₦airaland Forum

Please note I selected the bits that promote what I wish. Please do link to get the rest.

According to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, the fighters were foreigners from the Islamist group Ansar al-Tawhid.

Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), the main Islamist faction which led the uprising that toppled President Assad on Dec. 8, said foreign fighters had been detained over the incident, BBC reported.

Another video footage following the incident showed a religious leader from the ruling HTS holding up a cross in sign of solidarity and promising the crowd that tree would be restored by morning.

https://www.politico.eu/article/syria-protest-religion-war-islam-christian-faith-bashar-assad/

Reverseng:
Most scientists are atheist.

This is very not true. And you would know it is not true if you bothered to verify with your own senses!

Many scientists have been Christians, including:

Albert Einstein: Although he didn't identify as a Christian Scientist, he studied Science and Health, visited Christian Science churches and reading rooms, and his son became a Christian Scientist.

André-Marie Ampère: A devout Christian who read extensively on natural philosophy and science.

Hildegard of Bingen: Known as Saint Hildegard and Sibyl of the Rhine, she is considered the founder of scientific natural history in Germany.

Isaac Newton: His strong faith in God is evident in his writings.

Johannes Kepler: A creationist scientist who established the scientific discipline of celestial mechanics.

Joseph Lister: A creationist scientist who established the scientific discipline of antiseptic surgery.

Louis Pasteur: A creationist scientist who established the scientific discipline of bacteriology.

Rosalind Picard: An artificial intelligence expert who became a Christian as a teenager.

Troy Van Voorhis: A chemistry professor who became a Christian while a grad student at Berkeley.

Other notable Christian scientists include:
Robert Grosseteste, Nicholas Steno, Nicolaus Copernicus, Gregor Mendel, Lavoisier, Vesalius, and Cauchy.

Google!

Reverseng:
One of that scientist was Walter Russell. Go look up Walter Russell periodic table and compare to Mendeleev. He tried to share his scientific work with the science 'community' but he was shunned because his work acknowledged the supreme Creator.

Walter Bowman Russell (May 19, 1871 – May 19, 1963) was an American impressionist painter (of the Boston School),[citation needed] sculptor, mystic and author. Russell wrote extensively on science topics, but his ideas were rejected by scientists.
Wiki

Walter Russell was not a scientist, Reverseng. And his ideas were only rejected because they could not stand up to the scrutiny of the senses of others, which is a fundamental aspect of the sciences.

If I make a scientific claim that water boils at 0⁰c, I must demonstrate that it does boils at 0⁰c, and show how it did boils at 0⁰c, and others must be able to come to my same conclusion by following the method I used to boil water at 0⁰c. And if they can't boils water at 0⁰c using the same method I used, they will have no reason whatsoever to accept what I call the science of boiling water at 0⁰c, and neither can I force them to accept it.

Reverseng:
Your senses are limited. You can't see all forms of light

Russell claimed to have experienced a transformational and revelatory event in May 1921, which he later described in a chapter called "The Story of My Illumining" in the 1950 edition of his Home Study Course. "During that period...I could perceive all motion," and was newly "aware of all things."
Wiki

Can Russell see all forms of light, and "perceive all motion", and be "aware of all things" because they are revealed only to his own unlimited senses and no one elses?

Sorry, but you have no knowledge nor understanding of science, and I strongly suggest you rectify your deficiency by using your senses, or you must expect your ideas to be rejected by those of us who do use our senses.

I have included Walter Russell's periodic table below. You might want to show me the chemistry that has been produced with it please, while you are at it.

cococandy:
You know you’re being facetious. It’s like someone reading this comment I made and claiming I support rapists. Knowing very well what’s being said is way different than the meaning you chose to get from it. That intentional misinterpretation is why it’s so difficult to have a conversation

Oh well.

As you might have noticed, I don't bother much with the stupid idiot. Unlike some, he doesn't need to ask me to keep out of his posts because his posts are usually not worth getting into except to occasionally remind him what one thinks of him.

bemeruca:
Say all you want, I am still gonna call out your degenerate tendencies so defend and support rapists and groomers.

This is so you see what others see while you sit in your bubble of ignorance.

https://www.nairaland.com/8295255/pastors-wife-teaches-women-how/2#133431279

LordAdam16:
Congratulations.
You have your token Conservative condemnation.

Why is that not enough for you?

One minute, conservatives excuse statutory rape.
Next minute, conservatives condemn statutory rape.

