Science and Technology news... :: View topic

Rusty Shackleford · Guest

idiot...

Don Stockbauer · Guest

On Dec 6, 11:42 pm, Rusty Shackleford
<Dale_Alvin_Grib...@Bugabago.com> wrote:
[quote]idiot...
[/quote]
Sticks and stones.......

Rusty Shackleford · Guest

Don Stockbauer wrote:
[quote]On Dec 6, 11:42 pm, Rusty Shackleford
Dale_Alvin_Grib...@Bugabago.com> wrote:
idiot...

Sticks and stones.......
[/quote]

....Some "sticks and stones" are perfect tools for a job and this is one
of those situations.

Perhaps Richard Feynman was a human being with genuine emotions and not
just brilliant. Feynman was also an eccentric and had a great sense of
humour. Most likely he wrote as a way of grieving or expressing his loss.

I doubt very much that Feynman actually believed that dead people have
addresses in an afterlife. Even if he did believe in an afterlife, that
would have been his personal belief, which is different from fact.

It is far more likely that he *hoped*, in the same way that all mortals
hope. Certain things should not be taken literally and the poster is an
idiot for not being able to distinguish.

....But *fraud* or aspiring cult leader are just as suitable titles for
this poster.

Guest

On Nov 13, 10:22 am, nos...@nospam.com (monkie) wrote:
[quote]On Mon, 12 Nov 2007 19:35:02 -0800, "Raishaan" <raish...@comcast.net
wrote:

Facinating reading. Seems that the weak point of the organization was who
got to drive. Pretty standard human nature. :)

good...@rock.com> wrote in message
news:1194911654.624890.34670@v23g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
I ran across this and thought it sounded interesting.

I have anOneidasilverware tea set, a wedding gift to my parents
(1940>s) from relatives who lived in the NY Finger Lakes district. I
didn>t know theOneidawere so complex. The right of passage or
puberty ritual might be considered a matriarchy .... Christian
matriarchy? It sounds pagan or something It was Queen Victoria who
popularized dedicated marraige between young couples, turned it into a
fad that became the social norm and possibly subverted the communal
tradition.
[/quote]

I think it would suck to do 40 year old women as a 14 year old. I
would rather do girls my own age at any age. But I don>t think it
would hurt them. If sex is consensual at any age, how does it hurt
the minor? And if it doesn>t hurt them, then why would we hurt and
penalize the adult. If the child is not coerced, restrained,
threatened or forced, then how is it crime? It seems society is
doing
evil when it penalizes in such situations. And when you penalize
someone, you hurt not only them, but their friends, and relatives,
and
even the minor who they had a relationship with.

The greatest number of people committing child abuse must be parents.
No one has a greater opportunity to commit child rape - incest and
get
away with it than a parent. Parents need to know, that while they
may
have a right to force their children to do many things, such as play
in little league or clean their rooms, they do not have a right to
force them to have sex with them, for that is rape. Parents do not
have a right to have sex with their children. In fact, they do not
have a right to touch their children in any way without their
consent,
just as no one has a right to touch anyone else without their
consent,
and it should be illegal to spank your children or strike them in any
way, for that is pure assault. Parents should not lord over their
children in any case, and hopefully they don>t have to force them to
do very many things to begin with.

Children need to have sex ed at a young age, be taught about sex, and
how to deal with abusive parents, that they must either get the abuse
to stop, or suffer the abuse, or be orphans and go into a foster
home. The obvious choice is for the child to get the abuse to stop,
and get on with their lives, if it is not flagrant, and if possible.
Next they need to be taught to tell a school counselor or teacher or
principle or call a number, so they can get out of an abusive family
if it>s too abusive and it doesn>t stop.

But if sex is consensual then I don>t see how it hurts a minor.
Having someone touch your genitals does not hurt you. Having someone
put their mouths on your genitals does not hurt you. Touching
someone
else>s genitals does not hurt you. Putting your mouth on someone
else>s genitals does not hurt you, and coitus does not hurt you,
unless it does, and in which case you would be saying "stop" and it
would be rape, and if a minor is forced or restrained it is rape,
just
as it is for an adult. If a minor is threatened or coerced it is
rape, just as it is for an adult. And nobody wants to be raped.
Assault is bad to begin with. Rape is a flagrant violation. Desired
hugging is not assault.

And yet perhaps there are some people who had consensual sex with
adults as minors and yet still feel themselves victims, if so, this
would partially contradict what I am saying. That would be some
evidence that it>s somehow rape in any case. Yet even so, at the
same
time, there may be some people who had consensual sex with adults as
minors and remember it as the happiest actions of their lives. And
there may be some people who had consensual sex with adults as minors
and felt and feel it nothing and neutral. So one would have to
balance all the cases to determine what the answer was in that case.
In any case, people sometimes make bad decisions in life, both sexual
and otherwise. The mere fact that even large numbers of people chose
to have consensual sex with adults as children and later regretted it
does not necessarily mean that it should be illegal. One would
seriously have to believe in the inability of a child - perhaps a
virgin, to make a willful sexual choice. And this is all based on a
hypothetical assumption that such people who consensually and
willfully chose as children to have sex as adults and later regretted
it actually exist. And any way, they don>t have to have sex again a
second time if they regretted it the first in any case. So such
reasoning may be dubious.

