should peadohpiles be allowed to live ?

[joebbowers]

Still, I don't think that your recollections are helping your point.  I mean, I knew girls that were pregnant by the time they were in 8th grade too.  But didn't their pregnancy itself kind of demonstrate that they probably weren't ready to be having sex in the first place?  I mean, I remember dudes begging girls to have abortions.

I think that if they were able to get pregnant, that proves that they were ready to have sex. Evolution favors procreation over the needs of the individual. Society shames them for it, but there is no reason that they couldn't have raised a happy, healthy child, continued their education and became productive members of society. Teen moms do it literally every day.

In any case, I think you're confusing two different things.  Being sexually curious and being sexually mature.  And I just don't think that being sexually curious isn't the same thing as being prepared to actually have sex with a much older woman, let alone a woman that is ostensibly acting as your guardian, or deal with whatever issues one might have surrounding that experience.

You missed my point. My point is that children are very sexual beings, despite what society would have you believe. I did not say anything about their readiness for sex other than stating that I, personally, was.

What issues? What negative issues may have arisen out of my 10 year old self having sex with my 20 year old babysitter that are not simply artificial morality issues imposed by a sexually-repressed society?

[Van Persie]

Child pornography, be it production of, distribution of or possession of, is intolerable to anyone who isn't a depraved, sick puppy. Are there any decent vets in China Joe?

What if it's produced, distributed and consumed by children, as is often the case when our young people have access to a cell phone or a web cam and some alone time?

Timo, then it is just a damn tragedy and makes me weep.

[Van Persie]

That sure sounds like the same kind of language people use to describe homosexuals.

Not me.

I know that as a Christian you're not used to backing up your statements with facts and logic. You throw out your emotional opinions and insult anyone who doesn't share them. That doesn't make you right, and that isn't how you convince someone they're wrong.

Facts and logic, when it comes to something like child pornography, can bite me. If you don't simply fucking know it's wrong then you are a tragedy, and need help, and will certainly never have a meaningful relationship with any woman. Discussion over.

[Timo]

I think that if they were able to get pregnant, that proves that they were ready to have sex. Evolution favors procreation over the needs of the individual. Society shames them for it, but there is no reason that they couldn't have raised a happy, healthy child, continued their education and became productive members of society. Teen moms do it literally every day.

The fact that they are physically capable of carrying a child doesn't mean that they are emotionally or financially ready to do so.  We can talk about evolution until we're blue in the face but the fact of the matter is that evolution has instilled in us more than the ability to reproduce in our early teen years.  It's also instilled in us, among other things, the ability to create complex societies in which having children in our early teen years can have a profoundly negative impact on our quality of life.

To be sure, there are indeed plenty of young single moms that were able to get their lives in order.  I know some of them.  But I think that this is the same sort of sleight of hand we usually see employed by economic conservatives.  You can't act as if something like a pregnancy at age 14 is not, in general, a very bad thing to happen in this society (and for more than "moral" reasons) just because there are people that have managed to overcome it.

You missed my point. My point is that children are very sexual beings, despite what society would have you believe. I did not say anything about their readiness for sex other than stating that I, personally, was.

What issues? What negative issues may have arisen out of my 10 year old self having sex with my 20 year old babysitter that are not simply artificial morality issues imposed by a sexually-repressed society?

I completely understood your point.  I just doubt that you're being completely honest with yourself.  Maybe I'm wrong and you were an exceptional little boy in that regard.  Only Allah knows.  I'm just saying that I doubt it.

As far as negative issues go, I'd imagine that they'd be the same sorts of issues that other sexual abuse victims deal with, ie anything from control, trust and anxiety issues to depression, ptsd and substance abuse problems later in life.  I know they've got support groups for this sort of thing and that there are men out there that are to this day ashamed and embarrassed about things that happened between them and their babysitters.  How much of that is due to our society being sexually repressed or whatever is anyone's guess.  I don't think that this sort of thing is possible to completely isolate as a variable in these sorts of discussions, nor do I think these things should be isolated.

[Timo]

Timo, then it is just a damn tragedy and makes me weep.

Just curious.  What exactly makes you weep about it?  I'd imagine that our concerns overlap but that yours go beyond mine, what with you being a Christian and all.

[Dante]

I know that as a Christian you're not used to backing up your statements with facts and logic. You throw out your emotional opinions and insult anyone who doesn't share them. That doesn't make you right, and that isn't how you convince someone they're wrong.