Pick a lane. Or argue with yourself. IDGAF.
But keep my username out of your posts.

If you want your posts kept out of, post in your private forum where only you read it.

You can not create imaginary lanes to put people into and then ask that your username be kept out of your posts. Or rather, you can ask, but as you can see, request denied.

triplechoice:
Rape is a deliberate act. Rapist don't rape their victims unintentionally. . The definition for child sexual abuse or any kind of sexual as an intentional is by the experts,not me. Please use Google because I see you have a very casual and stubborn understanding of what sexual abuse.

The below is from the Metropolitan Police.

The legal definition of rape is when a person intentionally penetrates another's vagina, anus or mouth with a penis, without the other person's consent. Assault by penetration is when a person penetrates another person's vagina or anus with any part of the body other than a penis, or by using an object, without the person's consent.

The overall definition of sexual or indecent assault is an act of physical, psychological and emotional violation in the form of a sexual act, inflicted on someone without their consent. It can involve forcing or manipulating someone to witness or participate in any sexual acts.
https://www.met.police.uk/advice/advice-and-information/rsa/rape-and-sexual-assault/what-is-rape-and-sexual-assault/

Notice its twofold. Anyone, or shall I say most, or at least many, reading the definition above would understand that you can not unintentionally penetrate another's vagina, anus or mouth with a penis without the other person's consent. And if you do, it is obviously rape, since you must have disregarded the person's lack of consent, and intentionally gone ahead and forcefully penetrated the person. It can't be something done unintentionally or by accident, or your get out of jail card would read "I did not intend to rape her", and I just don't see that fly anywhere.

If you penetrate me without, and especially against my consent, your intentionality is very much obvious, is the point, since you can't exactly claim you did not intend to rape me.

The recent conviction of those who used such a banal excuse after raping Dominique Pélicot proves that point. Some claimed they thought she consented to sex which it was their intention to have with her, and not to intentionally rape her, but they will be spending time in jail for rape.

In some countries, like the one I live in a husband can even be jailed for spousal rape for penetrating his wife against her consent.

A Guide to Marital Rape Law
Marital rape, also known as spousal rape, is a sexual assault under UK law (as outlined in the Sexual Offences Act 2003).

The offence occurs when a person commits a sexual act without the consent of their spouse (or ex-spouse) or does so against their will. This sexual assault can also be considered a form of domestic violence.
https://www.noblesolicitors.co.uk/about/a-guide-to-marital-rape.html

And so you may see how subjective it is, it is not a recognised crime in many countries or even states in the same country.

Reform of the exemption has been slow and tentative in the United States. Only two States -- Oregon and New Jersey -- have abolished the marital exemption rule. The legal systems of most countries exempt the husband from prosecution for the rape of his wife. In Russia, Czechoslovakia, and Poland, however, husbands may be charged with marital rape.
https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/if-you-cant-rape-your-wife-whom-can-you-rape-marital-rape-exemption

You just try puling that in Nigeria and see how far you'd get.

Now, for the sexual abuse I'm insisting on in this particular case, I think we've agreed that is my subjective opinion. You at least have accused me of being subjective, to which I plead guilty as charged.

Basically, in my own subjective opinion and view and in my own book, what this mother did to her daughter, who is obviously under the legal age to consent, is sexual abuse. The mother did after all intentionally penetrate her daughter's vagina. And the consent aspect is mute, since it is recognised that a minor can not consent to having her private parts penetrated by anyone

If the mother did what she did where I live and if the authorities hear of it, she will most definitely be arrested for sexual abuse, and I would not in the least be surprised if she is also done for statutory rape, since it is not a valid excuse to claim a minor gave consent. She'd at least have social services on her ass until her daughter is an adult.

Also it is a physical, psychological and emotional violation, especially if the mother intends to keep checking her daughter's parts until she presumes her daughter is old enough not to be checked.

triplechoice:
If you could please provide evidence of sexual abuse committed by the mother on her daughter , then I accept the subjectivity tag.

And this is the reason I wrote all the above, which I respect you for reading.

The mother has provided sufficient evidence herself, and if she lived in UK, she would have been arrested already based on the evidence (confession, even), that she provided on facebook. But I have no intention of making you accept my subjective tag, Triple. It is my subjective tag, as in my own view and opinion about what the mother did, and it is the view also in the country I live in, and is not a view that I intend to rape your own subject to adopt unless you live in a country that shares my opinion and view and subjectivity, to wit I'd urge caution, though I am very certain that regardless of however you choose to view what she did, it is not something I feel you intend to do yourself so my urging is unnecessary since you are smart enough not to need warning from me.

