So much for "Love thy neighbor"

[Robert]

In the United States the definition of sexual assault varies widely between the individual states. The Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network defines sexual assault as "unwanted sexual contact that stops short of rape or attempted rape. This includes sexual touching and fondling."[7]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_assault

Hey maybe you have to be more careful now that you know

[The Anvil]

People aren’t bragging bob when they tell of their military service. Far from it. It’s a level of kingship and brotherhood that you clearly are unaware of and can’t understand. There’s no ‘bragging’ or ‘conceit’ in sharing stories with fellow Patriots!   

We have two flag poles outside out home. One, the higher one of course, (Google it bob) has the America Flag. The second pole has an ARMY flag in it.  We’re NOT boasting of our family’s commitment to freedom, which in my bride’s case, can be traced to the Revolutionary war. No! We’re HONORING and showing RESPECT to the men & woman who are serving now, have served, or will be serving! Either you get that or you don’t.

In ‘fairness’ you’ve never specifically said you served in the “military” have you? Only hinted at it. . . . LOL! Too stinking funny!

Man. . . . I don’t know why in the world I respond to you. I really don’t. I guess it’s because you help me understand where we’re at historically as a civilization (Which would be in the preverbal ‘dustbin.’) So, thank you and please continue to post. I, for one, enjoy it.   

PS. I was not wrong that the act of “kissing” CAN be considered CSC, though in the case of a homosexual ‘kissing’ a person against their will, I would call it ‘felonious assault’ due to the much higher infectious disease rate and STD’s within the “gay community.” Oops! We’re not supposed to talk about that, are we? It’s not politically correct! Dang! Those ‘FACTS sure can get in the way though. . . . Here’s a link bob. Google it honestly for additional info and you’ll find how much more DANGEROUS it is to be “gay” but I suspect you already know that, yes?
http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/homosexuality/ho0075.html

How about you find an unbiased source (the Catholic church!  ) for figures showing  a higher rate of STD's and infectious diseases among homosexuals. Be sure and include the whole world, like Africa where AIDS is a plague.

BTW, if kissing is by definition sexual contact then don't kiss your kids anymore (because you'll be a pedophile) don't kiss any family members of age (because it's incestuous) and don't kiss your pets (bestiality).

[Robert]

Anvil you dont have the understanding of intent, at a gay parade it is about sex. When kissing your kids it is intimacy brought by physical contact not of a sexual nature. Intent is what a good part of our law is based on which is another reason our country is so messed up. With out clear guide lines its hard to determine intent.
 
Gay statistics are not good in sexually or relationship wise

[The Anvil]

Anvil you dont have the understanding of intent, at a gay parade it is about sex.

Granted I'm not the expert on gay pride parades that you are, but I'm gonna have to disagree here. They are not the orgies of gay sex in the streets that a lot of people seem to think they are and I'm fairly certain that the woman in question was not looking to jump Father McD-bag's bones and finally make a man out of him.

But even at that, you can't really PROVE one way or another so you're never gonna secure a conviction. The only thing you can really prove is that she made contact with him. So you charge based on that.

[Robert]

LOL about the expert thing, but it seems you have lost your understanding or hearing. Gay agenda is about society laws following sexual freedom. So in this context it is all about sex regardless, why wouldn't a hug or touch on the arm done just as well as a kiss? This is what I meant by distortion you have been accepting of so many things you cannot discern what the real intent was of the action and why that particular action was chosen from a total stranger. What a intimate way to try to calm someone down or maybe to prod them a bit more?

[The Anvil]

LOL about the expert thing, but it seems you have lost your understanding or hearing. Gay agenda is about society laws following sexual freedom. So in this context it is all about sex regardless

No it's not about "sex". It is in part about "sexuality" (there's a difference) but just as much about not allowing yourself to be bullied or marginalized because of it. Are there those in the crowd being childish and overtly sexual and in general inappropriate? Sure. But attend any St. Patrick's day parade in South Boston and see the flipside of that. Does it mean that the parade is "about" the boorish behavior that sometimes takes place within? I would submit that it does not.

What kills me is all of the people claiming to be oppressed by the gays. 