Facts and logic, when it comes to something like child pornography, can bite me. If you don't simply fucking know it's wrong then you are a tragedy, and need help, and will certainly never have a meaningful relationship with any woman. Discussion over.

Well, that was easy.

[One Above All]

Then the answer is not no, you're saying you would not have sex with her right now, which is a non-answer that deflects the question.

Fine. The answer is "not right now". Is that better? Anyway, you don't see sex the way I see it. To you, it's for pleasure. For me, it's for love. If I was going to have sex with anyone[1], it'd be because I loved them. I would even have sex with the ugliest person in the world if I loved them.

And for the last time, the name's One Above All. Get it right.

1.	And I'm bisexual, BTW. And no, it's not dishonest of me to omit irrelevant information. It would only be relevant if I was homosexual, in which case my opinion would be moot.

[joebbowers]

I would even have sex with the ugliest person in the world if I loved them.

But would you love the ugliest person in the world? Romantic love.

And for the last time, the name's One Above All. Get it right.

Yeah, I'm not calling you that.

[One Above All]

But would you love the ugliest person in the world? Romantic love.

Fuck yes. You're still young[1], so I see how that might confuse you, but appearances don't mean a damn thing.

Yeah, I'm not calling you that.

It's a fictional character from the Marvel universe; no different than Lucifer, Vishnu or Spider-man.

1.	From my PoV.

[Van Persie]

Timo, then it is just a damn tragedy and makes me weep.

Just curious.  What exactly makes you weep about it?  I'd imagine that our concerns overlap but that yours go beyond mine, what with you being a Christian and all.

The loss of innocence, the fact that sex has become such a commodity made all the more exploitable by technology. Peer pressure. My own daughter is on the cusp of puberty. It's scary.

[Van Persie]

I know that as a Christian you're not used to backing up your statements with facts and logic. You throw out your emotional opinions and insult anyone who doesn't share them. That doesn't make you right, and that isn't how you convince someone they're wrong.

Facts and logic, when it comes to something like child pornography, can bite me. If you don't simply fucking know it's wrong then you are a tragedy, and need help, and will certainly never have a meaningful relationship with any woman. Discussion over.

Well, that was easy.

If you can stomach discussing this with him, go ahead. He makes my skin crawl. I signed back up to the forum to make my point to him, from now on I avoid him.

[joebbowers]

Facts and logic ... can bite me.

When the evidence demonstrates that legalizing the possession of child porn would lead to fewer children being raped and you're still in favor of banning it, it becomes obvious that it's not really about protecting children. It's about banning things that make you uncomfortable, that don't fit in with your concept of normal.

[Nam]

Facts and logic ... can bite me.

When the evidence demonstrates that legalizing the possession of child porn would lead to fewer children being raped and you're still in favor of banning it, it becomes obvious that it's not really about protecting children. It's about banning things that make you uncomfortable, that don't fit in with your concept of normal.

If it would be happening less, than where is all this child pornography coming from? What? What's already floating out there? You'd think just like those into regular porn would get sick and tired of the old and want something new.

Oh, but, that's different, right? There'd be less children being sexually abused just to please people like you.

-Nam

[Dante]

Well, that was easy.

If you can stomach discussing this with him, go ahead. He makes my skin crawl. I signed back up to the forum to make my point to him, from now on I avoid him.

I can stomach any subject when facts, logic, and thought are used in the discussion. What I've found I have a hard time stomaching are discussions based on preconceived attitudes and emotional platitudes, such as yours.

[Zankuu]

But would you love the ugliest person in the world? Romantic love.

Fuck yes. You're still young, so I see how that might confuse you, but appearances don't mean a damn thing.

I find it hard to believe that you could connect emotionally and physically with someone you consider "ugly" and aren't attracted to. In fact, I'd go so far to say it isn't possible. But I don't want to derail this thread. I can start a topic on it if you're willing to discuss is.

[One Above All]

I can start a topic on it if you're willing to discuss is.

Bring it on.[1]

1.	This is a reference to "Megas XLR".

[Nam]

But would you love the ugliest person in the world? Romantic love.

Fuck yes. You're still young, so I see how that might confuse you, but appearances don't mean a damn thing.

I find it hard to believe that you could connect emotionally and physically with someone you consider "ugly" and aren't attracted to. In fact, I'd go so far to say it isn't possible. But I don't want to derail this thread. I can start a topic on it if you're willing to discuss is.

If they are "settling", I can believe it but if someone finds another "repulsive" physically, I don't see how they can truly love them. Perhaps they are confusing lust with love?

