Tuesday, September 15, 2015

Can't face competition

Feminists are responding precisely as expected to sex robots:
A campaign has been launched to try and ban the development of ultra-realistic sex robots.

Using sophisticated robotics to develop realistic human dolls capable of performing sex acts is "very disturbing indeed," said campaign leader Dr Kathleen Richardson. Dr Richardson believes humanoid sex robots reinforce traditional and damaging stereotypes of women.
More likely she's upset at the looming end of female influence over men. This isn't to say sex robots will have a positive effect on human society, indeed, those societies that don't ban them may well find themselves failing.

74 comments:

b1bae96e-6447-11e3-b6bb-000f20980440 said...

There are some positives for sex robots.

1) Female obesity rates will plummet and overall demeanor will improve
2) All the sodomizers can get their fix on objects rather than actual prepubescent boys
3) Post menopausal women and other women with libido issues can still keep their men happy by outsource the activity.

Then again it is also possible that the only advances made by a civilization after the introduction of sex robots would be agriculture and those technologies necessary to create, perfect, and deliver sexbots.

finndistan said...

Maybe the robots will need to give consent?

MidKnight (#138) said...

Real women have advantages over sex bots.

The question is, do they want to?

Kim Priestap said...

Sure, they complain about sex robots now, but at some point they'll end up being the ones who are more likely to use them, just like with porn. From The Telegraph (UK):

Feminists 'are more likely to watch porn'

In perhaps surprising news, people who watched pornography were found by the University of Western Ontario to be more likely to have feminist views

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/11865582/feminist-porn-study.html

Fred Gilham said...

From THAT HIDEOUS STRENGTH by C. S. Lewis:

The Stranger mused for a few seconds; then, speaking in a slightly sing-song voice, he asked the following question:
"Who is called Sulva? What road does she walk ? Why is the womb barren on one side? Where are the cold marriages? "
Ransom replied, " Sulva is she whom mortals call the Moon. She walks in the lowest sphere. Half of her orb is turned towards us and shares our curse. On this side the womb is barren and the marriages cold. There dwell an accursed people, full of pride and lust. There when a man takes a maiden in marriage they do not lie together, but each lies with a cunningly fashioned image of the other, made to move and to be warm by devilish arts, for real flesh will not please them, they are so dainty (delicati) in their dreams of lust. Their real children they fabricate by vile arts in a secret place."
"You have answered well," said the Stranger. "I thought there were but three men in the world that knew this question...."

tweell said...

TFH predicted this, and said that 2020 would be the turning point. Sexbots will come down in price and up in capability, along with VR porn and such. Gamma and omega males will flock to the devices, and the women will lose their last post-Wall safety net.This Dr. Kathleen Richardson is certainly not competition to even the current bots, she's ugly, fat and has crazy eyes.

Kim Priestap said...

Sure, they complain about sex robots now, but at some point they'll end up being the ones who are more likely to use them, just like with porn. From The Telegraph (UK):

Feminists 'are more likely to watch porn'

In perhaps surprising news, people who watched pornography were found by the University of Western Ontario to be more likely to have feminist views

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/11865582/feminist-porn-study.html

swiftfoxmark2 said...

Feminists are like most communists: they don't like competition. What most women don't seem to understand is that they are in constant competition with porn, prostitutes, online dating sites, and even sex-bots, not to mention any other woman who happens to fancy a man in any fashion.

This is, of course, the main key to Game. Exploiting the fact that you have options is the best form of Game.

kurt9 said...

Banning any kind of product simply creates a black market in that particular product. Note the utter failure of the drug war in the U.S.

Personally, I find the idea of sex bots to be creepy. However, I have no problem with manufacturing and selling them as a business activity. I also have no problem with manufacturing and selling them as black market business opportunity (even though I do not feel this way about recreational drugs). I would never sell any recreational drug (because I've seen the results of drug addiction to people) but have absolutely no problem with "trafficking" in sex bots or VR (virtual reality) technology if any of these were to be made illegal.

