Defiance said: Plate said: Defiance said: Baman said: Defiance said: So yea, go back to /b/ with the pedophiles and enjoy the exploitation of children and bring me(which there isn't) a justifiable meaning to pedophilia. How do you know there isn't a justifiable meaning hmm? I grow weary of people flaunting their moral views as the one and true "RIGHT". i wonder what you would do if your 8 year old child was molested by some 20 year old dude, i really wonder Molestation =/= consensual relations I'd be pissed off if my 8 year old child was raped, but not if she had sex. fixed* please dont bring me out of context Sentiment remains. |
| "youre stupid".... and you call yourself in the "top perCENT(one word btw) of intelligence" and thats the best argument you have |
Defiance said: "youre stupid".... and you call yourself in the "top perCENT(one word btw) of intelligence" and thats the best argument you have Per cent can actually be two words and mean the same thing (those English). It's rather low to criticize spelling, especially when incorrect to begin with. But if you want to do this, it's "that's" not "thats." |
Defiance said: Plate said: Defiance said: i wonder what you would do if your 8 year old child was molested by some 20 year old dude, i really wonder Molestation =/= consensual relations I'd be pissed off if my friend was raped, but not if she had sex. please dont bring me out of context But you didn't answer my question. What I would do if my 8 year old child got raped was not an issue. And neither did I mention rape. |
| I don't even know why i bother to argue, this is just a game of semantics. Enjoy your EXTREMELY liberal views on the molestation and exploitation of prepubescent children. I'm done with this topic. |
Plate said: Per sent is just Latin-like for 'of the hundred'. 90 per cent means 'ninety of the hundred', spelling it loose was the original meaning as 'per' is a præposition and cent just means 'hundred'.Defiance said: "youre stupid".... and you call yourself in the "top perCENT(one word btw) of intelligence" and thats the best argument you have Per cent can actually be two words and mean the same thing (those English). It's rather low to criticize spelling, especially when incorrect to begin with. But if you want to do this, it's "that's" not "thats." All that aggression. Aggressio hominí dativí auctoris nihil absurdí lupus est. Freely translated: 'You're bad for my sensitive skin.' |
| Perelman, martyr |
khorven said: Plate said: Per sent is just Latin-like for 'of the hundred'. 90 per cent means 'ninety of the hundred', spelling it loose was the original meaning as 'per' is a præposition and cent just means 'hundred'.Defiance said: "youre stupid".... and you call yourself in the "top perCENT(one word btw) of intelligence" and thats the best argument you have Per cent can actually be two words and mean the same thing (those English). It's rather low to criticize spelling, especially when incorrect to begin with. But if you want to do this, it's "that's" not "thats." All that aggression. Aggressio hominí dativí auctoris nihil absurdí lupus est. Freely translated: 'You're bad for my sensitive skin.' Perfect example of playing semantics, just like i said. Bad troll is bad,why don't you put any information at all on your profile, you dont even have any anime/manga on it, just shows you are a troll that's just keeping anonymity to troll folks. As for Bamans question, just because i don't want to leave you hanging(but its hard to answer 3 people at the same time), I'm not an extremely religious guy, i never go to church, but I am a Christian, I believe homosexuality is fine(as long as they are adults). Now I say that to tell you that I'm saying this with religious views out of this and that I'm not a total Jesus freak. Refer to my original opinion post(#164), I'm pretty sure I listed WHY i believe it was morally right. |
Defiance said: I don't even know why i bother to argue, this is just a game of semantics. Enjoy your EXTREMELY liberal views on the molestation and exploitation of prepubescent children. I'm done with this topic. This is what usually happens when people bring up morality in debates. edit: In response to your post #164, Id like to know how you know that children are sexually innocent. Now, I'm not about to portray Freud's empirically fallacious theories as proof of the contrary, but if you have definite proof to support your theory of innocence, do share, and if not, I wouldn't write so surely about it, were I you. And for the record, I don't ship ChildxAdult. Whether or not someone is ready for sexual relation is not based solely upon age, as there are varying degrees of maturity, both mental and physical. I'd ideally be pretty liberal and consider each case by how mature the involved parties are, and whether or not anyone's taking advantage of someone. But for a society to work, we need laws, and laws must be absolute. As I've said before, 16 is the legal age for sex in Norway, but some people might be fully ready long before that, and others might not be ready until they're approaching twenty, but how do we know, and why do we care? Breaking the law is still breaking the law, and while I disregard all form of morality, I do adhere to principles of legality. Arguing that child sexuality is wrong and amoral is pointless, as morals are not undeniably "right". But laws are definite. |