[Robert]

Human sexuality is how people experience the erotic and express themselves as sexual beings; the awareness of themselves as males or females; the capacity they have for erotic experiences and responses.[1] Human sexuality can be described as the way someone is sexually attracted to another person of the opposite sex (heterosexuality), to the same sex (homosexuality), to both sexes (bisexuality), or attracted to no sexes in a sexual way (asexuality).[2]

Right from Wiki and no it may not be the actual act but in conspiracy laws enough to get you convicted

[The Anvil]

Human sexuality is how people experience the erotic and express themselves as sexual beings; the awareness of themselves as males or females; the capacity they have for erotic experiences and responses.[1] Human sexuality can be described as the way someone is sexually attracted to another person of the opposite sex (heterosexuality), to the same sex (homosexuality), to both sexes (bisexuality), or attracted to no sexes in a sexual way (asexuality).[2]

Right from Wiki and no it may not be the actual act but in conspiracy laws enough to get you convicted

And that still does not make an act contained within or related even peripherally to the parade an overt sexual act. It just doesn't. 

Remember this iconic photo?



From The Eye of Eisenstaedt:

    I was walking through the crowds on V-J Day, looking for pictures. I noticed a sailor coming my way. He was grabbing every female he could find and kissing them all — young girls and old ladies alike. Then I noticed the nurse, standing in that enormous crowd. I focused on her, and just as I'd hoped, the sailor came along, grabbed the nurse, and bent down to kiss her. Now if this girl hadn't been a nurse, if she'd been dressed dark clothes, I wouldn't have had a picture. The contrast between her white dress and the sailor's dark uniform gives the photograph its extra impact.

So by your standards that's sexual assault? Well I disagree, to me it's an expression of joy. So you'd put that guy in jail? Are you f**king kidding me? Or is it okay because he's a man and she's a woman and it's okay for a man to take liberties with a woman but not the other way around? Call in the cops! Some sexual assault is going down right here! 

End of argument, I win.

[Robert]

So if he wasn't sexually attracted to her why didn't he just kiss a guy? Or maybe for this it would be the right thing to say   If the act of sex played no part in this then we wouldn't be having this discussion. Sexuality results from our desire of sex and the thought process of sex leads to well, creative ideas of what to do with our sexual desire. So in splitting hairs like I said the act  is contemplation, desire, meditation and reinforced with past experiences  then, what actually is the act with all this thought in it? When you see a pretty girl and think about what it would be like to be with her and get a stirring in some parts how close do you have to come to say your not having sex? Is breaking the physical barrier having sex or not no matter how little. The Bible says if you look on a woman to lust for her you have already done the act. Law says this is enough the thought that is, because that is what conspiracy actually is. dont get talking to someone about planning a crime even if your not there you could get convicted. Now the thought police cannot get in your mind yet but any action towards the thought is demonstration of the intent.

[The Anvil]

So if he wasn't sexually attracted to her why didn't he just kiss a guy? Or maybe for this it would be the right thing to say   If the act of sex played no part in this then we wouldn't be having this discussion. Sexuality results from our desire of sex and the thought process of sex leads to well, creative ideas of what to do with our sexual desire. So in splitting hairs like I said the act  is contemplation, desire, meditation and reinforced with past experiences  then, what actually is the act with all this thought in it? When you see a pretty girl and think about what it would be like to be with her and get a stirring in some parts how close do you have to come to say your not having sex? Is breaking the physical barrier having sex or not no matter how little. The Bible says if you look on a woman to lust for her you have already done the act. Law says this is enough the thought that is, because that is what conspiracy actually is. dont get talking to someone about planning a crime even if your not there you could get convicted. Now the thought police cannot get in your mind yet but any action towards the thought is demonstration of the intent.

Like I said, argument over. I win. 

[3fan4life]

Remember this iconic photo?



So by your standards that's sexual assault? Well I disagree, to me it's an expression of joy. So you'd put that guy in jail? Are you f**king kidding me? Or is it okay because he's a man and she's a woman and it's okay for a man to take liberties with a woman but not the other way around? Call in the cops! Some sexual assault is going down right here!  