Arthur Isaac said...

Feminists insist on a woman to consent to any sex act. Since there is no woman here there can be no consent. Not only do they insist on controlling reproductive sex, they also demand hegemony over recreational sex.

kurt9 said...

Bans on particular products are stupid. They just create a more lucrative black market. Hasn't this idiot professor ever heard of the massive failure known as the War on Drugs?

Brad Andrews said...

Banning any kind of product simply creates a black market in that particular product. Note the utter failure of the drug war in the U.S.

I agree that the drug war is failed, but this argument has huge holes. We should allow anything, including sex with minors in public forums, by that argument. A society can and should draw some boundaries. The problem is that the majority of that society must buy into those boundaries and then ruthlessly enforce them.

The drug war is a failure because so many don't support it, not because it would be impossible to carry out. Change societal acceptance of drug use and you would instantly change the effectiveness of the drug war. We are not likely to do the former any time soon, but it is possible for a society to come that will make it socially unacceptable and therefore to push those who would violate the rules to the fringes or completely out of the society.

hank.jim said...

Sex robots should be considered the end result of women being incapable of giving consent, plus unwanted pregnancy, and sex trafficking. The feminist argument is not particularly realistic. You can't control women by not being in contact with them. If sex robots does reinforce traditional stereotypes, it is one of fantasy. Or maybe women should be behave more like what they detest, thus removing the competition.

A lot of sci-fi movies show female robots doing all sorts of spectacular things, plus being outrageously sexual. Perhaps that's what it comes down to. It's a fetish. We are an amoral society. Feminists paved the way even though they don't realize it.

Retrenched said...

If sexbots ever become available it will be interesting to see how they affect the average delta guys who sometimes find success with women but often go home empty-handed. Will they approach women with more confidence knowing that they have a backup option? Will they develop unrealistic standards and refuse the average women they might have a shot at? Or will they just withdraw altogether, deciding that guaranteed sex from a fake 10 is better than spending time and money taking real 6s on dates just to get rejected in the end? Hmm.

Retrenched said...

If sexbots ever become available it will be interesting to see how they affect the average delta guys who sometimes find success with women but often go home empty-handed. Will they approach women with more confidence knowing that they have a backup option? Will they develop unrealistic standards and refuse the average women they might have a shot at? Or will they just withdraw altogether, deciding that guaranteed sex from a fake 10 is better than spending time and money taking real 6s on dates just to get rejected in the end? Hmm.

hamburger said...

Or will they just withdraw altogether, deciding that guaranteed sex from a fake 10 is better than spending time and money taking real 6s on dates just to get rejected in the end?

*ding*

Welcome to civilizational hell. Enjoy your stay.

AmyJ said...

Feminists insist that men get out of their uterus via abortion "rights", yet do everything they can to control men's sex lives. What next? Banning self satisfaction?

Laguna Beach Fogey said...

Sex-bots? Er, no thanks.

Meat > Robots

Durandel Almiras said...

"Dr Richardson believes humanoid sex robots reinforce traditional and damaging stereotypes of women."

When did young, skinny and attractive become traditional and damaging stereotypes? If only the average modern women were such.

Considering some of the research by Peter Frost, how much wailing and gnashing of teeth shall we expect when the best selling sex android models are all attractive, white, blonde haired and light colored eyed?

Nate Winchester said...

I'm disappointed Vox didn't post the obvious educational video.

Laughingdog said...

The key turning point will be when the sex-bots can also cook and clean. Then the women choosing to ride the carousel into their 30s will be properly hosed.

Owen said...

Weepy feminist: Won't someone think of the friendzone?!?!

Robert What? said...

Technologically speaking, as big a challenge as the advanced robotics will be the power source. Battery technology will have to make some major leaps as well.

mts1 said...