BamanOct 11, 2008 1:50 PM
| btw my defense is in favor of prepubescent children primarily, I lost my virginity at 16 like a lot of guys to girl that was also 16, so I'm not trying to go against the guys that are into like 15-16 year old, I'm strictly against these asshats that are trying to defend PEDOPHILIA(13 and under). |
Baman said: Two years or so back, there was this situation here in the Netherlands if I recall correctly:Defiance said: I don't even know why i bother to argue, this is just a game of semantics. Enjoy your EXTREMELY liberal views on the molestation and exploitation of prepubescent children. I'm done with this topic. This is what usually happens when people bring up morality in debates. And for the record, I don't ship ChildxAdult. Whether or not someone is ready for sexual relation is not based solely upon age, as there are varying degrees of maturity, both mental and physical. I'd ideally be pretty liberal and consider each case by how mature the involved parties are, and whether or not anyone's taking advantage of someone. But for a society to work, we need laws, and laws must be absolute. As I've said before, 16 is the legal age for sex in Norway, but some people might e fully ready long before that, and others might not be ready until they're approaching twenty, but how do we know, and why do we care? Breaking the law is still breaking the law, and while I disregard all form of morality, I do adhere to principles of legality. Arguing that child sexuality is wrong and amoral is pointless, as morals are not undeniably "right". But laws are definite. A girl from a poor country with substantial brains lived her, she lived here with her father and he had just died so she lived with some friends, 'rules' in the Netherlands dictated that she then had to go back because she wasn't eighteen yet at that time. There was more to it, the girl was enrolling the prestigious Dutch VWO secondary education, an 'elite-level school' so to speak. She was getting excellent grades there but the point is that the law required her to go back just two months before she would have completed her final exams in it, which she would have surely made. Going back without a VWO diploma would get her into an orphanage there with no prospect of a future, going back with a VWO diploma would nigh ensure here a relatively good job ahead for that country. Rita Verdonk at was at that time the minister in charge of it. She refused to allow this girl to stay a simple two months longer based on her ever repeated motto 'rules are rules'. This decision caused quite a polarisation in the Netherlands, one side saw it as inhumane, the other said exceptions cannot just be made. While this was discussed at a political show here, the præsenter who was supposed to stay impartial couldn't take it any-more and started crying and said some-thing like: 'You have to realize, rules are there to make things go well, clearly this rule makes things go worse, the rule was badly designed and people didn't take this event into account when they made it, by not making an exception, you are going against the very purpose of this rule.' Which is ultimately my stance on this, rules are there to make things go better, and when rules clearly do the reverse, exceptions must be made, people that design the rules can't think of every-thing, and there are simply cases when rules work backwards. The girl was sent back to the country she came from conform the rules. |
| Perelman, martyr |
Defiance said: Only a Sith deals in absolutes.. I shall do what I must.btw my defense is in favor of prepubescent children primarily, I lost my virginity at 16 like a lot of guys to girl that was also 16, so I'm not trying to go against the guys that are into like 15-16 year old, I'm strictly against these asshats that are trying to defend PEDOPHILIA(13 and under). How about looking per person to the case, and not as strictly in age, you do realize you discriminate the same way people look at this per race or gender and not per person, no? Oh, sorry, I mean perrace and perperson. |
| Perelman, martyr |
khorven said: Which is ultimately my stance on this, rules are there to make things go better, and when rules clearly do the reverse, exceptions must be made, people that design the rules can't think of every-thing, and there are simply cases when rules work backwards. My absolute and Imperialistic side would vote for obeying the rules, but I do understand the problem. But breaking the rules would still be idiotic, so perhaps a reform or adding some footnotes would fix it. khorven said: Only a Sith deals in absolutes.. I shall do what I must. Nah, they all have different views. Revan and Nihilus. D: |
| Didn't know lolicon was such a serious topic. :O |
| (づ°‿°.)づ |
Ontario said: Sic est homini loliconi.Didn't know lolicon was such a serious topic. :O |
| Perelman, martyr |
