Reply #291: Incidentally, instead of rambling on about thought police and [View All]

[Joe Chi Minh]

pederasts on street corners fantasising about child porn!, if there is a distinction to be drawn, it is between formal crime, as per the applicable laws, and informal crime. The formality of a crime is the least significant part of it to all but the most self-serving lawyers. There is a morality, an ethical dimension not by any means covered by the man-made laws applicable in a place, which are no less criminal for that.

A callous lack of feeling for the suffering of young children, unmitigated malice, can evidently be manifested in a variety of ways, but I wouldn't have compared your "thoughts", however callous to those of a pederast. If that's the impression I gave, I'm sorry. I was simply pointing out the vacuity of your equation of education with sensitizing people to morality. It may occur, provided such education is based on sound morality (which is evidently not the case with you, I have to say), but it certainly cannot be taken for granted, particularly in cases of extreme malice, as here. The world is peopled by children of darkness as well as children of light. But then, Christ's teachings haven't favorably impressed you, have they? You look to "education" for your moral enlightenment.

Now before you have a ball responding, think of the implications of what you are saying. We wouldn't want a repeat of, "Well, if they're not my children..., would we? Words have meanings, remember, and English is presumably your first language, so it's important not to make too much of a fool of yourself. Latin terms can only give an impression of erudition in the mouth of someone who has mastered his own language.