Rat & Swan wrote:
>
>
> Jonathan Ball wrote:
>
> his usual drivel.
>
> Having been shown that there is no way a genuine libertarian
> could not agree with my position on age on consent laws

Nope. Nothing of the kind. But in your monumental
arrogance and non-stop self-deception, you pretend you
have. You are not the authority on genuine
libertarianism. In fact, you are not an authority on
ANYTHING pertinent to any of this.

> <snip>
>
>>> Jonathan Ball wrote:
>
>
> <snip>
>
>> - you are not opposed to laws, so your claim to be
>> opposed to age-of-consent laws *because* they are
>> laws is specious
>
>
> false

No, TRUE:

The government is full of idiots and bullies, but
when I look at those who really need [help], I
can't see
any alternative for the present but to have some
government help.

Karen Winter, lying sophist in Santa Fe, NM


You are not opposed to government or laws.

>
>> - you acknowledge that young boys are harmed by anal
>> penetration, BASED ON THEIR AGE
>
>
> false.

No, TRUE; what a truly stupid lie!

Yes, it [sexual penetration of pre-teens] is
harmful, I believe. THEREFORE it should be
prohibited -- not because the boy is a certain
age, but because the action involved is HARMFUL.

Karen Winter, lying sophist in Santa Fe, NM


Indeed, I agree anal penetration of young
[pre-teen] boys is
harmful, and that it would be forbidden AS HARMFUL
either as part of assault laws [snip dreamy irrelevant
'anarchist' bullshit].

Karen Winter, lying sophist in Santa Fe, NM

You believe it is *always* harmful in the case of
pre-teens, PRECISELY because of their age.

>
>> - you have *already* acknowledged that you support
>> NAMBLA because you see it as a queer group
>
>
> true -- partly.

True, full stop.

>
>> - you are a queer
>
>
> also true....

A deviant, in other words.

>
>> Ergo, we conclude that solidarity with fellow deviants is more
>> important to you than protecting young boys from CERTAIN harm,
>> when a significant barrier to pedophile queers is eliminated.
>>
>> You are scum.
>
>
> something utterly false

Nope. We conclude that which the evidence leads to
unswervingly. You are scum.