| The fact that I'm the only one that has argued against this in the past 5 pages kinda makes me sad, i guess i was wrong, 99% of the world isn't psychologically sane. I guess you pedophiles win, now I'm going to back to rl and laugh how wrong I am. Because there isn't a single law in my country(the U.S.) that allows people to have sex with a person under 16. So yea guys, you are absolutely right, OBVIOUSLY I'm wrong looking at the laws of the most advanced society in the world. All I have to conclude is I hope you guys don't live in the U.S., cause I would hate to have some crazed closet pedophiles in it. |
Defiance said: The fact that I'm the only one that has argued against this in the past 5 pages kinda makes me sad, i guess i was wrong, 99% of the world isn't psychologically sane. I guess you pedophiles win, now I'm going to back to rl and laugh how wrong I am. Because there isn't a single law in my country(the U.S.) that allows people to have sex with a person under 16. So yea guys, you are absolutely right, OBVIOUSLY I'm wrong looking at the laws of the most advanced society in the world. All I have to conclude is I hope you guys don't live in the U.S., cause I would hate to have some crazed closet pedophiles in it. Common sense is beeswax anyway, and the concept of sanity is also debatable. And who's the pedophile? The US is the most advanced society? By what standards? As for looking at the laws, you said it was morally wrong, which is why I took a stance against you. Had you used laws as your basis, I'd agree with you. As for crazed closet pedophiles...There are far more of them in the Us and Norway. |
Baman said: Defiance said: The fact that I'm the only one that has argued against this in the past 5 pages kinda makes me sad, i guess i was wrong, 99% of the world isn't psychologically sane. I guess you pedophiles win, now I'm going to back to rl and laugh how wrong I am. Because there isn't a single law in my country(the U.S.) that allows people to have sex with a person under 16. So yea guys, you are absolutely right, OBVIOUSLY I'm wrong looking at the laws of the most advanced society in the world. All I have to conclude is I hope you guys don't live in the U.S., cause I would hate to have some crazed closet pedophiles in it. Common sense is beeswax anyway, and the concept of sanity is also debatable. And who's the pedophile? The US is the most advanced society? By what standards? As for looking at the laws, you said it was morally wrong, which is why I took a stance against you. Had you used laws as your basis, I'd agree with you. As for crazed closet pedophiles...There are far more of them in the Us and Norway. Arn't Laws a byproduct of morals more or less? Listing laws as a basis for an arguement is pretty much the same as listing morals, as a law is pretty much a way for a government to enforce their morals upon the citizens. |
Razma said: Arn't Laws a byproduct of morals more or less? Listing laws as a basis for an arguement is pretty much the same as listing morals, as a law is pretty much a way for a government to enforce their morals upon the citizens. What he said EDIT:"As for crazed closet pedophiles...There are far more of them in the Us than Norway." Thats probably because Norway has less than 5 million people in it, whereas the USA has over 300 million lol. |
DefianceOct 11, 2008 3:18 PM
Razma said: Arn't Laws a byproduct of morals more or less? Listing laws as a basis for an arguement is pretty much the same as listing morals, as a law is pretty much a way for a government to enforce their morals upon the citizens. Morals are usually the fundaments of laws, true, but if you argued that pedophilia is fundamentally wrong based on morality alone, there wouldn't be any factual evidence to back you up, and would pretty much be equivalent to stating that Pluto is made of pudding simply because you believe so. While arguing that pedophilia is wrong based on laws would give you material evidence to support your claim in form of law paragraphs. That was my point. I realize I am nitpicking here, but discussion is amusing, and being a Nihilist, I squirm at the mention of universal moral truths. Defiance said: EDIT:"As for crazed closet pedophiles...There are far more of them in the Us than Norway." Thats probably because Norway has less than 5 million people in it, whereas the USA has over 300 million lol. Hehe, you saw through that one XD |
Sohei said: How the hell is that child porn? Maybe not CP persay but i belive it is going a bit to far. Of course in this thread opinions, nor facts count, only what the swarm of parasites believe. |
Rpgwiz99 said: Sohei said: How the hell is that child porn? Maybe not CP persay but i belive it is going a bit to far. Of course in this thread opinions, nor facts count, only what the swarm of parasites believe. It makes me laugh how you try to insult people here. You know that pic that you declare "CP" was recently posted in another thread, that you yourself even posted in, yet did not object to at all? |
| Actually i dont alaways tend to read countless pages of spam, i just happened to see that pic in this thread and belived it was going to far. either way my opinion is gonna be objected and its not like i really care but i wanna have a little fun in the mix, actually ive been insulted in this thread to but i dont bitch and whine about it like everybody else who dose. If that hurt anyones feelings im really sorry ^^ |