End of argument, I win.

In 1945 it would not have been considered sexual assault.

By today's standards it would be.

In this area today's laws have totally run amuck.

In many states now if you were to be caught "taking a leak" on the side of the road you could easily become a registered "sex" offender.

All it takes is for someone to call the cops and say that you "exposed" yourself to them.

[3fan4life]

So if he wasn't sexually attracted to her why didn't he just kiss a guy? Or maybe for this it would be the right thing to say   If the act of sex played no part in this then we wouldn't be having this discussion. Sexuality results from our desire of sex and the thought process of sex leads to well, creative ideas of what to do with our sexual desire. So in splitting hairs like I said the act  is contemplation, desire, meditation and reinforced with past experiences  then, what actually is the act with all this thought in it? When you see a pretty girl and think about what it would be like to be with her and get a stirring in some parts how close do you have to come to say your not having sex? Is breaking the physical barrier having sex or not no matter how little. The Bible says if you look on a woman to lust for her you have already done the act. Law says this is enough the thought that is, because that is what conspiracy actually is. dont get talking to someone about planning a crime even if your not there you could get convicted. Now the thought police cannot get in your mind yet but any action towards the thought is demonstration of the intent.

Like I said, argument over. I win. 

Is that REALLY what you call  REASONABLE and MATURE way to conclude a debate ?   

[The Anvil]

So if he wasn't sexually attracted to her why didn't he just kiss a guy? Or maybe for this it would be the right thing to say   If the act of sex played no part in this then we wouldn't be having this discussion. Sexuality results from our desire of sex and the thought process of sex leads to well, creative ideas of what to do with our sexual desire. So in splitting hairs like I said the act  is contemplation, desire, meditation and reinforced with past experiences  then, what actually is the act with all this thought in it? When you see a pretty girl and think about what it would be like to be with her and get a stirring in some parts how close do you have to come to say your not having sex? Is breaking the physical barrier having sex or not no matter how little. The Bible says if you look on a woman to lust for her you have already done the act. Law says this is enough the thought that is, because that is what conspiracy actually is. dont get talking to someone about planning a crime even if your not there you could get convicted. Now the thought police cannot get in your mind yet but any action towards the thought is demonstration of the intent.

Like I said, argument over. I win. 

Is that REALLY what you call  REASONABLE and MATURE way to conclude a debate ?   

I see no reason to continue the argument from my end and I'm being a little cheeky.

[3fan4life]

So if he wasn't sexually attracted to her why didn't he just kiss a guy? Or maybe for this it would be the right thing to say   If the act of sex played no part in this then we wouldn't be having this discussion. Sexuality results from our desire of sex and the thought process of sex leads to well, creative ideas of what to do with our sexual desire. So in splitting hairs like I said the act  is contemplation, desire, meditation and reinforced with past experiences  then, what actually is the act with all this thought in it? When you see a pretty girl and think about what it would be like to be with her and get a stirring in some parts how close do you have to come to say your not having sex? Is breaking the physical barrier having sex or not no matter how little. The Bible says if you look on a woman to lust for her you have already done the act. Law says this is enough the thought that is, because that is what conspiracy actually is. dont get talking to someone about planning a crime even if your not there you could get convicted. Now the thought police cannot get in your mind yet but any action towards the thought is demonstration of the intent.

Like I said, argument over. I win. 

Is that REALLY what you call  REASONABLE and MATURE way to conclude a debate ?   

I see no reason to continue the argument from my end and I'm being a little cheeky.

So then could what you are saying to Robert be:

Let's just agree to disagree ?

[Robert]

Hey I'm ok with what he said, not many here would do that .

[The Anvil]

So if he wasn't sexually attracted to her why didn't he just kiss a guy? Or maybe for this it would be the right thing to say   If the act of sex played no part in this then we wouldn't be having this discussion. Sexuality results from our desire of sex and the thought process of sex leads to well, creative ideas of what to do with our sexual desire. So in splitting hairs like I said the act  is contemplation, desire, meditation and reinforced with past experiences  then, what actually is the act with all this thought in it? When you see a pretty girl and think about what it would be like to be with her and get a stirring in some parts how close do you have to come to say your not having sex? Is breaking the physical barrier having sex or not no matter how little. The Bible says if you look on a woman to lust for her you have already done the act. Law says this is enough the thought that is, because that is what conspiracy actually is. dont get talking to someone about planning a crime even if your not there you could get convicted. Now the thought police cannot get in your mind yet but any action towards the thought is demonstration of the intent.