Perhaps not dubious given potential inabilities in children>s
judgment. Perhaps all the more dubious if such children regretted
merely due to the fact that they were taught by society that it was
somehow wrong and bad. That is not truth, but a decision to condemn
something.

Anyway, it would be better if the law could focus on apprehending the
actual rapists. The greatest solution to the problem of child abuse,
is in my opinion, the education of children, and the self reporting
of
children. There is no other good way to catch the criminals.

Society makes scapegoats out of lesser sex offenders and ruins many
individuals for no reason. Society is doing evil in this regard. The
current sex-offender registry thing is an abomination that
effectively
leaves people in prison for years, with an illusion that they have
been released to the outside. Except for forcible rapists, no one
should be classified as a "sex offender, " if anyone should be
classified as a sex offender at all. in my opinion all these other
sexual offenses are legal, or should at least be worth no more than a
fine. But they seek to make social outcasts of good people, they
have
made scapegoats of them, they are nearly the new "niggers" and they
ruin innocent individuals lives, which all the while does nothing
about the real rape and incest which must be going on within homes
behind closed doors of families with tyrants for parents.

Child porno is freedom of the press. It is free speech. Buying it
should no more be a crime, then buying a newspaper with pictures of
the terrorists being sexually abused in prison. Those people who
actually restrain, force, threaten, or coerce children into sexual
acts should be the ones put in jail.

By failing to differentiate between consensual and nonconsensual sex,
they are effectively saying that child rape is just as okay as child
consensual intercourse.

If it legally makes no difference, then it>s possible that some
pedophiles just rape, rather than trying to find consenting children.

A restraining order is an option if an adult is trying to have
consensual sex with one>s children. If they violate the restraining
order they go to jail.

What is it that makes a pedophile attracted to minors? There may be
1
of several things going on:
1) children are easy prey, weak and not wise in the ways of the world
2) The Adult is looking for anyone, doesn>t care about the age, and
the other person just happened to be a minor.
3) the Adult is attracted to kids specifically. If the adult is
attracted to kids specifically, known as a "pedophile," what is it
exactly that attracts them? For instance, would the pedophile be
attracted to a 30 year old adult who _looked_ just like a child?
Would the pedophile be attracted to a 1 year old who had aged
miraculously quickly and looked like a 30 year old? Or is it
something perhaps even more ephemeral, like the "idea" of a child.
In
any case, pedophilia is either a fetish or a sexual orientation.
Saying that pedophilia is a mental disorder is like saying that
homosexuality is a mental disorder. With a fetish, sexual
orientation, or desire, the problem arises if it is destructive. If
pedophilia is destructive, as it is in the form of child rape, then
this is a concerning issue. If pedophilia can be expressed in ways
not destructive such as through consensual child intercourse or
possibly pornography of sorts, then perhaps it is not destructive.
People have many different kinds of fantasies, and they need not be
seen as mental disorders as such, unless they become destructive, or
they want to get over them, perhaps through some sort of catharsis.

[quote]Thanks for the history. I>ll think on that next time I brew a pot of
tea!

OneidaSociety
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

TheOneidaCommunity was a utopian commune founded by John Humphrey
Noyes in 1848 inOneida, New York. The community believed that Jesus
Christ had already returned in the year 70, making it possible for
them to bring about Christ>s millennial kingdom themselves, and be
free of sin and perfect in this world, not just Heaven (a belief
called Perfectionism).

TheOneidaCommunity practiced Communalism (in the sense of communal
property and possessions), Complex Marriage, Male Continence, Mutual
Criticism and Ascending Fellowship. There were smaller communities in
Wallingford, Connecticut; Newark, New Jersey; Putney, Vermont; and
Cambridge, Vermont. The community>s original 87 members grew to 172 by
February 1850, 208 by 1852 and 306 by 1878. With the exception of the
Wallingford community, which remained in operation until devastated by
a tornado in 1878, all the rest of the branches were closed in 1854.
TheOneidaCommunity dissolved in 1881, and eventually became the
silverware giantOneidaLimited.

Community structure
Males and females had equality and equal voice in the governance of
the community. A community nursery provided care for infants and
children so that both parents could work. Females adopted a style of
dress, believed to have been copied from the Iroquois, consisting of a
short skirt over trousers (bloomers). This allowed them much greater
freedom of movement than contemporary women>s styles.

Even though the community reached a maximum population of about three
hundred, it had a complex bureaucracy of twenty-seven standing
committees and forty-eight administrative sections.