You'd think all of those feminist womyn would be thrilled. The rape culture they so insist is ruining their gender (and as they boil rape all the way down to saying hi to a woman with hopes it will start the ball rolling to a relationship) will vanish as men withdraw from "hurting" women via their sexual interest in them anymore. Men will finally no longer keep them trampled underfoot and oppressed. Since men are the source of all womyn's troubles, their withdrawal from their relationship lives will be a combination of the lifting of a great weight and a tremendous updraft under their wings, allowing them to soar as they normally would, had not men held them down. I've heard the phrase, "what would a world without men look like; no crime and lots of happy fat women" so often that I would be able to buy a car if I had a nickel for each occurrence. If that's the case, what's not to like?

Women would be FREE to build their lives on their own, with no one doing their fighting for them, paying their bills, building the infrastructure, fighting enemy combatants who would destroy this sweet setup, do the dangerous jobs to support the infrastructure for their happy HR or consultant jobs, ...

What? Feminism without the willing male rock foundation that props it up? This must be stopped! Heh.

Cail Corishev said...

Sure, they complain about sex robots now, but at some point they'll end up being the ones who are more likely to use them, just like with porn.

Every woman's bedroom I've been in had at least one sex toy, usually a few. They already have sex robots; they just don't have bodies and faces attached to them, because women aren't visual -- they'd rather have the fantasy in their head than a plastic Fabio. They could have had blow-up men with vibrators decades ago, but didn't ask for them. They also have more advanced devices like the Sybian that go way beyond anything men have built for themselves, but they don't dress them up.

And today's woman is pretty open about her use of sex toys. Sitcoms have dildo jokes, and women post pictures on social media of themselves at dildo parties. If they wanted blow-up men attached to them, they'd have that too. They could have them, because there isn't the shame for them that there is for men; but I'm not sure many will, until it's realistic enough that they can't tell the difference.

dvdivx said...

Most of the advances will happen in Japan where this attitude holds little sway. Also considering the profits involved from essentially a loophole around prostitution money will overcome any objections. If anything the only thing that would happen will be a tax so the government gets a cut.

LibertyPortraits said...

I, for one, look forward to our future sex robot overlords.

maniacprovost said...

This should also cut down on non-gay child abuse once lolibots come down in price. I imagine pedophiles and certain other disturbed individuals will still want the real thing, but situational child molesters will probably stick with the robot, and then kill themselves from loneliness.

Jack Amok said...

If they wanted blow-up men attached to them, they'd have that too. They could have them, because there isn't the shame for them that there is for men; but I'm not sure many will, until it's realistic enough that they can't tell the difference.

Until there's a credible threat the Sybian might dump its owner and hook up with another woman, they'll never quite be what women want, no matter how high the RPMs go.

evilwhitemalempire said...

"More likely she's upset at the looming end of female influence over men."
---------------
Give that man a cigar.

evilwhitemalempire said...

"If sexbots ever become available it will be interesting to see how they affect the average delta guys who sometimes find success with women but often go home empty-handed. Will they approach women with more confidence knowing that they have a backup option? Will they develop unrealistic standards and refuse the average women they might have a shot at? Or will they just withdraw altogether, deciding that guaranteed sex from a fake 10 is better than spending time and money taking real 6s on dates just to get rejected in the end?"
----------------------
Perhaps a combination of all of the above.

Tom K. said...

@Fred Gilam. Great CSL quote! I find many quotable quotes in the Space Trilogy. When I find a place where it works, I love to quote from that incredible multipage. . .pluriloquy. . .that Ransom engages in with the King and Queen, and Venus and Mars: "The Plan of the Great Dance." What an amazing piece of prose, don't you agree.

Regarding sexbot, yes, I think it will be the natural progression from "cold marriages" to "frozen ones." What is more cold than a woman who after using a man's resources to bear and raise her children thinks her duty to him is done? That is, unless he "insists" on using her body for his "pleasure". In which case she will acquiesce, but not until she is certain he knows how put upon she is and long suffering she is being. Such women will likely welcome sex robots for their "husbands" since many secretly wish he would use prostitutes.