Like I said, argument over. I win. 

Is that REALLY what you call  REASONABLE and MATURE way to conclude a debate ?   

I see no reason to continue the argument from my end and I'm being a little cheeky.

So then could what you are saying to Robert be:

Let's just agree to disagree ?

Essentially, yes.

But I'm still right. 

[3fan4life]

Essentially, yes.

But I'm still right. 

That depends,

If your position is that the Lady should NOT be charged with or convicted of a sex crime for "kissing" the guy on his cheek, then yes,  you are RIGHT.

If your position is that she CAN'T be charged with or convicted of a sex crime then you are WRONG.


I think that your position is the first one,

But to be honest I couldn't follow your posts well enough to decide for sure.

[ricoman]

A thread titled "Love thy Neighbor" gets turned into one about sexual assault. Nice job! 

Too funny, OT.
Imagine the energy that could be harnessed, just from tapping the chin flapping of those who like to post to see themselves talk! Stay on subject-not important, lemme talk! What ever you say, I can take an opposite position, just lemme talk! Let's get this one to over 5 pages of drivel like so many others.
dave

A thread titled "Love thy Neighbor" gets turned into one about sexual assault. Nice job! 

[The Anvil]

Essentially, yes.

But I'm still right. 

That depends,

If your position is that the Lady should NOT be charged with or convicted of a sex crime for "kissing" the guy on his cheek, then yes,  you are RIGHT.

If your position is that she CAN'T be charged with or convicted of a sex crime then you are WRONG.


I think that your position is the first one,

But to be honest I couldn't follow your posts well enough to decide for sure.

You certainly could charge her with sexual assault, but you're not getting a conviction. Not gonna happen. Even if by some confluence of astronomical chance you did find 12 rubes dumb enough to convict it would be swiftly overturned on appeal.

So in summary;

Charge? Yes.
Convict? NFW.

[3fan4life]

You certainly could charge her with sexual assault, but you're not getting a conviction. Not gonna happen. Even if by some confluence of astronomical chance you did find 12 rubes dumb enough to convict it would be swiftly overturned on appeal.

So in summary;

Charge? Yes.
Convict? NFW.

Common Sense says that you should be 110% correct.

However, common sense doesn't always apply when it comes to the law.

I'd like to think that you are right, but I wouldn't bet the farm on it.

[Bobbo]

 
PS. I was not wrong that the act of “kissing” CAN be considered CSC, though in the case of a homosexual ‘kissing’ a person against their will, I would call it ‘felonious assault’ due to the much higher infectious disease rate and STD’s within the “gay community.” Oops! We’re not supposed to talk about that, are we? It’s not politically correct! Dang! Those ‘FACTS sure can get in the way though. . . . Here’s a link bob. Google it honestly for additional info and you’ll find how much more DANGEROUS it is to be “gay” but I suspect you already know that, yes?
http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/homosexuality/ho0075.html

I believe that lady was there with her husband, so it's unlikely she was homosexual...

As far as your reference goes, you have to take into consideration that this organization used to enforce the belief that the world was flat.  That is, until the truth came up and b*tch slapped them upside the head!      

[Bobbo]

So if he wasn't sexually attracted to her why didn't he just kiss a guy? Or maybe for this it would be the right thing to say   If the act of sex played no part in this then we wouldn't be having this discussion. Sexuality results from our desire of sex and the thought process of sex leads to well, creative ideas of what to do with our sexual desire. So in splitting hairs like I said the act  is contemplation, desire, meditation and reinforced with past experiences  then, what actually is the act with all this thought in it? When you see a pretty girl and think about what it would be like to be with her and get a stirring in some parts how close do you have to come to say your not having sex? Is breaking the physical barrier having sex or not no matter how little. The Bible says if you look on a woman to lust for her you have already done the act. Law says this is enough the thought that is, because that is what conspiracy actually is. dont get talking to someone about planning a crime even if your not there you could get convicted. Now the thought police cannot get in your mind yet but any action towards the thought is demonstration of the intent.

