You are about to join the
Discussion : Bail for child porn accused
Discussion is closed !1-15> 16-30 > Total 20 comments
2008-12-03 09:07:15 -
porn
2008-05-04 05:54:52 -
send child porn movie
2006-08-01 10:32:14 -
asd
2006-07-21 15:54:44 -
njhmönopıjşlmdvx
2006-06-07 09:20:27 - AHHH
EVERYONE THAT POSTED IS A RAPEIST!!!!AHHH
2006-06-07 09:19:27 -
have a 16 year old friend who is showing herself nude Which i Think is wrong
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2006-05-10 05:32:02 - mohamed
hiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2006-05-03 06:04:17 - Mike
That child got TBagged hahahaha
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2005-11-03 12:31:13 - Voice of basic reasoning
It is in my view that young children, especially boys, search out porn on the net as early as 8 years of age because they are interested in their sexuality. I myself was first aware of a need for something sexual in nature (although i had no clue what was happening) as early as age 5! I watched a report in my politics class about problems in society regarding porn and underage sex and was shocked to an 8 year old talk of his sexual encounters with his 9 year old girlfriend. If society oppresses children rather than teach and educate them about their sexuality then they will find out for themselves. Indeed, one of the greatest civilisations on earth, the Romans believed a girl came of age at 12 (when they hit puberty) and could be married and have children. Boys came of age at 15 because they were more imature than girls. This is a logical and well thought out decision based on pure reasoning: girl is able to have children so girl is allowed to marry and have children. Boys are more immature than girls so they are able to marry and have children later than girls - at age 15. I am not saying that this sytem should be put in place but that the Romans addressed it and educated their children to be ready for it. At the moment children are given next to nothing before they hit puberty and are forced to reacte by instict. They are capable of complex relationships if they are supported rather than suppressed. Below the start of puberty i believe girls (and boys) should be councilled as to what to expect and this will give them the knowledge they need. Pedophilia is not an illness just like homosexuality is not an illness. Society should work to educate people rather than denouce and suppress them if a better society is to be made.
I haven't put my name down because:
1) It isn't necessary
2) I feel a degree of fear thanks to those people who are filled with hatred, despite, in my view, not doing much to justify it
3) Just because someone doesn't put down their name, it doesn't mean they haven't put all their feelings and sole into what they have written
Take my views as you will, i'd like to hear what people think of them (logical, structered response is preferable, although i understand people like 'Sue', 'Brenda' and 'Murray' find that hard)
3)
2006-06-07 09:17:20 - Fresh prince of belair
Yo u....yea u!..... don't give me that look cause that look will get ya ki*lled!!
2006-06-07 09:15:34 - DUMB
MY GIRL FRIEND FLASHES HER BOOBS AND I DON'T GIVE A S*H*I*T!! AND WE ARE ONLY 12 LOL
2006-05-28 15:12:47 -
I have a 16 year old friend who is showing herself nude Which i Think is wrong
2006-05-10 05:32:02 -
hiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
2006-05-03 06:04:17 -
That child got TBagged hahahaha
2005-11-03 12:31:13 - Voice of basic reasoning
It is in my view that young children, especially boys, search out porn on the net as early as 8 years of age because they are interested in their sexuality. I myself was first aware of a need for something sexual in nature (although i had no clue what was happening) as early as age 5! I watched a report in my politics class about problems in society regarding porn and underage sex and was shocked to an 8 year old talk of his sexual encounters with his 9 year old girlfriend. If society oppresses children rather than teach and educate them about their sexuality then they will find out for themselves. Indeed, one of the greatest civilisations on earth, the Romans believed a girl came of age at 12 (when they hit puberty) and could be married and have children. Boys came of age at 15 because they were more imature than girls. This is a logical and well thought out decision based on pure reasoning: girl is able to have children so girl is allowed to marry and have children. Boys are more immature than girls so they are able to marry and have children later than girls - at age 15. I am not saying that this sytem should be put in place but that the Romans addressed it and educated their children to be ready for it. At the moment children are given next to nothing before they hit puberty and are forced to reacte by instict. They are capable of complex relationships if they are supported rather than suppressed. Below the start of puberty i believe girls (and boys) should be councilled as to what to expect and this will give them the knowledge they need. Pedophilia is not an illness just like homosexuality is not an illness. Society should work to educate people rather than denouce and suppress them if a better society is to be made.
I haven't put my name down because:
1) It isn't necessary
2) I feel a degree of fear thanks to those people who are filled with hatred, despite, in my view, not doing much to justify it
3) Just because someone doesn't put down their name, it doesn't mean they haven't put all their feelings and sole into what they have written
Take my views as you will, i'd like to hear what people think of them (logical, structered response is preferable, although i understand people like 'Sue', 'Brenda' and 'Murray' find that hard)
3)
2005-11-03 12:30:41 - Voice of basic reasoning
I've read everything said here very carefully and the aspect that I have picked up upon the most is that 'You should be so lucky' and 'Anti-iconomach' take the time to write structured, well thought-out and logical arguments as regards their beliefs. 'Brenda', 'Murray' and 'Sue' on the other hand, seem to be very narrow minded. I expected a logical, intelligent and even adult reply, but i was disappointed to find nothing but viscious attacks that show little ATTEMPT to understand other people's views. This is upsetting because it only supports the arguments of 'You should be so lucky' and 'Anit-iconomach'. No intelligent person would understand or support arrogant, illogical, ramblings that come from people so set in their ways that they are filled with intollerance and hatred.