Women will not like the world they are creating for themselves. And each and every one of them is creating it for themselves by how they treat the man in their life now.

It will be interesting to see how the Church responds to sexbots. It certainly can't be considered adultery. Nor "looking upon a woman to lust after her." Yet I predict, rather obviously, that the effects will be disastrous for us all.

"Oh brave, new world that has such people in it!"

"Tis' new to thee."

Tom K. said...

@Fred Gilam. Great CSL quote! I find many quotable quotes in the Space Trilogy. When I find a place where it works, I love to quote from that incredible multipage. . .pluriloquy. . .that Ransom engages in with the King and Queen, and Venus and Mars: "The Plan of the Great Dance." What an amazing piece of prose, don't you agree.

Regarding sexbot, yes, I think it will be the natural progression from "cold marriages" to "frozen ones." What is more cold than a woman who after using a man's resources to bear and raise her children thinks her duty to him is done? That is, unless he "insists" on using her body for his "pleasure". In which case she will acquiesce, but not until she is certain he knows how put upon she is and long suffering she is being. Such women will likely welcome sex robots for their "husbands" since many secretly wish he would use prostitutes.

Women will not like the world they are creating for themselves. And each and every one of them is creating it for themselves by how they treat the man in their life now.

It will be interesting to see how the Church responds to sexbots. It certainly can't be considered adultery. Nor "looking upon a woman to lust after her." Yet I predict, rather obviously, that the effects will be disastrous for us all.

"Oh brave, new world that has such people in it!"

"Tis' new to thee."

rumpole5 said...

As Kipling wrote, regarding a parallel dilema: "A woman is only a woman, but a good cigar is a smoke."

Mindstorm said...

@Robert What?

As if they would wander far from the wall socket.... :)

Dexter said...

What is a vibrator other than a sexbot for women?

Unknown said...

" What is more cold than a woman who after using a man's resources to bear and raise her children thinks her duty to him is done?"

Had to laugh at that line. When I called my spousal unit frigid, she reacted with horror, even though I only called her that after her 4th or 5th refusal to engage in sex! And no, it wasn't because of the false "exhaustion" of keeping up with the kids and housework.

Think of the wear and tear on your finger and tongue muscles! And I'll bet they'll come with a "STFU" switch as well, so we can enjoy the afterglow in silence.

Keroberos said...

@Tom K. The Church already has prohibitions against masturbation and, indeed, male orgasm ending anywhere but his wife's vagina. Sexbots would definitely be against Church teaching.

Unless your capitalization was unintentional, in which case who knows what the tens of thousands of Protestant denominations will do. Probably a variety of responses.

Keroberos said...

@Tom K. The Church already has prohibitions against masturbation and, indeed, male orgasm ending anywhere but his wife's vagina. Sexbots would definitely be against Church teaching.

Unless your capitalization was unintentional, in which case who knows what the tens of thousands of Protestant denominations will do. Probably a variety of responses.

Crowhill said...

Oh, it's disturbing to some woman. We'd better put a stop to this right away.

Crowhill said...

@Fred and Tom, That Hideous Strength is a great book that I've read through many times. It's a little weird, but it has some remarkable insights. Thanks, Fred, for the quote.

YIH said...

As you can guess, Japan is leading in R&D on these. There already are companies who sell very realistic-looking sex dolls. They are not the 'inflate-a-date' that are often the butt of jokes nor are they those body pillows featuring anime characters.
They can be produced in whatever dimensions suit your tastes. If you want to see what I mean just Google 'japan sex dolls' (NSFW likely).
Add some robotics and you have a *ahem* girlfriend/wife that will only move or talk back when you want her to.
From what I've seen, they are expensive (as in $5-10k+ US) and for some versions the ''check local laws before ordering'' disclaimer applies.
Amazing what you can learn from 8chan, isn't it?

muhammad syafiq said...

hmmm
The key turning point will be when the sex-bots can also cook and clean. Then the women choosing to ride the carousel into their 30s will be properly hosed.