Rpgwiz99 said: Actually i dont alaways tend to read countless pages of spam, i just happened to see that pic in this thread and belived it was going to far. either way my opinion is gonna be objected and its not like i really care but i wanna have a little fun in the mix, actually ive been insulted in this thread to but i dont bitch and whine about it like everybody else who dose. If that hurt anyones feelings im really sorry ^^ Oh, no, it's not that it's offensive at all. A kid calling me a poo poo head is just funny, that sort of thing. But the fact that when you realize you can't argue you stoop to calling everyone else parasites, it's hilarious. BTW, that's just the 5 year old pregnant kid. Someone said she was "obese" which is also funny. The image is not sexualized at all, if you find it to be pornography you have a better imagination than most. |
Plate said: Rpgwiz99 said: Actually i dont alaways tend to read countless pages of spam, i just happened to see that pic in this thread and belived it was going to far. either way my opinion is gonna be objected and its not like i really care but i wanna have a little fun in the mix, actually ive been insulted in this thread to but i dont bitch and whine about it like everybody else who dose. If that hurt anyones feelings im really sorry ^^ Oh, no, it's not that it's offensive at all. A kid calling me a poo poo head is just funny, that sort of thing. But the fact that when you realize you can't argue you stoop to calling everyone else parasites, it's hilarious. BTW, that's just the 5 year old pregnant kid. Someone said she was "obese" which is also funny. The image is not sexualized at all, if you find it to be pornography you have a better imagination than most. I never thought i could argue in the first place... |
Rpgwiz99 said: Of course in this thread opinions, nor facts count, only what the swarm of parasites believe. Let me lay something up for you here. As of yet I do not care about this whole issue by any significant degree. As the thread begun, I stood nearly perfectly in the middle - the arguments for both sides seemed equally shaky and equally hard to base anything on. I think that if it hurts the children, it shouldn't be allowed, but if it doesn't, well, go ahead. I have seen a few arguments from the contra side that were valid (url-elf did a great job), but mostly it's moralists RAEGing without any semblance of argument. You are in effect turning me more and more to the pro side. That is how badly you debate. It's not the rebuttals, it's the lack of any argument on your part. So either keep silence or offer real, actual, factual arguments. Right now you and the other moralists are just hurting your cause. This presupposing there are more arguments to be given, it's wholly possible there isn't. It is also presupposing you can give them and I am very sceptical to that. |
How is the world ruled and how do wars start? Diplomats tell lies to journalists and then believe what they read. | Report rules abuse | Your Panel | Clubs | Messages | Forum | Recent <img src="http://img593.imageshack.us/img593/4672/stuhlbarg.png" /> |
| i guess in a way based solely on looks. my gf looks like she's about 14 |
 |
Defiance said: But ya gotta admit, some 13 year olds do look pretty good..=Pbtw my defense is in favor of prepubescent children primarily, I lost my virginity at 16 like a lot of guys to girl that was also 16, so I'm not trying to go against the guys that are into like 15-16 year old, I'm strictly against these asshats that are trying to defend PEDOPHILIA(13 and under). And by the way khorven, I'm impressed! You're more knowledgeable in English than me, and you're Dutch! And did I spell argument wrong? Oh well, what can you expect from America's public schools? In order to stay competent I have to do research on my own time while my classmates struggle with figurative language.-_- But that's besides the point. Baman, you said that saying pedophilia is wrong on a solely moral basis isn't a good reason. I agree. But, like I said before, in child rape cases, female victims' reproductive organs had been damaged so badly that they couldn't have children when they became adults. This evidence lends to the theory that it just isn't physically safe for younger girls under 12 to have intercourse. This isn't a matter of ill-formed morals or questionable psychology, this is a matter of physical damage to the child. |
| Well as for a certain age, there's no way to debate damage in certain sex forms, such as penetration. Because at a certain age, unless they have so kind of freakish growth problem, their bodies are too small to withstand penetration without feeling severe amounts of physical pain. So in no way can you say the experience is not a bad one for the child. But even in such instances there are other forms of sex than just penetration. I have no idea at what age it becomes ok to have sex with a child. Because I have not been shown enough information in my lifetime yet to decide either way to know approximately when and exactly why and how a person becomes able to be considered ready. But I certainly do not believe that I'm to believe it's wrong and harmful to the child just because I'm told so, and just because people say it's sick and wrong just because people say it's sick and wrong just like they react to homosexuality. And in fact, because I can't say for sure, that's why I believe it SHOULD be looked at deeply. It's not just something you can't just say "it's sick" or "I think it should be ok", you have to look at and analyze this situation closely because it is a big, confusing deal if you actually take a look at it instead of have a knee-jerk reaction either way. And so that's why I like and support discussion on this topic. |