Robert, you have a very narrow and somewhat twisted idea of the relationship between kissing and sex.  Sexual attraction is only one of MANY reasons for a kiss.  I kiss my brothers, sister, mother, dad, kids, and some friends.  Sex has nothing to do with it.  It's an expression of deep platonic affection.  Someday, I hope you will break free of the binding chains your religious dogma has placed on you.

[Robert]

Just like you do with everything you take one statement and because you dont have wisdom or discernment apply it to everything. This goes for taking all things out of context the Bible,life,people even the inflammatory things you come up with here. Just like not giving the full story on the kiss which really doesn't make a difference but anything to get people that have a different point of view going. If you reread the posts you'll notice I said Judas betrayed Jesus with a kiss. MY dog will lick anyone because he doesn't have any other way to show affection maybe you should try to broaden your ways to connect with people and really understand them. Then you wouldn't need to replace  physical act for real caring. You will actually find when its appropriate. Because there are deeper qualities that really count to people.

[The Anvil]

you have to take into consideration that this organization used to enforce the belief that the world was flat. 

At first I thought you mean the members of this board. What's funnier is that I found the possibility entirely plausible.

[Bobbo]

you have to take into consideration that this organization used to enforce the belief that the world was flat. 

At first I thought you mean the members of this board. What's funnier is that I found the possibility entirely plausible.

Ha!      

[Bobbo]

Just like you do with everything you take one statement and because you dont have wisdom or discernment apply it to everything. This goes for taking all things out of context the Bible,life,people even the inflammatory things you come up with here. Just like not giving the full story on the kiss which really doesn't make a difference but anything to get people that have a different point of view going. If you reread the posts you'll notice I said Judas betrayed Jesus with a kiss. MY dog will lick anyone because he doesn't have any other way to show affection maybe you should try to broaden your ways to connect with people and really understand them. Then you wouldn't need to replace  physical act for real caring. You will actually find when its appropriate. Because there are deeper qualities that really count to people.

According to the story, Judas kissed Jesus to indicate Him to the soldiers.  It was a much more subtle way than pointing and  yelling "Hey, dudes, here he is, right here!!".  It had nothing to do with affection.

Much like Judas' indication of Jesus, a kiss is only symbolic, usually of a feeling, not just a physical thing as you suggest I think it is.

[The Anvil]

Just like you do with everything you take one statement and because you dont have wisdom or discernment apply it to everything. This goes for taking all things out of context the Bible,life,people even the inflammatory things you come up with here. Just like not giving the full story on the kiss which really doesn't make a difference but anything to get people that have a different point of view going. If you reread the posts you'll notice I said Judas betrayed Jesus with a kiss. MY dog will lick anyone because he doesn't have any other way to show affection maybe you should try to broaden your ways to connect with people and really understand them. Then you wouldn't need to replace  physical act for real caring. You will actually find when its appropriate. Because there are deeper qualities that really count to people.

According to the story, Judas kissed Jesus to indicate Him to the soldiers.  It was a much more subtle way than pointing and  yelling "Hey, dudes, here he is, right here!!".  It had nothing to do with affection.

Much like Judas' indication of Jesus, a kiss is only symbolic, usually of a feeling, not just a physical thing as you suggest I think it is.

Dog's don't lick you out of affection either. They're after the salt on your skin. Otherwise they'd be chronic rim-jobbers.

[Robert]

By the way it was the educated at the time that said the world was flat Christopher Columbus was a Christian and was the one who discovered and believed that the world was round. So I guess you actually were right about the flat earth idea. Actually he felt confidence because  of his relationship with the Lord and said the Lord said to sail.

[RoadKill]

"sphere vs tortilla theory."     love it !   

[fudgie]

Why cant you all kiss and make up?   



Bet ya this gets locked. 

[Bobbo]

"sphere vs tortilla theory."     love it !   

Me too!