TheOneidaCommunity was a self-supporting enterprise. Its primary
industries were the growing and canning of fruits and vegetables, the
production of silk thread, and the manufacture of animal traps. They
were the primary supplier of animal traps to the Hudson Bay Company.
The manufacturing of silverware, the sole remaining industry, was not
begun until 1877, relatively late in the life of theOneidaCommunity.
Secondary industries of theOneidaCommunity included the manufacture
of leather travel bags, the weaving of palm frond hats, the
construction of rustic garden furniture, and tourism.

All Community members were expected to work, according to his or her
abilities. Although more skilled jobs tended to remain with one person
(the financial manager, for example, held his post throughout the life
of the Community), Community members rotated through the more menial
jobs, working in the house, the fields, or the various industries. As
the Community thrived, they began to hire outsiders to work in these
positions as well. They were a major employer in the area, with
approximately 200 employees by 1870.

Complex marriage
In theory, every male was married to every female. In practice, this
meant that most adults had continuous sexual access to a partner.
Community members were not to have an exclusive sexual or romantic
relationship with each other, but were to keep in constant
circulation. To help prevent a "special love" from forming, each
Community member had his or her own bedroom. This extended even to
couples who came to the Community already married. A married couple
entering the Community was not required or even encouraged to legally
dissolve their union, but rather to extend the borders of it to the
rest of the Community in complex marriage. The average female
Community member had three sexual encounters, or "interviews", a week.

Post-menopausal women were encouraged to introduce teenage males to
sex, providing both with legitimate partners that rarely resulted in
pregnancies. Furthermore, these women became religious role models for
the young men. Noyes often used his own judgment in determining the
partnerships which would form and would often encourage relationships
between the non-devout and the devout in the community, in the hopes
that the attitudes and behaviors of the devout would influence the non-
devout.

Male continence
Males were encouraged to avoid ejaculation during intercourse with
their partners, as a sign of grace. (Compare with Tantric sex.) This
meant that many sexual acts did not cause impregnation of the female
partner. This practice was based on the idea that "wasting" a man>s
semen was bad, and that difficult pregnancies for women should be
avoided. (Noyes' wife had lost four of five children during her
pregnancies.) TheOneidaCommunity had a low fecundity rate, although
there are around 40 unplanned pregnancies documented during the early
years of theOneidaCommunity.

Male Continence is based on the male>s muscular ability to control his
ejaculation during sexual coitus. Young boys just entering puberty
were only allowed to participate in sexual acts with women who were
past the child bearing age until they had proved their fully mastered
ability to control ejaculation. Many women of the community found male
continence to lead to the furtherment of their sexual enjoyment, as
sexual encounters often could last for more than one hour.

There were rumors at the time claiming that controlling the man>s
'seed' could be detrimental to the male>s health and lead to
infertility, but these claims were later disproved.

Mutual criticism
Every member of the community was subject to criticism by committee or
the community as a whole, during a general meeting. The goal was to
eliminate bad character traits. Various contemporary sources contend
that Noyes himself was the subject of criticism, although less often
and of probably less severe criticism than the rest of the community.

John Humphrey Noyes believed that sex had social and spiritual
purposes, not only biological. To Communitarians, it was yet another
path to perfection. Generally, it was believed that older people were
spiritually superior to younger people, and men were spiritually
superior to women. Noyes and his inner circle were at the top of this
hierarchy in the Community. In order to improve oneself, one was only
supposed to have sexual relations with those spiritually superior.
This was called "ascending fellowship." Once a Community member had
reached a certain level (usually determined by Noyes and his inner
circle), they were then to turn around and practice "descending
fellowship" with those Communitarians trying to work their way up.

Stirpiculture
A program of eugenics, then known as stirpiculture, was introduced in
1869.[1][2] It was a selective breeding program designed to create
even more perfect children. Communitarians who wished to be parents
would go before a committee and get matched based on their spiritual
and moral qualities. 53 women and 38 men participated in this program,
which necessitated the construction of a new wing of theOneida
Community Mansion House. The experiment yielded 58 children, nine of
whom were fathered by Noyes.

Once children were weaned from breast milk (usually at around the age
of one), they were raised communally in the Children>s Wing, or South
Wing. Their parents were allowed to visit, but if those in charge of
the Children>s Wing suspected a parent and child were bonding too
closely to one another, the Community would enforce a period of
separation.

Decline
The community lasted until John Humphrey Noyes attempted to pass the
leadership of the Community to his son, Theodore Noyes. This move was
unsuccessful because Theodore Noyes was an atheist and lacked his
father>s talent for leadership. The move also divided the Community,
with Communitarian John Towner attempting to wrest control for
himself.

Within the commune, there was a debate about when children should be
initiated into sexual rituals, and by whom. There was also much debate
about its practices as a whole. The founding members of the Community
were aging or deceased, and many of the younger Communitarians desired
to enter into exclusive, traditional marriages.