 Old avatar and sig retired for now. |
Zetsubou1117 said: Baman, you said that saying pedophilia is wrong on a solely moral basis isn't a good reason. I agree. But, like I said before, in child rape cases, female victims' reproductive organs had been damaged so badly that they couldn't have children when they became adults. This evidence lends to the theory that it just isn't physically safe for younger girls under 12 to have intercourse. This isn't a matter of ill-formed morals or questionable psychology, this is a matter of physical damage to the child. That would be a good argument. People doing such things, assuming it is against the will of the child (Not having seen Kodomo no Jikan, I can't really imagine otherwise), should be put to death swiftly. I'm a sucker for capital punishment. Grim brutality in the justice system, yes please. ukonkivi said: But I certainly do not believe that I'm to believe it's wrong and harmful to the child just because I'm told so, and just because people say it's sick and wrong just because people say it's sick and wrong just like they react to homosexuality. And in fact, because I can't say for sure, that's why I believe it SHOULD be looked at deeply. It's not just something you can't just say "it's sick" or "I think it should be ok", you have to look at and analyze this situation closely because it is a big, confusing deal if you actually take a look at it instead of have a knee-jerk reaction either way. And so that's why I like and support discussion on this topic. Morality should always be questioned once in a while. It's not healthy to see the world through one pair of glasses only. A narrow view might see better, but it invites along fanaticism and ethnocentrism. |
| Discussions of emotional scarring and morality aside, I'm pretty sure every mammal on the planet has a typical age at which they begin to reproduce - simple physical development. Small children are undeniably not fully developed. Thus it's not natural for them to have sex. Some of you seem to be forgetting that sex as intended is for reproductive purposes, and not the sport society has made it into. Not that I'm complaining. ^_^ |
   |
Baman said: Hardly nihilist, I oppose any form of punishment though acknowledge its necessity to remain balance, the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. I see it as little more than sacrificing, against their will, the needs of a lesser group for that of a greater one.That would be a good argument. People doing such things, assuming it is against the will of the child (Not having seen Kodomo no Jikan, I can't really imagine otherwise), should be put to death swiftly. I'm a sucker for capital punishment. Grim brutality in the justice system, yes please. YukiLi said: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalistic_fallacyDiscussions of emotional scarring and morality aside, I'm pretty sure every mammal on the planet has a typical age at which they begin to reproduce - simple physical development. Small children are undeniably not fully developed. Thus it's not natural for them to have sex. Some of you seem to be forgetting that sex as intended is for reproductive purposes, and not the sport society has made it into. Not that I'm complaining. ^_^ Damn interesting. food for thought. |
| Perelman, martyr |
| but the needs of the many are sometimes not in their own interests. |
khorven said: Hardly nihilist, I oppose any form of punishment though acknowledge its necessity to remain balance, the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. I see it as little more than sacrificing, against their will, the needs of a lesser group for that of a greater one. Now now, I can't be a hundred percent nihilist all the time. I do acknowledge the need for order in a society, and sacrifices must be made. Quoting The First Book of Indoctrinations - "it is better that one hundred innocents fall before the Emperor than one kneels before the Daemon." :D Though, seriously, without rules, there would be complete chaos. Which might be interesting, but ultimately fruitless I would think. |
| so many pedos here D: |
| My contribution to this topic will be the suggestion to add a poll to this topic. I'm curious after the results. |
| If she looked a loli, sure why not :P I'm not planning on breaking on any laws so I wouldn't accept anyone under 16 years. Still many 16-18years actually look like lolis :P wouldn't hurt with one I have to admit. |
 |
| Yeah, I've seen plenty 16-18 year olds that look like they are 12 |
Arieletta said: so many pedos here D: I don't see any pedobears. |
| I am Pedobear |