I agree with 'Anti-iconomach' that homosexuality has a role in this argument. It was not long ago that homosexuality was regarded as a mental disorder and those people who professed themselves as being homosexuals, were treated horribly. One of the world's (in many people's views) greatest playwrites, Oscar Wilde, was imprisoned for being a homosexual. Now his works are performed widely, by such figures as Judy Dench, Colin Firth and Rupert Everett to name but a few. This shows that something viewed as wrong can, through time, be accepted as normal. I would hope that no-one in this time period would claim to be right with the utmost certainty. For in 100 years their views would be regarded as foolish bickering of a past long forgotten if they stated them as CORRECT FULLSTOP
I believe that persecution of Pedophiles will only force them deeper underground and create a bigger problem than there already is. I would hate to fear for my life as I'm sure (having heard testimonies) that many pedophiles do. To those that cause this fear I say that you are the worst kind of sickening scum on this earth to wish to cause such suffering to anyone! A policy of 'an-eye-for-an-eye' will only make things worse!
I do not class myself as a pedophile although i have had a relationship of sorts witha young girl (I was 17, she was 13). This was mutual attraction and no laws were broken; however, we found that we could not stay together because we (mainly i) would be severely persectuted and misunderstood. I ask anyone who will answer, what is wrong with making someone happy at such an early age? We felt overjoyed when we were together (i again remind readers that no sexual activity occured past kissing and holding each other) so why would people shone us? I hate people that would do that and it is precisely that that makes pedophiles go underground and seek other ways to satiate their desires. (I myself have had no other relationships with girls more than a year younger than myself and i do not condone any form of child-pornography). If pedophiles were allowed to be open about their feelings and beliefs in a society that did not shone them then there would be no need for porn.
(continued in next section: please read on)
2005-09-01 21:32:19 -
Very nice
2005-06-15 00:47:53 - you should be so lucky
An intriguing set of arguments, the moral crusaders(Brenda and sue) battle out against logic(anti-iconomac). no doubt my opinions will be voided, but has any of you actually consulted the opinion of a pedophile? do you know what they really think?
I will tell you, i am a pedophile. I am only 17, but i have known of my orientation since i was 14, and the one thing that any true pedophile would never condone, allow or by volition of action allow to occur is the harm of a child. IT IS UNTHINKABLE. As unthinkable as most heterosexual men would view raping or harming adult women. Only a few pedophiles ever harm children, in fact the majority of child molesters(and I define that as the WILLFULL PYSICAL OR SEXUAL ABUSE OF CHILDREN AGAINST THEIR WILL, taking into account the fact that children DO have sexuality and DO have FREE WILL to choose)are not pedophiles, but are sexually frustrated bastards that see children as easy to overpower and rape. I have learnt this from many sites that deal with pedophillia from a logical perspective using statistical evidence and science, most of which are written by 'normal people' who view pedophillia it for what it is, a sadly misunderstood sexuality. If you wish to confirm this, please visit www.mhamic.org/sources/wilson&cox.htm please read the prisoners statement overview by the investigators, do they seem evil to you? they seem on average very caring for children to me.
The bottom line is that you people should not be judgeing my kind morally, since pedophiles obviously adhere to different morals to begin with. going down the moral argument on this subject (or on any in my opinion)is a waste of time. only logic and science can solve disputes, the kinds of attitude shown in my quoted website. to base ones opinions on blind moral belief is pure folly since all peoples cultures and upbringings differ and will always conflict.
Please do your research, as i have done, and realise that erotic or sexual imagery of children can be done with legal, parental and most importantly, the child in questions, consent without harming or abusing the child. There is no reason to denounce such clean child imagery, and if there was a legal repository of child erotica on the internet that i knew contained only images of little girls who had chosen of their own volition to pose i would gladly partake of it with great happiness to know none were being hurt or abused. Bear in mind also, that children ARE sexual beings, this is a scientific fact, not speculation; and repression of their childhood sexuality by society and 'Good' people WILL damage their personality later in life. It probably damaged you, and me.
I am aware of the irony that i seem so rightous and yet i dont give my name, this is because i am not rightous--i am scientifically corect in my opinions and since i am logical, fear having my skull smashed apart by people who disagree with me. i also know that you fear my kind, as much as i do yours. dont bother to try and make me more afraid than i am already with pointless threats. Please do your research, i wish you well in it (use google).
please respond to this, i would like to hear your views.
1-15> 16-30 >
Total 20 comments