Sexual abuse (of a minor), and rape (of anyone), is subjective. The rapist may claim they were having sex, while the raped will claim they did not consent. But consent does not apply where the penetration of minors are concerned, and that's why grown ups should stay away from the private parts of minors, in my own very subjective opinion and view, and even where the law does not see it as a crime, but I recognise milage may differ, legally, elsewhere.

LordAdam16:
I cannot for the life of me understand why you want conservatives to condemn him...

Thankfully, some conservatives did not wait for what anyone else wanted and condemned Gaetz already.

“I don’t think it’s a serious nomination for the attorney general,” Republican senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, told NBC News. “We need to have a serious attorney general. And I’m looking forward to the opportunity to consider somebody that is serious. This one was not on my bingo card.”

Republican congressman Max Miller of Ohio told Axios that “Gaetz has a better shot at having dinner with Queen Elizabeth II than being confirmed by the Senate”.

John Bolton, a former national security adviser, said Gaetz “must be the worst nomination for a cabinet position in American history”. “Gaetz is not only totally incompetent for this job, he doesn’t have the character. He is a person of moral turpitude,” Bolton said in an interview with NBC News NOW.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/nov/13/republicans-matt-gaetz-trump-attorney-general

But I'm very certain they must only have condemned Gaetz because Biden paid them with Obama's money, so perhaps we better not count or notice them.

Greymann:
I hope you get through what you are facing bro. Merry Christmas and wish you the best

I wish you a thousand times better.

Merry Christmas.

Reverseng:
Scientist love to be the authority on science because it gives them power.

After reading your post again, I'm going to inform you that no scientist has authority on science, because experience has shown that whatever scientific discovery you come up with today, someone is likely to come along in the future and either debunk it or do better science that you've done.

The reason for this is every scientific discovery is like the peeling of an onion that reveals more peels underneath.

Newton reigned undisputed for
https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2019/05/29/this-is-how-100-years-ago-a-solar-eclipse-proved-einstein-right-and-newton-wrong/

https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/earth-and-planetary-sciences/newton-theory

Greymann:
Honestly you can just move on without commenting. Everyone has different problems. Have a taste of what I’m going through and know how it feels

If I told you my experience in the regard of your problem, you'd likely forget your own problem.

Just trust me when I say, Gods please don't give Greymann a taste of what I'm given. You don't deserve it.

abba190b:
Na sex dey worry u?

His belly is full. What else should worry him?

Mindlog:
I buy from Baba Ltd, opposite Primark Peckham and next to KFC, if not mistaken.

I do very much appreciate your sympathy and your help.

My home is halfway between Deptford and Peckham, so I have no sympathy for myself and deserve none.

In fact, someone just now like a post to remind me how little sympathy I deserve!

https://www.nairaland.com/8293887/look-what-bought-ashamed-myself#133311215

Reverseng:
They've lied about everything. You have your ability to question reality. Use it well instead of believing dead men who are too dead to correct their mistakes or too proud to, even if they're still alive.

The meaning of the bold is, do the science with your own senses to ask and knock and seek for understanding, instead of stupidly believing.

The writers of the Bible did not lie. They merely wrote a science book that was based on their understanding at the time. And being humans, their understanding was flawed, or rather, incomplete.

If you use your senses' ability to question reality, you will understand that when you believe, you merely "think like a child and reason like a child". But you will eventually become a full grown adult and grow in understanding and "put away childish beliefs." "For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; [but] then we shall see face to face. Now we know in part; then we shall know fully, even as I am fully known".

Adam stupidly ignorantly believed, while Eve used her senses to question beliefs so that she may know. And the truth she learnt set them free from slavery in the Garden of Eden.

Reverseng:
1) Human sense is limited.

That is why you must continue to perfect your senses so that your father who art in heaven is glorified by your great works, instead of not developing your senses and not using your senses at all and becoming an ignorant naked slave.

If you do not develop the little sense you might have to reduce its limit, even the little sense that you have will taken from you and will be given to those who use their senses to enslave you like Adam was enslaved in a garden.