The capstone to all these pressures was the harassment campaign of
Professor Mears, of Hamilton College. John Humphrey Noyes was tipped
off by trusted adviser Myron Kinsley that a warrant for his arrest on
charges of statutory rape was imminent. Noyes fled theOneida
Community Mansion House and the country in the middle of a June night
in 1879, never to return to America alive. Shortly afterwards, he
wrote to his followers from Niagara Falls, Ontario, advising that the
practice of complex marriage be abandoned.

Complex Marriage was abandoned in 1879 following external pressures
and the community soon after broke apart with some of the members
reorganizing as a joint-stock company. Marital partners normalized
their status with the partners they were cohabiting with at the time
of the re-organization. Over 70 Community members entered into a
traditional marriage in the following year.

During the early 20th century, the new company,OneidaCommunity
Limited, narrowed their focus to silverware. The animal trap business
was sold in 1912, the silk business in 1916, and the canning
discontinued as unprofitable in 1915.

The joint-stock corporation is still in existence as of 2007 and is a
major producer of cutlery under the brand name "OneidaLimited". In
September 2004OneidaLimited announced that it would cease all
manufacturing operations in the beginning of 2005, ending a 124 year
tradition. The company would continue as a marketer for products
manufactured overseas. The company has been selling off its
manufacturing facilities. Most recently, the distribution center in
Sherrill, New York was closed. Administrative offices remain in the
Oneidaarea.

The last original member of the community, Ella Florence Underwood
(1850-1950), died on June 25, 1950 in Kenwood, New York near to
Oneida, New York.[3][4]

Legacy

From a 1907 postcardAn account of theOneidaCommunity is found in
Sarah Vowell>s book, Assassination Vacation. It discusses the
community in general and the membership of Charles Guiteau, for more
than five years, in the community (Guiteau later assassinated
President James Garfield). Worth Tuttle Hedden>s book Wives of High
Pasture is based in theOneidaCommunity.OneidaCommunity is given
tribute at Twin Oaks, a contemporary community of 100 members in
Virginia. All Twin Oaks' buildings are named after communities that
are no longer actively functioning, and "Oneida" is the name of one of
the residences.

The primary artifact of theOneidaCommunity, its 93,000 square foot
Mansion House, still stands inOneida, NY. It has been lived in
continuously since its construction in stages between 1862-1914.
Today, it contains 35 apartments, 9 dorm rooms, 9 guest rooms, a
museum and meeting and dining facilities.

References
^ Victoria C. Woodhull: Stirpiculture; or, The Scientific Propagation
of the Human Race (1888, ASIN: B00085ZZRA).
^ Yale-New Haven Teachers Institute, Utopian Communities, 1800-1890
^ New York Times; June 27, 1950
^ Time (magazine); July 3, 1950; Died. Ella Florence Underwood, 100,
last surviving member of theOneidaCommunity, a financially
successful communal settlement (OneidaSilver) which practiced both
promiscuity within its own group and stirpiculture; of a heart attack;
nearOneida, N.Y.

Further reading
Without Sin: The Life and Death of theOneidaCommunity, by Spencer
Klaw, 1993, The Penguin Press, ISBN 0-7139-9091-0
Charles Nordhoff, "The Perfectionists ofOneidaand Wallingford," in
The Communistic Societies of the United States (1875) [online text]

External links
OneidaCommunity Mansion House -- a museum of theOneidaCommunity
OneidaCommunity Collection at Syracuse University
TheOneidaCommunity, New York History Net
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oneida_Society"
Categories: Communalism | Utopian communities | Code of conduct

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oneida_Society[/quote]

Day Brown · Guest

On Dec 11, 9:31 pm, good...@rock.com wrote:
[quote]I think it would suck to do 40 year old women as a 14 year old. I
would rather do girls my own age at any age. But I don>t think it
would hurt them. If sex is consensual at any age, how does it hurt
the minor? And if it doesn>t hurt them, then why would we hurt and
penalize the adult. If the child is not coerced, restrained,
threatened or forced, then how is it crime? It seems society is
doing evil when it penalizes in such situations. And when you penalize
someone, you hurt not only them, but their friends, and relatives,
and even the minor who they had a relationship with.
Power is an aphrodisiac for women too. As a 14 year old, you did not[/quote]
see women as powerful back then. Times have changed. Young women now
make more money than young men, and their older sisters are taking
over upper management. We could go into why the corporations see more
profit in it, but the data is irrefutable.

The other thing, while a teen age boy mite get off on a girl, he is
far less likely to use a condom properly. And look at it from the
standpoint of the girls. Do the boys they see look like they will ever
have any power? The rapidly increasing numbers of fag hags says not.
They dont see any advantage to be enjoyed in the future with a
relationship with a classmate.

