From: eczcaw@mips.nott.ac.uk (A.Wainwright)
Subject: Re: Using California's Antidiscrimination: The Sort Of Case I Predicted
Reply-To: eczcaw@mips.nott.ac.uk (A.Wainwright)
Organization: Nottingham University
Lines: 30

In article <15442@optilink.COM>, cramer@optilink.COM (Clayton Cramer) writes:

|> The Walz monster above, however, was past 40 when he molested these
|> kids, as he says above.


Hehehe!  Dontcha just love these carefully constructed arguements?

Clayton, babe, please define the word `molest`.  Are you using a legal
term or a proper dictionary term?  Molest, as far as I can remember, means
`to do damage to person(s)`.  My mate, Mike, was lured into a woman's parlour
when he was 14.  Is that molestation?  A number of my friends (straight) lost
their virginity before that.  Were they 'molested'?  They told me that they
thoroughly enjoyed the experience.  I see no damage.  

Please stop pushing your objective morality on others.  If you push, people won't
fall over and say 'Ye gads, you're right!', they'll just push back.

Have you signed up for that logic course yet?

|> -- 
|> Clayton E. Cramer {uunet,pyramid}!optilink!cramer  My opinions, all mine!
|> Relations between people to be by mutual consent, or not at all.

-- 
+-------------------------+-----------------------------------------------+
|  Adda Wainwright        |    Does dim atal y llanw!         8o)         |
|  eczcaw@mips.nott.ac.uk |   8o)        Mae .sig 'ma ar werth!           |
+-------------------------+-----------------------------------------------+