Muhammad Syafiq

muhammad syafiq said...

Nice post

Muhammad Syafiq

Mindstorm said...

@YIH Google Images for "Japanese sex dolls" shows them in negligee (even with Safe Search off), so it's not exactly NSFW.

Tom K. said...

@Keroberos. I capitalize Church to mean all representations of Christ's body on earth, not just Roman Catholic. I was raised Catholic, but as a comedian once said, ". . .that means when I grew up, I quit." I switched to pentecostal at the age of 15, but although I still hold maybe 80% of the doctrines, I've grown intellectually way past it.

I gave up believing masturbation was sinful when I came to believe that God does not require of us what we cannot do, hence our legitimately earned guilt and our need of a Savior. But a man can no more NOT think lustful thoughts than he can not think about food when he's hungry. I have found much better interpretations of Matt. 5:28 than the most damning one taught to every good Christian boy when he hits puberty. And the best don't require me to deny my masculine nature. If you simply focus on the term, "adultery", the "orthodox" interpretation falls apart.

JB Philips wrote a book, "You're God is Too Small". For me, the Church is too small. Branching out and diversifying is what nature does. Always differentiating. People complain there are too many churches. Me? I tend to think there aren't enough to express all the uniqueness of God. And you don't have to give up orthodoxy to do that. Every protestant church not considered a cult believes and accepts the Nicene Creed. The truth of God's nature does not limit creativity. It releases it.

Tom K. said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Joe A. said...

I don't know. Surely sex robots can't make a society fail as much as following what feminists say.

Dexter said...

You'd think all of those feminist womyn would be thrilled. The rape culture they so insist is ruining their gender (and as they boil rape all the way down to saying hi to a woman with hopes it will start the ball rolling to a relationship) will vanish as men withdraw from "hurting" women via their sexual interest in them anymore.

Yes but they all expect to have that beta provider in their future, and they don't want him to have a choice between an aging, strident ex-carousel rider and a compliant sexbot.

hamburger said...

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/09/16/sexbots-why-women-should-panic/

most blokes are fine with a pizza and a wank

Milo is our foremost public philosopher.

liberranter said...

It will be interesting to see how the Church responds to sexbots.

Evangelicals will avoid addressing the topic at all, as they do with everything having to do with sex, except to occassionally condemn the men who use them. Of course the next condemnation from the pulpit of vibrators and/or the women who use them will be the first ever ...

Karren WSisco said...

Mailing one by one every diet in a brownish black come up so it's not black I use it every day just black no makeup to show you something that's really seem lot to video it's the mass factor X Clear All Rejuvenate install a minute to think presses into many that tonight it's very similar the only thing I don’t know about this is really hard to get all I used get much help rehabilitate.

http://eyeluminousfacts.com/clear-all-rejuvenate/

Trust said...

I don't think evangelicals will be silent, any more than they are on porn. They'll take the opportunity to shame men, praise women, and preach the Tingle Gospel.

corvinus333 said...

I gave up believing masturbation was sinful when I came to believe that God does not require of us what we cannot do, hence our legitimately earned guilt and our need of a Savior. But a man can no more NOT think lustful thoughts than he can not think about food when he's hungry.

@Tom K.
Uh, masturbation is not the same as being subject to impure thoughts. You can get impure thoughts but that doesn't mean you automatically call Mrs. Palmer and her five daughters for a date. Also, I'm a Catholic and haven't masturbated since I first heard it was wrong. Ever heard of the NoFap movement?

Sounds to me like you were just looking for excuses to dump Catholicism.

Tom K. said...

@corvinuss333. Congratulations on your personal victory. Perhaps you should write a book and upload a video telling all of us "Christian fappers" how you manage it. Seriously. Is it a skill that can be learned or are you a special case? Do you belong to a support group that practices the 12 Steps? I know I sound facetious but if you can answer yes these questions I am sure there are men like me who would like to know how you pull it off.

