@fmf said
I was involved with people helping those who had escaped abuse and who were pursuing convictions and ways of rescuing those left behind or helping other victims to get away or rehabilitate. I was impressed by their sense of moral obligation.

So you made a donation. Because you are so empathetic to the plight of the abused.

@fmf said
As someone who has done a fair bit of work in the field of helping victims who are victims of domestic violence, sexual violence, and sex trafficking.

I don't believe you.

@secondson said
So you made a donation. Because you are so empathetic to the plight of the abused.

What do you mean? What "donation"?

@secondson said
I don't believe you.

That's fine by me.

@dj2becker said
Interesting how you have side stepped the question with the elegance of a ballerina.

I don't think I have.

@fmf said
The way you described your parents before, prior to changing the story, portrayed them as morally unfit to be parents. Perhaps, as moral agents, they could plead diminished responsibility because of mental impairment that resulted in them being de facto complicit in the abuse. Ask petewxyz for more about that.

Very cold thing to say.
Something I might expect to hear from a lawyer defending a pedophile on his sixth conviction of rape.

@fmf said
His behaviour is part of the discourse.

Your discourse. You have a malignant agenda. YOUR behavior is reprehensible and trollish.

@secondson said
Very cold thing to say.
Something I might expect to hear from a lawyer defending a pedophile on his sixth conviction of rape.

Like "defending a paedophile"?

How so?

@secondson said
Your discourse. You have a malignant agenda. YOUR behavior is reprehensible and trollish.

I don't think I am being reprehensible. Nor am I malignant.

@fmf said
I don't think I am being reprehensible. Nor am I malignant.

Having difficulty reading?

I didn't say YOU were malignant.

It is reprehensible the way you mischaracterize and misconstrue the words of others. You do it constantly in virtually every post you make. It's quite obvious you have a malignant agenda.

Thing is though it's pardonable, since you don't realize you're doing it, but if you do realize you're doing it, then it's reprehensible.

Slice and dice away.

@fmf said
How so?

@fmf said
The way you described your parents before, prior to changing the story, portrayed them as morally unfit to be parents. Perhaps, as moral agents, they could plead diminished responsibility because of mental impairment that resulted in them being de facto complicit in the abuse.

Pure unmitigated rubbish. You twisted dj2becker's words into an occasion to discredit him and his parents in total disregard of the victim by blame shifting.

Cold, reprehensible and malignant.

@secondson said
It is reprehensible the way you mischaracterize and misconstrue the words of others. You do it constantly in virtually every post you make. It's quite obvious you have a malignant agenda.

I don't have a malignant agenda. And my behaviour isn't reprehensible.

@secondson said
You twisted dj2becker's words into an occasion to discredit him and his parents in total disregard of the victim by blame shifting.

I haven't "twisted" anything. I am addressing the story about what his parents chose to do on the night of the rape. I am ignoring the different version of events that he has subsequently offered presumably because the moral implications of the original version, which he clearly had not contemplated, made him uncomfortable, and a new and more convenient version was needed.

@secondson said
Thing is though it's pardonable, since you don't realize you're doing it, but if you do realize you're doing it, then it's reprehensible.

I think all that is happening here is that I am saying things that you don't agree with or don't like.

@secondson said
Why do you think stating the obvious justifies your means?

Who thinks I am "stating the obvious"?

Do you?