Reverseng:
Adam and Eve story is flawed. Your bible is propaganda that gives power to the church, same way news media gives power to the government one way or the other

Read my misconceptions of the Bible post

Link please.

But before I read it, know that the Adam and Eve made up story is not flawed, though it can and has been used as propaganda.

The Adam and Eve clearly shows how depriving you of knowledge will transform you from "equally in the image of God" to a mere naked ignorant alimanjeri slave created from mud, which is what a propagandist will tell you so you can be their slave.

But if you use your own senses to ask and knock and seek for understanding for yourself, you will learn how to free yourself from naked slavery and restore yourself back into the Image of the God you were created in and you will rule and subdue and multiply and be powerful.

All that other stuff I have not commented on is neither here nor there.

I wish the Greek Orthodox Patriarch of Antioch had shown love for his neighbours and faith in his God, and urged Christians to observe a celebratory Christmas with their Muslim neighbours.

That is what I think Jesus would have done.

bemeruca:
Say all you want, I am still gonna call out your degenerate tendencies so defend and support rapists and groomers.

Of course you are going to keep lying to yourself that one supports rapists and groomers raping and grooming our children. No less is expected from the stupid ignorant idiot that you are.

Basilico, please educate your children for us so they can resist rapists and groomers, and be your comfort in your old age, and not be like the stupid idiot please. Merry Christmas, and thank you very much in advance.

Mindlog:
That 3 plaintain sef cost, I got 9 of it at Peckham for £3.

What! So they gbamied at Deptford!?

I blame my laziness for not walking to Peckham, and the wages of my lazy sin is the hell of 3 plantain for £2.

I must repent!

Reverseng:
You did not read my post

I actually did read your post at least 4 times, first when I first responded, second with my last response, and again now before this response and a couple of times in between. And the only reason you think I did not read what you wrote is because you do not understand what I have written that I am certain you did read.

See the below?

Reverseng:
?Why haven't scientist acknowledge Giants?
All scientist are forced to agree that humans evolve from apes...and that's the false knowledge that forced on our children nowadays

If science acknowledge Giants existed,

This shows you do not know what you are talking about, because no scientist will tell you or agree that "humans evolved from apes" even if you tried to force them to, because humans did most definitely not evolve from apes, but humans and apes evolved from a common ancestor. And no scientist will tell you or acknowledge that giants existed, because there is no scientific evidence (as in no one has come across any evidence) that humans significantly larger than the average height have ever existed, and neither can you provide evidence that they ever did exist. And that is why I have given you a definition of science as the use of your own senses, instead of you merely believing what you were told or read.

A very precise Biblical definition of science would actually be, "ask and knock and seek with all your heart and soul and mind", which a certain alleged only begotten Son of a certain Creator taught. If Christ had not used his own senses, he would have not known better and would have ignorantly eaten stones, and would have stupidly bowed down to worship satan in exchange for all the kingdoms of the world, and would have bashed his head on the rocks and died when he threw himself off the mountain. But because he used his own senses to learn, he was intelligent enough to say "Get away Satan! It is written: The Lord, your God, shall you worship and him alone shall you serve".

The very first person we read of in the Bible to do science is God. He can not have created anything if he had not used his senses, and you can go check for yourself to see if there is science involved in the universe or not. The mathematic involved might amaze you. The very second scientist in the Bible is Eve, who did not stupidly ignorantly believe that the eating of the fruits of knowledge would kill her, but instead used her senses to check if what that stupid ignorant naked Adam had told her was true or not. Only to find the fruit was good for food and pleasing to the eye (senses), and also desirable for gaining wisdom (with her senses), so also gave sense to her Adam who was with her, and he ate it. Then the eyes (senses) of both of them were opened, and they realized (sensed) they were naked; so they sewed fig leaves together (did science) and made coverings for themselves, and went on to free themselves from slavery and Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the earth and subdue it and rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground, and also populate the earth with you and I and billions since.

If you do not do science, as in, use your senses, you will be ignorant and naked and enslaved like Adam, and you will most definitely not Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it or rule over anything but some tiny poxy garden in which you will be a naked slave to its owner, and you will definitely not be using the product of science to throw your voice over likely thousands of miles so it can be sensed by me with my senses. And if you live in a country that is full of people that do not use their senses, you will buy tokunbo because you can not make your own, and you will worship the book of the gods created by those who use their senses, and you will cry Nepa! Instead of saying "there is light, and will most likely not live as long as those in countries that value the use of their senses.