Then too, it only takes 15 minutes to f ck. What about the rest of the
evening? Do the boys have anything interesting to say to the girls? Do
the girls giva f ck what scores they had on the video games the boys
spend so much of their time with? And what will the boys have to say
the next day or the next week about the time they spent with a girl?
yech.

Now, consider the girl spending an evening with a well educated man,
who knows a good deal more about feminine psychology, physiology and
responsiveness. Is he going to be talking about his evening with a
girl the night before, or the week before, or months before? Uh huh.

Then too, consider the teenage boy. Again, the older woman knows a
good deal more about what she has on her hands than any of his
classmates. Is she going to get pregnant by him? Outside of a few
whackos, no. She knows he wont be useful later. He>s only good for the
time they spend together that evening. And for her, her own libido
increases later in life to match his, which maxes earlier.

But in any case, its not upta us, but far more often will be in the
hands of the mothers of teens. And as the culture evolves with women
moving up in the power structures, their greater understanding of
emotional dynamics and physiological development will be driving the
choices they make for their teens. They wont be giving their boys to
women who cant manage birth control, and they wont be giving girls to
men who cannot respond appropriately to their daughters. They already
are aware of sexual & emotional predators among the classmates. Its
not an art that can only be learned in adulthood.

So whatever we feel about this does not really matter that much. Only
the mothers of teens have the moral authority to make these kinds of
sexual assignations, and at some point, they will read the studies,
understand the physiology and emotional development, and along with
the abandonment of Christian family values, reconstruct the same kind
of puberty rites that their own ancestors had used for millennia
because it was the way to maximize mental and emotional development.

Guest

On Nov 19, 6:15 pm, good...@rock.com wrote:
[quote]On Nov 13, 10:22 am, nos...@nospam.com (monkie) wrote:

On Mon, 12 Nov 2007 19:35:02 -0800, "Raishaan" <raish...@comcast.net
wrote:

Facinating reading. Seems that the weak point of the organization was who
got to drive. Pretty standard human nature. :)

good...@rock.com> wrote in message
news:1194911654.624890.34670@v23g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
I ran across this and thought it sounded interesting.

I have anOneidasilverware tea set, a wedding gift to my parents
(1940>s) from relatives who lived in the NY Finger Lakes district. I
didn>t know theOneidawere so complex. The right of passage or
puberty ritual might be considered a matriarchy .... Christian
matriarchy? It sounds pagan or something It was Queen Victoria who
popularized dedicated marraige between young couples, turned it into a
fad that became the social norm and possibly subverted the communal
tradition.

I think it would suck to do 40 year old women as a 14 year old. I
would rather do girls my own age at any age. But I don>t think it
would hurt them. If sex is consensual at any age, how does it hurt
the minor? And if it doesn>t hurt them, then why would we hurt and
penalize the adult. If the child is not coerced, restrained,
threatened or forced, then how is it crime? It seems society is doing
evil when it penalizes in such situations. And when you penalize
someone, you hurt not only them, but their friends, and relatives, and
even the minor who they had a relationship with.

The greatest number of people committing child abuse must be parents.
No one has a greater opportunity to commit child rape - incest and get
away with it than a parent. Parents need to know, that while they may
have a right to force their children to do many things, such as play
in little league or clean their rooms, they do not have a right to
force them to have sex with them, for that is rape. Parents do not
have a right to have sex with their children. In fact, they do not
have a right to touch their children in any way without their consent,
just as no one has a right to touch anyone else without their consent,
and it should be illegal to spank your children or strike them in any
way, for that is pure assault. Parents should not lord over their
children in any case, and hopefully they don>t have to force them to
do very many things to begin with.

Children need to have sex ed at a young age, be taught about sex, and
how to deal with abusive parents, that they must either get the abuse
to stop, or suffer the abuse, or be orphans and go into a foster
home. The obvious choice is for the child to get the abuse to stop,
and get on with their lives, if it is not flagrant, and if possible.
Next they need to be taught to tell a school counselor or teacher or
principle or call a number, so they can get out of an abusive family
if it>s too abusive and it doesn>t stop.

But if sex is consensual then I don>t see how it hurts a minor.
Having someone touch your genitals does not hurt you. Having someone
put their mouths on your genitals does not hurt you. Touching someone
else>s genitals does not hurt you. Putting your mouth on someone
else>s genitals does not hurt you, and coitus does not hurt you,
unless it does, and in which case you would be saying "stop" and it
would be rape, and if a minor is forced or restrained it is rape, just
as it is for an adult. If a minor is threatened or coerced it is
rape, just as it is for an adult. And nobody wants to be raped.
Assault is bad to begin with. Rape is a flagrant violation. Desired
hugging is not assault.