Now it would have been nice if you'd left it at "Ever heard of the NoFap movement?"; however, to then go on to make assumptions as to why I chose to "dump" Catholicism was just snarky.

Which compels me to say that the Catholic Church NEVER told me masturbation was wrong and masturbation had nothing to do with why I dumped Catholicism, nor why I have never returned. A Catholic Church that won't punish pedophile priests, excommunicate baby killers or their enabler, a Church that will ALLOW a woman Religious (nun) sworn to obedience to the Pope to campaign for abortion rights, that will ANNUL marriages of 20+ years with 6 children (and thereby make the kids bastards), and which now tells the world we need to TOLERATE homosexuals is hardly a Church that would have any problem with a heterosexual man who beats off in private! The Catholic Church lost it's moral authority on matters of sex a long. . .long. . . . . .long time ago!

It wasn't until after I became a protestant that I decided masturbation was wrong. It was many years after that that I came to the conclusion that, where the Scriptures are silent, I must be silent, that while the male sex drive must be regulated, it cannot be, in and of itself, sinful. That "nature", by definition, cannot be sinful. Corrupted? Yes. Sinful? No.

Can a dog sin? Can a lion be guilty of murder? Never in a million years. Even so, nothing that is a part of nature can be sinful by itself. There must be a sinful consciousness motivating it. A seemingly slight, but monumental distinction.

Please, let's do what we can to avoid religious wars in androsphere spaces, shall we?

Tom K. said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
corvinus333 said...

The Catholic Church lost it's moral authority on matters of sex a long. . .long. . . . . .long time ago!

@Tom K.
As usual, you ex-Catholic idiots always confuse the non-Catholic SJW entryists in control of the Vatican -- and yes, they are in fact non-Catholics -- for Catholicism. Does Catholicism consider homosexuality, let alone pedophilia and covering it up, a sin? Of course. I mean, duh. You can't take anything the "pope" and "bishops" teach since Vatican II to be actual Catholicism.

Again, I suspect you're just using the Vatican II clergy as an excuse to dump the Faith and decide for yourself what morality should be like.

Tom K. said...

@Corvinus333. ". . .you ex-Catholic idiots. . ." Really? You go straight from reading my thoughtful post to name calling? Even after I asked you to share your secret to personal holiness with me and other men who fap?

I guess I'd better make note of your name because it's obvious you're just a trolling religious fanatic.

And you do realize that under the terms of your Catholic faith, everything that was approved under Vatican II MUST be accepted as church dogma under penalty of damnation, don't you?

Here's the website: Papal Encyclicals Online

And the web address: http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Paul06/p6ecclss.htm.

Oh, and this is the Pope Paul VI speaking ex cathedra:

"ECCLESIAE SANCTAE
Motu Proprio Implementing Four Council Decrees
POPE PAUL VI August 6, 1966
The governing of holy Church, following the conclusion of the Second Ecumenical Vatican Council, demands indeed that new norms be established ...

Therefore after carefully examining the matter, motu proprio and by our apostolic authority we decree and promulgate the following norms for the implementation of the decrees of the Council which begin with these words: Christus Dominus (On the Bishops' Pastoral Office in the Church) Presbyterorum Ordinis (On the Life and Ministry of Priests), Perfectae Caritatis (On the Adaptation and Renewal of Religious Life) and Ad Gentes Divinitus (On the Missionary Activity of the Church), and we command that they be observed by way of experiment, that is until the new Code of Canon Law is promulgated, unless in the meantime some other provision is to be made by the Apostolic See.

These norms will begin to be in force next October 11, the feast of the Maternity of the Blessed Virgin Mary, on which day the holy Council was begun four years ago by our predecessor of venerable memory, John XXIII.

We order that whatever has been prescribed by us in this letter issued motu proprio be firm and ratified, all things to the contrary, even those worthy of most special mention, not withstanding.

