Why is it not permitted to call someone a "pedophile" or ...

[K9Buck]

… a child molester? Don't misunderstand. I'm not complaining and I have no need to call someone such a thing. I realize it's a horrible smear, but it seems that all other smears are permitted. And I support permitting such expression. After all, myself or anyone else here can use the "ignore" function if someone's post(s) sufficiently offend them. It's just that it seems inconsistent to permit people to call others "racist" or "white supremacist" or "faggot", etc. but ban the "pedophile" pejorative.

 

[bodecea]

Reminds CRCs too much of their own.

 

[K9Buck]

Reminds CRCs too much of their own.

Ha ha. Nice retort.

 

[Auld Phart]

… a child molester? Don't misunderstand. I'm not complaining and I have no need to call someone such a thing. I realize it's a horrible smear, but it seems that all other smears are permitted. And I support permitting such expression. After all, myself or anyone else here can use the "ignore" function if someone's post(s) sufficiently offend them. It's just that it seems inconsistent to permit people to call others "racist" or "white supremacist" or "faggot", etc. but ban the "pedophile" pejorative.

Personal attack, usually

 

[bluzman61]

… a child molester? Don't misunderstand. I'm not complaining and I have no need to call someone such a thing. I realize it's a horrible smear, but it seems that all other smears are permitted. And I support permitting such expression. After all, myself or anyone else here can use the "ignore" function if someone's post(s) sufficiently offend them. It's just that it seems inconsistent to permit people to call others "racist" or "white supremacist" or "faggot", etc. but ban the "pedophile" pejorative.

I have NO problem calling a pervert that has sex with minors a PEDOPHILE. That's what these disgusting individuals ARE, PEDOPHILES.

 

[Auld Phart]

Question answered,

thread closed.

 

[flacaltenn]

… a child molester? Don't misunderstand. I'm not complaining and I have no need to call someone such a thing. I realize it's a horrible smear, but it seems that all other smears are permitted. And I support permitting such expression. After all, myself or anyone else here can use the "ignore" function if someone's post(s) sufficiently offend them. It's just that it seems inconsistent to permit people to call others "racist" or "white supremacist" or "faggot", etc. but ban the "pedophile" pejorative.

I know the thread is now closed, but I can't resist... Certainly the rule only applies to attacks on members. Not on public figures. And it's HARD to pick out the WORST types of "personal attacks" to ban... But if you leave the WORST ONES as an option,,, they will certainly get OVER-USED by the low effort flamers....

So way back in the Cretacious Era of USMB, the 3 WORST personal attacks were staked out as "off limits".. Those are family, bestiality, and pedophilia... The rational really is -- take those away and flamer has to get more creative and entertaining...