Now, I do not expect what you just read to make much sense to you yet, but if you use your own senses to do science (as in reflect) on it, the holy spirit that is inside you (your developed sense), might minister to you so you might sense, and then greater things than he did shall you do, and you'd likely live longer too. Amen.

Reverseng:
Science doesn't acknowledge The creator.
that's why science is incomplete.

To be honest with you, I think science is the very beginning of creation.

Science means the use of the senses, and this is shown in the In the very beginning when God is written to have created the heavens and the earth. Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.

See that bold part? That is God using his senses to survey where his creation will be. Its the same way you will use your senses to survey your land before you start to decide what you will build on it. If you do not use your senses to survey your land you'd likely build it wrong and on sand, and we all know what happens to such buildings.

You definitely can not possibly "Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground" if you did not use your senses, and that is you doing science.

P.s. buda is an unbelieving atheist, and Jesus the scientist and ultimate user of his senses is indeed Lord and saviour of the world, along with Buddha and Mohammed and Isaac Newton and seun the creator of Nairaland and Fela Anikulapo Kuti.

EmperorCaesar:


Nice story but if one fails at all these, what is the worst that could happen to them?

In the end, we overrate ourselves too much. Nobody is worth all the rules. Make them sef adjust to my own way|

A nice read still,OP.

They can or might not have done the work that you might have done, so it is remiss of you to think they are worth what you are worth.

Please do not underrate or belittle yourself by failing like they might.

The gods have provided. Enjoy.

cococandy:
I love this take because that’s exactly what Jesus presented in his message about people holding hard and fast onto religious traditions.

It frustrates me that many don't see this, but Christ always reminds me to forgive everyone for they know not what they do.

I can't forgive the resident stupid idiot though, for he definitely does know the evil he does, and that is just not forgivable despite the fact my not forgiving him makes it certain that I will indeed burn in the hottest part of hell.

Trust me bemeruca, when I am burning in hell, my only delight and joy is you will be feeling the hell fire more than I would because of your surprise at ending up in hell right there with me, because there is absolutely no way any god would let your evil lying stupid ignorant idiot sort in its peaceful beautiful heaven so you can catch your useless trolling cruise and dabaru the entire heaven as you dabaru here.

Bag of onions (about 30) was £3 at Deptford Market yesterday. The 3 peppers were a pound and the 3 plantain was £2.

bemeruca:
I am sure if it was from a certain religion of peace you would have attacked those who exposed it instead and then make excuses for the criminals.

We know you are always fast to defend rapists

As in, if your boys were raped and abused by any religion, I would attack those who abuse them instead of joining you in cutting off their abusing diqs and kicking their asses straight to hell?

Would I also be attacking those who expose the abuse of my own children instead and then make excuses for the criminals too, or is it your opinion that I don't care about your own children's welfare as much as I do care about my own children's because I am a stupid idiot like you are?

raumdeuter:
Religion is restrictive and has many rules, As people grow and get more enlightened, they realize many of the reasons they were religious can be explained with logic
Religion also thrives when there is a lot of mystery and poverty, the more people have knowledge and grow their resources the less religious they become.
Society has become way more enlightened than it used to be, So it makes less sense for enlightened people to believe in some stories of religion that sounds mythical or not following modern day logic

I do not agree that "Religion is restrictive".

When atheist non-believing me reads about Jesus, I see a person who introduced a religion that tried to free people from those who try to restrict others with religion.

Thing is, religions teach people, and especially the ignorant who indeed do need to be restricted from their base human natures of hatred and ignorance, to use their own minds just as Eve and Jesus Christ did, if we but understood what we read in our religion books and abandon our childish ways and practise what is taught.

In fact, its like communism, and capitalism, and conservatism and liberalism and many other isms. One can focus on there bad aspects and either adopt them as restrictive, or one can note their good bits and use them to create what can best be referred to as the Kingdom of God on earth and in our countries and right here amongst us in this thread.

We are after all, or at least can be, the salt of Nairaland if we tried to let the gods be our guide.

cococandy:
And they should. As a matter of urgency.
The greatest loss of the church are the kids who no one protected and they grew up into scornful adults who don’t believe in the sincerity of the teachings of the church.
I agree. I usually don’t speak on other religions because I’ve never been in one or learned their doctrine. But it doesn’t take a genius to know that if these things are happening in Christianity, there’s no way other religions are exempt. We even see examples in the child marriages muslims perform. But most of them are choosing to remain silent and complicit. Disgusting.

