"then you know that raping children is inexcusable" yes, I do know that. Are you implying I don't think that? I'm defending Stallman, and Stallman never did that either.

Notice how my whole argument has been DENOUNCING these things while noting that Stallman has changed his opinions on them (and never did them!). Go find one quote where I defended any of these actions. So why now are you trying to claim I'm actually okay with these things? Because I'm not.

You were talking about why he lost his job, so me bringing up the catalyst for that is perfectly reasonable in my opinion. Especially when it shows that a lot of it was sheer lying AND showcases his current opinion that it is bad, which was clearly present before this whole thing started.

I am opposed to child rape proponents, but thankfully Stallman is not a proponent of that. Stallman has always been a proponent of consent, and when he came to understand children cannot consent under any circumstances, his opinions changed to reflect that.

I don't understand your motives for putting words into my mouth and claiming I'm defending child rape (when again, I have explicitly stated on multiple occasions that it is wrong). But I don't appreciate it. I'm done, have a nice day.

EDIT: Okay now this prick is just making stuff up, about me and about Stallman. He never said anything even REMOTELY SIMILAR to what has been said below (and again, has CHANGED the opinions that sparked this argument in the first place completely, last stated over a decade ago). I wonder what would happen if I told them I am a minor myself?

My whole point, for the last time, is that his OLD opinions are WRONG, and that his CURRENT opinions are RIGHT. The mental gymnastics being used to paint me as someone who supports his OLD opinions is insane.

EDIT 2: The reason I still replied after being told "bye" is because I was being slandered lol. I'm sure if someone slandered this prick they'd do the exact same thing.