| Just no. I can't stand little kids and I can't believe that all these little 12y old grls gonna look more and more like young mature woman. Evolution is a joke! |
| OMG! No way! It's just like everyone is saying, that's Peadophilia! I like them on anime or mangas but real life?! O_________O |
     |
nyappybonbon said: She hit on me, couldn't let the little girl down.OMG! No way! It's just like everyone is saying, that's Peadophilia! I like them on anime or mangas but real life?! O_________O Neither did I want to... Let's see the first person whom I was 'intimate' with: loli. Second: my sister Third: lesbian What do I have left, a cat? |
| Perelman, martyr |
khorven said: What do I have left, a cat? Don't forget the Dendrophilia. Think about it. Every time one of those walks through a forest would be equivalent to me walking into a girl's locker room. Only they won't be thrown out and get the police on their neck D: Lucky bastards. |
Baman said: Well, what seems to be the limit for me is some-thing that can use cognitive language, not necessarily a human.khorven said: What do I have left, a cat? Don't forget the Dendrophilia. Think about it. Every time one of those walks through a forest would be equivalent to me walking into a girl's locker room. Only they won't be thrown out and get the police on their neck D: Lucky bastards. Like, Artanis, Hiërarch and Sarah Kerrigan, Queen of Blades are kind of hot. |
| Perelman, martyr |
| There's a fine line between reality & fantasy, and that I do see. |
| You know, I wanted to to reply to this topic with my own opinion about this thing, and argue a bit (cos it's always fun), but I realized, that I could use the minutes I would spend with reading this whole topic more useful... Like practicing guitar... reading a book... going for a walk... or actually anything besides reading this (mostly cos there's no way my opinion will change, I'm too stubborn) But I praise you khorven for making this topic. You kinda remind me of an internet troll from an other forum. A really clever fellow, but always arguing with everyone. |
 |
khorven said: Like, Artanis, Hiërarch and Sarah Kerrigan, Queen of Blades are kind of hot. As long as they're humanoid shaped, they should do the trick. Cant wait until the second SCII game to see Kerrigan again... As long as they're not furries.... >__>' |
Baman said: YOU'RE NOT GAY ARE YOU??khorven said: Like, Artanis, Hiërarch and Sarah Kerrigan, Queen of Blades are kind of hot. As long as they're humanoid shaped, they should do the trick. Cant wait until the second SCII game to see Kerrigan again... As long as they're not furries.... >__>' Eww, a man. |
| Perelman, martyr |
khorven said: Baman said: Hardly nihilist, I oppose any form of punishment though acknowledge its necessity to remain balance, the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. I see it as little more than sacrificing, against their will, the needs of a lesser group for that of a greater one.That would be a good argument. People doing such things, assuming it is against the will of the child (Not having seen Kodomo no Jikan, I can't really imagine otherwise), should be put to death swiftly. I'm a sucker for capital punishment. Grim brutality in the justice system, yes please. YukiLi said: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalistic_fallacyDiscussions of emotional scarring and morality aside, I'm pretty sure every mammal on the planet has a typical age at which they begin to reproduce - simple physical development. Small children are undeniably not fully developed. Thus it's not natural for them to have sex. Some of you seem to be forgetting that sex as intended is for reproductive purposes, and not the sport society has made it into. Not that I'm complaining. ^_^ Damn interesting. food for thought. I don't really agree that naturalistic fallacy applies at all here, there's a difference between behaviour using comparisons found in nature as an excuse, and the physical development of a mammal. We are mammals, we do develop physically, and we're not built or designed to engage in reproductive cycles before a certain age. This age will of course differ between individuals, there's no solid baseline like there is with law, but I'm sure I'm not wrong here, am I? It's all well and good not following society's moral code, and deciding things for yourself, but I think there's a line that has to be drawn somewhere. |
|
More topics from this board
Sticky: » The Current Events Board Will Be Closed on Friday JST ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )Luna - Aug 2, 2021 |
272 |
by traed
»»
Aug 5, 2021 5:56 PM |
|
» Third shot of Sinovac COVID-19 vaccine offers big increase in antibody levels: study ( 1 2 )Desolated - Jul 30, 2021 |
50 |
by Desolated
»»
Aug 5, 2021 3:24 PM |
|
» Western vaccine producers engage in shameless profiteering while poorer countries are supplied mainly by China.Desolated - Aug 5, 2021 |
1 |
by Bourmegar
»»
Aug 5, 2021 3:23 PM |
|
» NLRB officer says Amazon violated US labor lawDesolated - Aug 3, 2021 |
17 |
by kitsune0
»»
Aug 5, 2021 1:41 PM |
|
» China Backs Cuba in Saying US Should Apply Sanctions To ItselfDesolated - Aug 5, 2021 |
10 |
by Desolated
»»
Aug 5, 2021 1:36 PM |