And yet perhaps there are some people who had consensual sex with
adults as minors and yet still feel themselves victims, if so, this
would partially contradict what I am saying. That would be some
evidence that it>s somehow rape in any case. Yet even so, at the same
time, there may be some people who had consensual sex with adults as
minors and remember it as the happiest actions of their lives. And
there may be some people who had consensual sex with adults as minors
and felt and feel it nothing and neutral. So one would have to
balance all the cases to determine what the answer was in that case.
In any case, people sometimes make bad decisions in life, both sexual
and otherwise. The mere fact that even large numbers of people chose
to have consensual sex with adults as children and later regretted it
does not necessarily mean that it should be illegal. One would
seriously have to believe in the inability of a child - perhaps a
virgin, to make a willful sexual choice. And this is all based on a
hypothetical assumption that such people who consensually and
willfully chose as children to have sex as adults and later regretted
it actually exist. And any way, they don>t have to have sex again a
second time if they regretted it the first in any case. So such
reasoning may be dubious.

Perhaps not dubious given potential inabilities in children>s
judgment. Perhaps all the more dubious if such children regretted
merely due to the fact that they were taught by society that it was
somehow wrong and bad. That is not truth, but a decision to condemn
something.

Anyway, it would be better if the law could focus on apprehending the
actual rapists. The greatest solution to the problem of child abuse,
is in my opinion, the education of children, and the self reporting of
children. There is no other good way to catch the criminals.

Society makes scapegoats out of lesser sex offenders and ruins many
individuals for no reason. Society is doing evil in this regard. The
current sex-offender registry thing is an abomination that effectively
leaves people in prison for years, with an illusion that they have
been released to the outside. Except for forcible rapists, no one
should be classified as a "sex offender, " if anyone should be
classified as a sex offender at all. in my opinion all these other
sexual offenses are legal, or should at least be worth no more than a
fine. But they seek to make social outcasts of good people, they have
made scapegoats of them, they are nearly the new "niggers" and they
ruin innocent individuals lives, which all the while does nothing
about the real rape and incest which must be going on within homes
behind closed doors of families with tyrants for parents.

Child porno is freedom of the press. It is free speech. Buying it
should no more be a crime, then buying a newspaper with pictures of
the terrorists being sexually abused in prison. Those people who
actually restrain, force, threaten, or coerce children into sexual
acts should be the ones put in jail.

By failing to differentiate between consensual and nonconsensual sex,
they are effectively saying that child rape is just as okay as child
consensual intercourse.

If it legally makes no difference, then it>s possible that some
pedophiles just rape, rather than trying to find consenting children.

A restraining order is an option if an adult is trying to have
consensual sex with one>s children. If they violate the restraining
order they go to jail.

What is it that makes a pedophile attracted to minors? There may be 1
of several things going on:
1) children are easy prey, weak and not wise in the ways of the world
2) The Adult is looking for anyone, doesn>t care about the age, and
the other person just happened to be a minor.
3) the Adult is attracted to kids specifically. If the adult is
attracted to kids specifically, known as a "pedophile," what is it
exactly that attracts them? For instance, would the pedophile be
attracted to a 30 year old adult who _looked_ just like a child?
Would the pedophile be attracted to a 1 year old who had aged
miraculously quickly and looked like a 30 year old? Or is it
something perhaps even more ephemeral, like the "idea" of a child. In
any case, pedophilia is either a fetish or a sexual orientation.
Saying that pedophilia is a mental disorder is like saying that
homosexuality is a mental disorder. With a fetish, sexual
orientation, or desire, the problem arises if it is destructive. If
pedophilia is destructive, as it is in the form of child rape, then
this is a concerning issue. If pedophilia can be expressed in ways
not destructive such as through consensual child intercourse or
possibly pornography of sorts, then perhaps it is not destructive.
People have many different kinds of fantasies, and they need not be
seen as mental disorders as such, unless they become destructive, or
they want to get over them, perhaps through some sort of catharsis.> Thanks for the history. I>ll think on that next time I brew a pot of
tea!

OneidaSociety
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

TheOneidaCommunity was a utopian commune founded by John Humphrey
Noyes in 1848 inOneida, New York. The community believed that Jesus
Christ had already returned in the year 70, making it possible for
them to bring about Christ>s millennial kingdom themselves, and be
free of sin and perfect in this world, not just Heaven (a belief
called Perfectionism).

TheOneidaCommunity practiced Communalism (in the sense of communal
property and possessions), Complex Marriage, Male Continence, Mutual
Criticism and Ascending Fellowship. There were smaller communities in
Wallingford, Connecticut; Newark, New Jersey; Putney, Vermont; and
Cambridge, Vermont. The community>s original 87 members grew to 172 by
February 1850, 208 by 1852 and 306 by 1878. With the exception of the
Wallingford community, which remained in operation until devastated by
a tornado in 1878, all the rest of the branches were closed in 1854.
TheOneidaCommunity dissolved in 1881, and eventually became the
silverware giantOneidaLimited.