Given at Rome at St. Peter's, August 6, the feast of the Transfiguration of Our Lord Jesus Christ, 1966, in the fourth year of our pontificate."

Now who's "dumping the faith" and "decid[ing] for yourself what morality should be like"?

To appropriately quote Vox Day here, from his new bestselling book, SJWs Always Lie: "Rule 3: SJWs Always Project"!

Except you're not concerned with social justice, just religious conformity. So can we call you a Righteous Religious Warrior? An RRW? Well, if you get enough friends to join you and you start trolling every site where non-catholics gather (or are you only interested in "lapsed Catholics" like myself? Well, nevermind. You just go wherever you can and start shitting all over the comment sections and cutting and pasting objections and doctrinal statements until you make everyone sick and annoyed. Then maybe Mary will forgive your heresy against the Mother Church.

There is always hope because of her gentle, mother heart. Pray with me now:

"O Mary, gentle and humble of heart, remember us when we sin. You know that all people sin. Grant that through your most pure and motherly heart, we may be healed from every spiritual sickness. Grant that we may always experience the goodness of your motherly heart, and that through the flame of your heart we may be converted. Amen."

I told you I wanted to avoid a religious war in the androspace. But you wouldn't. Tag, you're it!

Tom K. said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
corvinus333 said...

Really? You go straight from reading my thoughtful post to name calling?

Thoughtful? Hey, you're the one who said, "I was raised Catholic, but as a comedian once said, '. . .that means when I grew up, I quit.' " . Don't expect to make offensive, if not blasphemous, jokes and get away with it.

And you accuse me of projection...

And you do realize that under the terms of your Catholic faith, everything that was approved under Vatican II MUST be accepted as church dogma under penalty of damnation, don't you?

Sure, but you're operating under the assumption that Paul VI was actually a Catholic and that Vatican II taught Catholic dogma.

When Vatican II teaches heresy that directly contradicts everything else the Church has taught earlier, it would suggest that maybe it was an invalid council, like Pistoia, or any number of other ones that have existed throughout Church history.

There were definite shenanigans at the 1958 conclave -- this is a known fact, even if the details aren't known for sure -- and the Church hasn't been the same since.

Mindstorm said...

Is someone calling for blasphemous jokes about Catholicism? I might be happy to oblige, being an ex-Catholic myself. Just continue with your posturing, corvinus.

Karl said...

nobody else read this Popular Mechanics article linked by instapundit? http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/robots/a17357/there-is-now-a-campaign-against-sex-robots/

"The Questions We're Not Asking About Sex Robots"

Money sentences:

These arguments address what sex robots mean for us—whether their existence is degrading to humans. But there is another huge problem yet to come: Should we be building intelligent machines, then refusing them agency? . . . .Building a robot designed to have sex with people, making it intelligent enough to relate to people, and then not letting it to say "no" to that person seems like it would, in fact, perpetuate sexual violence."

First thought I had: The ministry has fallen. (I don't read pop mechanics anymore but Damnit.)

Second thought: Author is eye-opening stupid.

Third thought: How many Tor books will now feature robot rape?

Tom K. said...

@Corvinus333. LOL!! Now I know you are a trolling religious fanatic. First of all, I was not even ADDRESSING YOU when I made that JOKE. You butted into a conversation you weren't invited to. Yet you took personal offense! How very solipsistic, how very feminine of you! Or should I say, How very gamma of you?

Second, I was referring to my last post as being thoughtful and your response was to disrespect me and anyone who rejects the Church YOU YOURSELF SAY IS HERETICAL!!

You do see the circular reasoning, don't you? You tell me the Church of my youth - I was born during Vatican II and had my first communion just after - is heretical and that the Pope himself is NOT CATHOLIC!!??? LOL!!!! And then you damn ME for rejecting the Church??

Project much, dude? Rule 3: RRWs Always project.

So tell me, Cory, which one of us is the hypocrite? The blasphemer? Me for walking away or you for sticking with a heretical, hypocritical, false church you say is not REALLY catholic?

