Before i go, I've just noticed the last post by steel where he says that philips must be a socialist or fascist for having a strong opinion that tries to crush steel's opinion. Steel, using the same logic that you use, you also must be a socialist or fascist because you are arguing your point and trying to crush philips, unsuccessfully by the way. Philips has never said you are not allowed to express any opinion you desire. You using the terms socialist and fascist in this context, shows you have run out of all ideas.

Steel, after reading your post here on the thread, you just call people names like Islamist extremist, fascist and a dozen other insults, because they don't have the same opinion as you. You just attempt to demonise your opponents. Philips is right, you have no credibility in relation to this subject matter.

I won't waste my time anymore on steel, I doubt he's worth it. He seems like one of those people incapable of change

samsung your comments here add nothing. they are merely desperate accusations against me which mimic philips and to which i've already answered:

Steel>"all you've done is painted a contrived description and put words into my mouth. There is no way that corresponds with what I said."

samsung>"Steel, using the same logic that you use, you also must be a socialist or fascist because you are arguing your point and trying to crush philips, unsuccessfully by the way"

Nope that's not my logic at all. It's yours. If you care to prove my last comment wrong, then do so, rather than wishing that whatever you say about me must be true merely because you are saying it.

samsung>"Steel, after reading your post here on the thread, you just call people names like Islamist extremist, fascist and a dozen other insults"

Why not quote where I call people these things? Who did I call an Islamist extremist exactly? Here's the hint: You are merely regurgitating philips contrived ridicule, a strawman so to speak. All I said was if you had bothered to look it up rather than spout nonsense about me is, "You are playing into the hands of the Islamist and Christian extremists". As you can see, that is not "calling philip" anything. in fact it implies he isn't one.

More impotantly those descriptions are classifications witha basis. I have a reason for describing the situation and those are the labels. They fit the events and protagonists accurately.

samsung>"You just attempt to demonise your opponents."

This is the most ironic and sad comment you've made yet. What exactly do you think philips did and you are doing yourself by not checking your comments against my actual words? You are demonising me, not the other way around.

samsung>"on steel, I doubt he's worth it. He seems like one of those people incapable of change"

So I must change because of your staunchly ignorant and partisan opinion? I don't think so. The only thing that will change my opinion are facts and reason none of which you remotely suggest you understand.

Forget about him samsung. He's a lost cause.

All his political rhetoric shows him for what he really is. He stands roundly condemned via his "own" words. He'll defend himself till the cows come home. He'll always turn the argument around. You know, all the usual techniques used by a defensive, forum addict. The subject matter really isn't the major concern for him. The major concern seems to be his need to **DOMINATE**, and he attempts to do this by calling people who attempt to protect children "child abusers" and other such immature names. He needs to actually grow up, and live life.

The sexualisation of nude, underage children in professional photography is something he couldn't care less about.

If you can't debate then leave. That's a good lesson. I have to say I'm excited to unearth something about Melinda tankard reist that will be very, very interesting to some of those posting in support or objeting to her views.

Unfortunately the rigid rules on commenting on articles prevents me from posting this, but it's deliciously ironic and alarming at the same time as it will expose and explain many interesting allegiances and otherwise inexplicable comments, while showing how some people really, really may have their heads in the sand on this. Can't wait...but i will have to. Put it this way, Melinda is a very deceitful individual that has hijacked and utilised many for her own agenda (which I've been constantly referring to and to which people have been inclined to feel doesn't exist or to dismiss it's importance and influence). maybe posters already know this but i did not. I will probably post it in her pin up article :)

philips: "The major concern seems to be his need to **DOMINATE**"

Talk about the pot calling the kettle black...

philips: "The sexualisation of nude, underage children in professional photography is something he couldn't care less about."

Don't know about Steel, but that statement would true for me. So long as any sexualisation occurring is in the eye of the beholder and not the child, I couldn't care less.

Actually, that's not true. If I knew some pervert took such pleasure from a picture of my child, I would feel very uncomfortable. Still, its unlikely I would ever find out, assuming the pervert had any social graces at all. If the entire exercise took part in the perverts mind everyone is happy I guess.

Now to I come to think of it we did show some naked pictures of our kids at one of their birthdays. They might even of got one or two hearts racing in the crowd. I can't say the idea worries me in the slightest. Maybe I am not as sensitive to the issue as I thought.

Needless to say, I am very sensitive to the idea banning the taking of those sorts of pictures, or the banning of showing them in public to whoever and whenever I wanted. It is an idea I don't like at all.

One comment for you philips. Thanks so much for standing up for common decency and for respect towards childhood.

You have thoroughly won the debate with steel. You care deeply about the innocence of children. You're a good man, a "real" man. Take care.