Community structure
Males and females had equality and equal voice in the governance of
the community. A community nursery provided care for infants and
children so that both parents could work. Females adopted a style of
dress, believed to have been copied from the Iroquois, consisting of a
short skirt over trousers (bloomers). This allowed them much greater
freedom of movement than contemporary women>s styles.

Even though the community reached a maximum population of about three
hundred, it had a complex bureaucracy of twenty-seven standing
committees and forty-eight administrative sections.

TheOneidaCommunity was a self-supporting enterprise. Its primary
industries were the growing and canning of fruits and vegetables, the
production of silk thread, and the manufacture of animal traps. They
were the primary supplier of animal traps to the Hudson Bay Company.
The manufacturing of silverware, the sole remaining industry, was not
begun until 1877, relatively late in the life of theOneidaCommunity.
Secondary industries of theOneidaCommunity included the manufacture
of leather travel bags, the weaving of palm frond hats, the
construction of rustic garden furniture, and tourism.

All Community members were expected to work, according to his or her
abilities. Although more skilled jobs tended to remain with one person
(the financial manager, for example, held his post throughout the life
of the Community), Community members rotated through the more menial
jobs, working in the house, the fields, or the various industries. As
the Community thrived, they began to hire outsiders to work in these
positions as well. They were a major employer in the area, with
approximately 200 employees by 1870.

Complex marriage
In theory, every male was married to every female. In practice, this
meant that most adults had continuous sexual access to a partner.
Community members were not to have an exclusive sexual or romantic
relationship with each other, but were to keep in constant
circulation. To help prevent a "special love" from forming, each
Community member had his or her own bedroom. This extended even to
couples who came to the Community already married. A married couple
entering the Community was not required or even encouraged to legally
dissolve their union, but rather to extend the borders of it to the
rest of the Community in complex marriage. The average female
Community member had three sexual encounters, or "interviews", a week.

Post-menopausal women were encouraged to introduce teenage males to
sex, providing both with legitimate partners that rarely resulted in
pregnancies. Furthermore, these women became religious role models for
the young men. Noyes often used his own judgment in determining the
partnerships which would form and would often encourage relationships
between the non-devout and the devout in the community, in the hopes
that the attitudes and behaviors of the devout would influence the non-
devout.

Male continence
Males were encouraged to avoid ejaculation during intercourse with
their partners, as a sign of grace. (Compare with Tantric sex.) This
meant that many sexual acts did not cause impregnation of the female
partner. This practice was based on the idea that "wasting" a man>s
semen was bad, and that difficult pregnancies for women should be
avoided. (Noyes' wife had lost four of five children during her
pregnancies.) TheOneidaCommunity had a low fecundity rate, although
there are around 40 unplanned pregnancies documented during the early
years of theOneidaCommunity.

Male Continence is based on the male>s muscular ability to control his
ejaculation during sexual coitus. Young boys just entering puberty
were only allowed to participate in sexual acts with women who were
past the child bearing age until they had proved their fully mastered
ability to control ejaculation. Many women of the community found male
continence to lead to the furtherment of their sexual enjoyment, as
sexual encounters often could last for more than one hour.

There were rumors at the time claiming that controlling the man>s
'seed' could be detrimental to the male>s health and lead to
infertility, but these claims were later disproved.

Mutual criticism
Every member of the community was subject to criticism by committee or
the community as a whole, during a general meeting. The goal was to
eliminate bad character traits. Various contemporary sources contend
that Noyes himself was the subject of criticism, although less often
and of probably less severe criticism than the rest of the community.

John Humphrey Noyes believed that sex had social and spiritual
purposes, not only biological. To Communitarians, it was yet another
path to perfection. Generally, it was believed that older people were
spiritually superior to younger people, and men were spiritually
superior to women. Noyes and his inner circle were at the top of this
hierarchy in the Community. In order to improve oneself, one was only
supposed to have sexual relations with those spiritually superior.
This was called "ascending fellowship." Once a Community member had
reached a certain level (usually determined by Noyes and his inner
circle), they were then to turn around and practice "descending
fellowship" with those Communitarians trying to work their way up.

Stirpiculture
A program of eugenics, then known as stirpiculture, was introduced in
1869.[1][2] It was a selective breeding program designed to create
even more perfect children. Communitarians who wished to be parents
would go before a committee and get matched based on their spiritual
and moral qualities. 53 women and 38 men participated in this program,
which necessitated the construction of a new wing of theOneida
Community Mansion House. The experiment yielded 58 children, nine of
whom were fathered by Noyes.

Once children were weaned from breast milk (usually at around the age
of one), they were raised communally in the Children>s Wing, or South
Wing. Their parents were allowed to visit, but if those in charge of
the Children>s Wing suspected a parent and child were bonding too
closely to one another, the Community would enforce a period of
separation.