I don't believe in gods. In fact, I don't only not believe, I know gods do not exist and are the amazing creations of human beings. The world would be much worse and full of stupid idiots if there were no churches and mosques and other religious institutions to teach what they teach. I can't after all not see how horrible we would all be if we were not taught to love our neighbours even though we often fail.

For that reason, I'm taking my family to church (of England) tonight as I'm certain to be far too lazy to bother waking us all up to go tomorrow.

Mohammed is a prophet, Buddha is an amazing teacher, and Christ lives only when I don't stupidly crucify him in and with my ignorant heart and soul and mind.

basilico:
I mention you because you support many idiotic positions by liberals .

I think I don't call you a stupid idiot because I believe that you are at least capable of determining if the above is as true as you make it out to be and that you can admit it, unlike the resident stupid idiot who most definitely is brain dead.

cococandy:
I’m assuming you mean the Catholic priests who have been found to sexually abuse children? ( No innate bias here as I grew up Catholic. Many of my fond childhood memories were made in the church. I was even in juniorate to become a nun at some point in my life. Long story .)

To answer your question, I don’t know how many conservatives defend those priests. For those of them who do, shame on them. However, I know a lot of conservatives do defend predatory evangelical pastors. Shame on all of them too.

It grinds my gears when people want to “care about kids” as a front for their agenda instead of truly caring about kids. So many of these churches do not ostracize the ministers found wanting. They hide, cover up, transfer and sometimes outrightly support them.

If only they could be about the life they claim to be about.

The Archbishop of Canterbury recently resigned because he did not take action against a paedophile priest.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c4gvpyzxvjpo

There are those asking for the resignation of the Archbishop of York too.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/dec/22/archbishop-of-york-stephen-cottrell-david-tudor-case.

And the former Canterbury had to resign as a priest.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/dec/18/george-carey-former-archbishop-of-cantebury-resignation-church-sexual-abuse-case-bbc-investigation-david-tudor-ntwnfb

There will also be [another] review of safeguarding because of the scandals or the Church of England will just become emptier. The recommendations of the review will apply to all religious organisations, including Islam, Hindu etc, and anywhere else of similar child-adult structure.

basilico:
Budaatum.
These fuhggots adopted two boys. They abused them and distributed videos of them raping their adopted kids.
I mention you because you support many diotic positions by liberals I would also mention Ijebos for the same reason but he ain't got no brains at all
cc obrigardo.

These particular fuhggots must be castrated. And I mean, their diqs and balls should be cut off without anesthetics, after which I'd want them kept alive in an all male prison for a long while.

Do know however that that is not a punishment for gay people who are not child molesters and or abusers. Basically, not all gays are fuhggots.

basilico:
My brain cells work very well. I'm a truth seeker and obviously biased against the vicious evil left.
They filthy left has to convince me it's not propaganda in most of their reporting or actions.
I'm diffetent from you who is prejudiced and can see no evil at all from your favorite liberals.

Merry Christmas Basilico.

triplechoice:
Sexual abuse is an intentional act ,if not, anyone who inadvertently touches another sensitive body part in a very tight space, an overcrowded elevated, for instance is guilty of sexual abuse.

"Sexual abuse is an intentional act", is like you claiming you raped me only if you intended to rape me, and if you didn't intend to rape me but raped me any way, it is subjective of me to claim you raped me, and if its not in a "very tight space" its not even rape.

I hopefully do not need to say I see it different.

triplechoice:
There's no evidence from her story of sexual abuse. What she described is exactly the same a doctor in any hospital will perform first on any female child to ascertain if she has been sexually abused.

There is a lot of evidence of sexual abuse in her story. She after all narrated that her 6 year old daughter was raped by her own son. And that's apart from her own sexual assault of her daughter.

For your information, sexual abuse and rape can be subjective, and thankfully, it is subject to the abused or raped person, regardless of what the raper or abuser may think or the space in which the person raped or abused. If it wasn't subjective, and if it was down to the abuser or raper, a sexual abused and raped person would not have a valid allegation.

triplechoice:
I accept your psychological abuse, but reject sexual and physical abuse.

There is no requirement for you to accept anything I say, Triple, and neither are you under any obligation to.

Since your subjectivity is equally as valid as my own subjectivity as far as I am concerned, my poison does not have to be your poison.