On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 20:23:45 GMT, Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>Derek wrote:
>> On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 14:51:02 -0500, Ron > wrote:
>>>In article >,Der ek > wrote:
>>>>On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 19:27:59 GMT, Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>>>>>Scented Nectar wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>Then forced complicity
>>>>>
>>>>>There is no such thing.
>>>>
>>>>Forced complicity exists, and if I were to threaten
>>>>you and your family with death by starvation, you'd
>>>>be forced to comply with the truth of this sentence.
>>>
>>>We disagree, Derek. The choice to comply is still a choice.
>>
>> Then, if I were to bend your arm up your back in
>> a half Nelson,
>
>You couldn't do it. He's not crippled, and you are.
>Even though he's a pansy, he'd kick the shit out of you.

Some things pass right by you without you even noticing
it, don't they?

Let's use your favourite character in a little thought
experiment of our own, shall we? If a catamite was
being buggered up the arse by Harrison, would that
catamite be forced to comply with a buggering or not?