Decline
The community lasted until John Humphrey Noyes attempted to pass the
leadership of the Community to his son, Theodore Noyes. This move was
unsuccessful because Theodore Noyes was an atheist and lacked his
father>s talent for leadership. The move also divided the Community,
with Communitarian John Towner attempting to wrest control for
himself.

Within the commune, there was a debate about when children should be
initiated into sexual rituals, and by whom. There was also much debate
about its practices as a whole. The founding members of the Community
were aging or deceased, and many of the younger Communitarians desired
to enter into exclusive, traditional marriages.

The capstone to all these pressures was the harassment campaign of
Professor Mears, of Hamilton College. John Humphrey Noyes was tipped
off by trusted adviser Myron Kinsley that a warrant for his arrest on
charges of statutory rape was imminent. Noyes fled theOneida
Community Mansion House and the country in the middle of a June night
in 1879, never to return to America alive. Shortly afterwards, he
wrote to his followers from Niagara Falls, Ontario, advising that the
practice of complex marriage be abandoned.

Complex Marriage was abandoned in 1879 following external pressures
and the community soon after broke apart with some of the

...

read more >>- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -
[/quote]
Anyone that has a facination with community, other than for
educational means is sick. My husband is a decendent, and was
obsessed with his ancester, and thought it was okay to put his penis
on my three year old Genitals. We had all the books his Great
Grandfther wrote, and at least a dozen pictures of the Mansion House
and his Great anceators. If I had known what that community stood
for, I would never have let our walls be full of them. Kenwood,
and surrounding areas find the Mansion House, Kenwood, N.Y, a place
of celebration?

His lives there now, a member of the board, and believes he is the
reicarnation of John Humphrey Noyes. I wish I had known what this man
has stood for, but this is the truth. Keep your Children away from
there. Just a little advise,

George Hammond · Guest

On Mon, 24 Mar 2008 09:13:10 -0700 (PDT), tici viracocha
<q2k3rl@execs.com> wrote:

[quote]On Mar 24, 3:36 pm, George Hammond <Nowhe...@notspam.org> wrote:
On Sun, 23 Mar 2008 17:40:04 -0500, "David Flechard"

david_flech...@invalid.invalid.nowhere.com> wrote:
On 19/03/2008, George Hammond wrote:

God = G_uv (curvature of subjective spacetime)

discovered and peer published by the American physicist
George Hammond.

This was enormous fun. I read the paper with considerable interest and
attention

[Hammond]
That only proves you>ve got half a brain.

(once I could get past the pop-up ads offering me valuable
tips and tricks for playing poker), and especially admired this insight:

[Hammond]
Put your pop up blocker on idiot.

"For decades Factorists have been arguing over whether there are 3, 4,
5, 7, 9 or 13 dimensions (Eysenck 1991). My paper resolved the entire
problem by showing that everyone is right".

I believe this gives me some solid grounding in my theory that there
are precisely one and three quarters dimensions. Now I know I cannot be
proved wrong.

[Hammond]
Cackling moron... Hammond discovered the Structural Model
is a CUBE.... and as any undergraduate knows a CUBE has 13
(rotational) symmetry axes...... therefore if you Factor

[Tici Viracocha]
have a picture?

[George Hammond][/quote]
Sure, lots of them Tici, on my website. Look at this one
for instance:

http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god/5X7C01I.jpg
(be sure to hit the "+" button to enlarge to full size)

This picture shows clearly how the "cubic brain" causes the
13 symmetry axes of the CUBIC Structural Model of
Personality... these show up as the 13 Psychometric Factors
of the Structural Model (Cattell measured them all).
Also, look at this picture:

http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god/5X7C0193.jpg
(hit "+" button to enlarge)

which shows how the 13 Factor General Solution also
explains the various 3,4,5,6,7,8,9 Factor Models which are
simply low resolution "redactions" of the 13F CUBE. We see
these in the journals all the time variausly Big-5,
Eysenck-3, AVA-4, Brand-6, Cattell-7, Saucier-9, etc.

[quote]Analyze a CUBE you will get 13 factors. The human beain is
actually CUBIC due to binary cartesian cell cleave which
creates it... the brain is well known to have 8 CUBIC LOBES
(one in each corner octant of the cube)... which is WHY the
psychometric factor analystis have discovered 13
EIGENVECTORS !
Uneducated moron.
=====================================
SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE
http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god
mirror site:
http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com
GOD=G_uv (a folk song on mp3)
http://interrobang.jwgh.org/songs/hammond.mp3
=====================================[/quote]


www.GetXFactor.com Leading Technology, Science, Agriculture News and information	Part of the Identityscape.com network... getxfactor.com jmoodmusic.com smartbusinesschoices.com mintdepot.com lowfaresalways.com evangelicalview.com shoppingpodder.com soproudlywehail.com webnews.ws currenthumor.com

Science and Technology news... Forum Index -> Psychology - Theory Forum	Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 ... 60, 61, 62
Page 62 of 62