8




Paedophiles are NOT 'human'

and have NO rights


in the same way THEY decide a little child has no rights


reply posted on 10-10-2008 @ 01:54 PM by ben420
Originally posted by billyjoinedat2k8
Originally posted by Dock6
reply to
post by billyjoinedat2k8





Yes we do. We most certainly do have the right .. because we make it our right .. to decide we do not want paedophiles at liberty to molest, rape, torture, kill our children.

If you want to put your views to the test, go amongst parents and tell them paedophiles have ANY 'rights', other than the right to exit this planet before they're tossed off it.



Paedaphiles are in no way right about what they do they should be ashamed of it but they are still humans and theyrefore should have human rights still


Sorry to burst your bubble here guy, but pedophiles ruin lives.

Imagine you had a child and he/she got raped. Would you still be pleading for pedophiles rights?


reply posted on 10-10-2008 @ 01:56 PM by Dock6
reply to post by StevenDye



What you describe as 'your' country used to be 'my' country

And if things keep running as they are in 'your' country, you can put money on the return of the death penalty

Because death is the only way to solve some problems

And paedophiles are a problem NO-one's country can afford


reply posted on 10-10-2008 @ 02:04 PM by Dock6
reply to post by StevenDye




Again, it's about degree

Rape is abhorrent.

Rape of a child is beyond tolerance.


You appear unable or unwilling to recognise the difference.


An adult pitted against an adult aggressor has at least SOME chance of survival or escape.

A small child pitted against an adult aggressor hasn't a hope in hell.

Can you tell the difference ?

Don't you WANT to acknowledge the difference ?

Or are you hoping to bluff your way through and in the process equate an attack upon an adult with an attack upon a defenceless child ?
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5    6    7  >>    ^^TOP^^



Israel angered over IAEA vote on nuclear arsenal
  Posted 13 days ago with 79 member flags
Neil Armstrong dead at age 82 - report
  Posted 17 days ago with 63 member flags
Judge orders release of detained Marine veteran
  Posted 19 days ago with 58 member flags
Birds hold \'funerals\' for dead
  Posted 10 days ago with 55 member flags
TSA agents swarm Ron Paul\'s plane, demand explosives check
  Posted 11 days ago with 47 member flags
Mysterious Changes in Ocean Salt Spur NASA Expedition
  Posted 1 days ago with 36 member flags
Ga. Murder Case Uncovers Terror Plot by Soldiers
  Posted 15 days ago with 32 member flags