Respect should initially be given to everyone you meet to start with but the respect can be lost due to that person's actions. Nobody has a right to respect when they are disrespectful themselves.

Clearly you haven't had a spanking. It doesn't hurt for just a second and those who respond in that way would have a masochistic streak in them which as far as I am aware is extremely uncommon in children.

I think the creator of this debate may be referring to this http://www.smokyraincounseling.com/articles/the-new-age-movement/

I was spanked as a child for wrongdoing and due to that I soon learnt that if I did something wrong I would get another spanking. Spanking as a form of punishment for something a child has done wrong, as long as it is within reason, is not violence for the sake of it. The problem I see with the argument for no spanking is that the children soon learn that if there is no serious repercussion for what they do, they can just run riot and know that there is nothing major a parent (or a school teacher) can do. I have heard it from childrens mouths where they say "I might get an evening's detention... Big deal"

What about those who have a university education and still go into prostitution? The fact is that there are people who chose to go into prostitution and enjoy the sex trade.

I agree. Through regulation, there can be better controls.

You have just contradicted yourself. In the first part you said nobody wants to see people naked, and in the next part you say that in today's society they want to see people naked all the time.

I have been studying this debate for a while through newspaper reports and TV documentaries etc. and there seems to be a general consensus based on what I have seen that society in general is not really fussed as long as sexuality is not involved. In fact there is a man in jail in the UK called Steven Gough who has been battling for the right to be naked and although there have been a few hecklers, there has been a lot of support for him. If society in general says it is okay, then why should it be illegal just because you prefer to see people clothed?

It is classed as sexual assault by penetration under Section 2 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003

A person (A) commits an offence if—

(a)he intentionally penetrates the vagina or anus of another person (B) with a part of his body or anything else,

(b)the penetration is sexual,

(c)B does not consent to the penetration, and

(d)A does not reasonably believe that B consents.

Rape (section 1) and sexual assault by penetration (section 2) both carry a maximum penalty of life imprisonment.

The explanatory notes state that this offence can be committed by a man or woman. The notes say

Section 2 covers the situation where a person (A) intentionally penetrates the vagina or anus of another person (B). The offence is committed where the penetration is by a part of A’s body (for example, a finger) or anything else, (for example, a bottle); where the penetration is sexual (as defined in section 78), so that it excludes, for example, intimate searches and medical procedures; where B does not consent to the penetration; and where A does not reasonably believe that B consents. What is said in the note to section 1 about whether a belief in consent is reasonable also applies here. This and all subsequent offences in the Bill save the offence at section 5 can be committed by a male or female, against a male or female. Subsection (3) provides that sections 75 and 76 apply to this offence. Sections 75 and 76 deal with evidential and conclusive presumptions about consent.

The report posted states the following....

Sweat produced by the axillary apocrine glands is odorless. Secretions from the apocrine glands, however, can be converted to odoriferous compounds by bacteria (Corynebacteria), which results in the formation of the unique “human axillary odor”. Axillary osmidrosis patients (538G/G homozygote or G/A heterozygote) were observed to have significantly more numerous and larger-sized axillary apocrine glands as compared with those in subjects carrying the A/A homozygote.

It also says ABCC11 WT (Gly180) would be responsible for the secretion of preodoriferous compounds from the axillary apocrine gland.

ABCC11 did not originate in North Korea (Northern Mongoloids). Everyone has the ABCC11 gene and according to the report posted, wet/dry types of earwax are determined by the SNP c.538G > A in the ABCC11 gene; G/A and G/G genotypes give the wet-type and A/A the dry-type. There is a hypothesis that a c.538G (wet-type) → c.538A (dry-type) mutation may have occurred some 40,000 years ago in a tribe of the ancient Northern Mongoloids.

Presence of the ABCC11 gene does not indicate genetic superiority and neither does the c.538G (wet-type) → c.538A (dry-type) mutation.

I think that global warming is part of Earth's natural cycle of warming and freezing. There is scientific evidence of many ice ages and many hot climatic periods.