And just who are the REAL catholics and where do they meet? Where do they celebrate Mass? Who is their Pope? According to you, the gates of Hell HAVE Prevailed against the Church! Don't you see what a logical bind you are in?

If the Church is infallible, if the Pope is infallible whenever he speaks ex cathedra, how is it possible that both Pope John XXIII and Pope Paul VI - BOTH - could speak heresies from the Throne of St. Peter? If they could commit heresy AS POPE, how can you be sure ANYTHING the Church has EVER taught is True?

You are a nasty, nasty person. Full of hate and bile. I have no reason to talk with you. I wasn't even talking to you anyway. But this has been fun, I must confess. You never stood a chance in a battle of wits with me. Your hands were tied by your self-contradicting dogmas.

corvinus333 said...

@Tom K.

Simmer down, dude. I do apologize if you grew up in the Novus Ordo (the post-Vatican II "church"), and also for being a bit of a hothead (like you clearly are), but that doesn't change the fact that it's a fake and not any more Catholic than the Episcopal Church. I mean, really, if a religion is hemorrhaging adherents, that's a slight clue that its leaders aren't really committed to it. As opposed to, say, the Muslims.

This site can answer most of your questions: Novus Ordo Watch

As to your point about John XXIII and Paul VI, quite simply, if you know what a conclave was, and when I stated there were shenanigans, it would explain how you could have apparent popes who aren't really valid. They're fakes. They were invalidly and fraudulently elected, and their actions since becoming "pope" pretty much prove it. By their fruits ye shall know them. And it's not like there haven't been antipopes throughout Church history.

Mindstorm said...

Can one refuse the official Catholic dogma and still call oneself a Catholic, corvinus?

Tom K. said...

@Corvinus333. I have no desire to go down that rabbit hole. And you still haven't answered my question. In re Who is your Pope now? Is he in hiding waiting for the opportunity to reclaim the throne? How can it be possible that the "true church" could ever be wrong based on Jesus' own words? Just WHAT do you base your faith on now except your own opinion about what the scriptures and the dogmas mean?

So should I start calling you Martin Luther now and not Corvinus333? I think I will.

Can we expect some theses from you soon listing all the things wrong with Vatican II? Will you nail them to the door of your local church or will you fly to Rome and do it at St. Peter's?

The suspense is killing me!

Tom K. said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
corvinus333 said...

I have no desire to go down that rabbit hole.

@Tom K.
Heh. You pepper me with questions, refuse to read the "rabbit hole" answers I give which address those very questions, and then repeat the questions.

I don't know what your point in doing this is, but you're just as bad as Mindstorm, who is a confirmed Gamma.

You're done. Bye.

Tom K. said...

Your rabbit hole is the NWO red herring which can have nothing to do with the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church which Jesus promised the gates of Hell could not prevail against. If the Catholic Church IS that church, you are a heretic and an apostate. Not me.

You damn me for leaving the church and then change your tune when I tell you I left AFTER Vatican II. Yet you accused me before of being guilty if exercising my own judgment on a matter of morality and a matter of doctrine. But you are doing the very same thing.

I know how much Catholics HATE having Bible verses quoted but this one is just TOO good:

"Therefore thou art inexcusable, thou, whosoever thou art that judgests another. For in that thou judgests another thou condemnest thyaelf, for thou doest the same things also,". Romans 2:1.

Tom K. said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
corvinus333 said...

Apologies retracted, then. My initial instincts were dead on. I was later giving you the benefit of the doubt, but turns out I was wrong to do so. My mistake.

Tom K. said...

Corvinus333. I'm sorry you're wrong, too, heretic.

Where do you go to confession now? What do you do with all those unexpurgated sins?

How will you get into heaven without the help of the One True Church?

You must really fear death with no priest to administer extreme unction.

Tom K. said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Agus Sugiyanto said...

whether the robot can give satisfaction?

Post a Comment

NO ANONYMOUS COMMENTS.