Ludwig but a judge would and a national newspaper would print it.
<<Problem being, Paul, that Graham told us not to post anything explicit.>> Poirot, depends on what one considers "explicit" the "V" word and the "p" word are rightly used in sex education classes in Catholic primary schools in NSW, I know because I was there when they were used. Yet on another thread a poster puts this up;
<<Perhaps in the long term this could actually be a good thing, if it brings the human population down by a couple of billion.>>
Okay don't mention the private parts even using the words of a learned judge and the oxford dictionary. Hummmmm, but reference to the deaths of 2 billion people by TB is a good thing, its acceptable. How American,
Ludwig you just keep on press'n that red cross. After all my post sunk your mate, did it not? Besides its Grahams forum anyway, he does what he likes, no argument from me.

Well R0bert, at least you have considered my views and responded in a decent manner. So I thank you for that.

You might be right. But I am certainly not willing to accept that you definitely are.

The views of this fellow I was talking to are very similar to the views of numerous other people that I have spoken to. Only one person that I have spoken to over the last ten weeks that this thread has been running has indicated a different view. And when it comes to actually debating the issue, he backs right away from it, while those who agree more or less with me are perfectly happy to delve right into it.

BTW, I now see no less than four posts above by Ludwig . (Ludwigdot). So we all need to be aware that this thread, and indeed the forum, is under attempted corruption, from one person (originally Jay123) who became so outrageous that he was not just suspended but banned from OLO.

I thought that he was directly and vehemently opposed to me and everything I have said, but now I am not so sure. It seems that he might just be out to embarrass and weaken the arguments of those against me…. or perhaps he is just so peeved at having been banned that he is only interested in trying to corrupt OLO and get at Graham.

Who knows. But he sure is a prize-winning fruitcake! ( :>)

To the real Ludwig, I apologise for any confusion re your nic. My eyesight is not all that good. If someone is trying to steal your identity, and it appears they are, they are juvenile in the extreme.

<< To the real Ludwig, I apologise for any confusion re your nic >>

Thanks Paul. This person is indeed juvenile in the extreme.

Hahahaa. I now see 7 Ludwigdot posts above!!

One of them is a hoot, where he makes fun of Paul for not noticing the difference between Ludwig and Ludwigdot!!

He writes:

<< The fact that Paul has been reading my posts, and still thought that I was Ludwig, shows how absolutely CRAZY the real Ludwig is. Paul couldn't tell the difference. HA HA HA HA HA. >>

Hahahaaa. Shows how crazy WHO is??

Oh dear. He is a very very fruity prize-winning fruitcake. But at least he is providing a bit of entertainment value!

.

Oh hullo Poirot.

Another post infringing Graham’s forum rule No 1 I see, in which you uphold Graham’s requirement for us not to post anything explicit.

Ummm… there couldn’t possibly be a touch of duplicity in that, by any chance??

I did try to get you to re-enter the debate by asking you a direct and very pertinent question a few posts back.

But alas, you have passed it over.

AdrianD really did hit the nail on the head when he said:

<< I think the difference with Harris is that most people (except Ludwig) have a deep revulsion towards the act of a grown man sexually touching underage girls; a revulsion that goes very deep into our souls… >>

I can understand your reluctance to respond to it, because I’m sure you think it is oh so true, but to admit it would be to admit that it does indeed not sit at all comfortably with cool-headed logical thought processes and realisitic perspectives.

And here’s the interesting thing: It would appear that AdrianD and Ludwigdot are the same person. HAAAAA hahahahahaaa!!

stop all the mud slinging, this is very important subject perhaps. I can't understand why there is no discussion on causes and prevention if child abuse is so vile. IMO te biology of the subject should be looked at eg My wife and I licked ,hugged and kissed our 3 boys constantly until they were about 18 months. That's bonding and protection like most mammals. About 2% of boys start to show homosexual urges after that I believe. My observation is that at about 9 yrs old about 2% of girls start to flirt their sex. (like Lolita?) These natural variations can be adjusted I contend.
Adjust the hormones and neurones and neurotranmitters. Problem solved.

Hullo Mollie. Welcome back.

I see you just ‘joined’ OLO today, and have put up ten posts. All short, half of them just one-liners. Not much substance in any of them. Oh except the one on this thread.

So, you’ve just dropped in briefly to a few other threads and made throw-away comments, in an attempt to look like a genuine OLO contributor.

But, on this thread, you have apparently studied it in depth to the extent that you can come up with a whole set of conclusions. Hmmm.

And you have made a fatal error in asserting things that you cannot possibly know enough about to be able to assert anything.

You assert that I invented…

<< …an imaginary friend, who just by sheer "coincidence", just happens to possess the EXACT SAME views that Ludwig holds, 100% word for word. Hmmm. >>

Of course you wouldn’t have a clue whether I did that or not. So you are I no position to assert anything.

Hahahaha. You’ve been caught out making patently false assertions, which means that you’ve been caught out lying!

Which, you silly dummy, means that no one can believe a word that you have written.

There’s only one other person who has done this sort thing in such a blatant and utterly unintelligent manner.

Welcome back Jay123!

Haaaaahahahaa.

Oh, and by the way, I don’t ever invent stories. My conversation and the views of that person were 100% genuine, just as I expressed them.