-Nam

[Traveler]

...Society likes to pretend that children aren't sexual but they are. Most begin masturbating years before puberty. We like to forget that historically women girls were married as soon as they could menstruate. Not rarely, not just sometimes, but this was the norm.

And here we get to an important point that I think has been missed. Girls and boys are different. Women carry the burden of the consequences of early pregnancies, and I think they are often more vulnerable to advances that end them up in trouble. I'm generalizing here, but many teenage boys just want to get laid. Teenage girls want to be loved. This leads to mixed signals, girls having sex to be liked, boys having other ideas, and the girls get hurt. You are not a girl, Joe. I cannot repeat this enough. I am a woman. I was a girl. I've spoken with lots of girls and women. And many, many of them have been hurt by this difference in outlook. Anything you say or feel about being a young, sexual being, cannot immediately be applied to the female side of the equation.

And saying something is anonymous in this day and age? Please. Be serious. Nothing is beyond reach. A child in a porno image can be identified now, tomorrow, or next year or decades later. It will always hang over them as a possibility. I would feel humiliated if I knew there were such out there of me. Heck, after this discussion I might never have sex again for fear they'll film it and distribute it. Ick.

Edited to add: Any society that marries girls off at menstruation were wrong. Those women were oppressed. I defy you to find any society that does such where the women have freedom or equality. They are property.

[joebbowers]

Got it, most of mankind since the beginning of time was wrong, and now we finally have our perfect morality, which will never change.

[One Above All]

Got it, most of mankind since the beginning of time was wrong, and now we finally have our perfect morality, which will never change.

Can anyone say "strawman"? I'm sure you can, joebbowers, since you seem so fond of it.

[joebbowers]

If it would be happening less, than where is all this child pornography coming from? What? What's already floating out there?

All what child pornography? What deluge of child porn have you been flooded with? Is AOL sending child porn-laden CDs to your door to try 50 hours free?

On the other hand, try to throw a rock on the internet without hitting some gay porn. It's errrywhere. And yet homosexuals and pedophiles represent approximately equal percentages of society.

You'd think just like those into regular porn would get sick and tired of the old and want something new.

I think there is enough existing content to keep consumers satisfied, yes.

Oh, but, that's different, right? There'd be less children being sexually abused just to please people like you.

No, there'd be more! Decreased access to pornography leads to increased sexual crime. Have you been sleeping?

[Nam]

Joe, you're an idiot. You really are. I mean, if a person who watches legal porn now can get sick of what's out there now, and there's a lot of legal porn out there, then there'd be no reason for people to make more of it since there's plenty out there?

It'd be a commodity. A business, if made legal. People would exploit it[1] just to make more money from it, and the consumer will want more newer stuff, they'll get sick of the old stuff.

You are not only an idiot but also full of shit.

-Nam

1.	and the children

[Traveler]

Got it, most of mankind since the beginning of time was wrong, and now we finally have our perfect morality, which will never change.

No, no, and no. We are not perfect, and I despair of us ever being perfect. Human society is so screwed up sexually that I despair of us ever learning a better way.

[Quesi]

The consensus among experts is that increased access to pornography reduces the number of sexual crimes. I will read any scientific paper that says otherwise, but I believe that the only articles you will find that claim the opposite are the sole opinions of the authors, and not based on solid research.

Longitudinal study

A longitudinal study of 341 convicted child molesters in America found that pornography's use correlated significantly with their rate of sexually re-offending. Frequency of pornography use was primarily a further risk factor for higher-risk offenders, when compared with lower-risk offenders, and use of highly deviant pornography correlated with increased recidivism risk for all groups.[5] The majority of men who have been charged with or convicted of child pornography offenses show pedophilic profiles on phallometric testing.[6] A study with a sample of 201 adult male child pornography offenders using police databases examined charges or convictions after the index child pornography offense(s). 56% of the sample had a prior criminal record, 24% had prior contact sexual offenses, and 15% had prior child pornography offenses. One-third were concurrently charged with other crimes at the time they were charged for child pornography offenses. 17% of the sample offended again in some way during this time, and 4% committed a new contact sexual offense. Child pornography offenders with prior criminal records were significantly more likely to offend again in any way during the follow-up period. Child pornography offenders who had committed a prior or concurrent contact sexual offense were the most likely to offend again, either generally or sexually.[7]


Mayo Clinic studies

According to the Mayo Clinic of the U.S.A., studies and case reports indicate that 30% to 80% of individuals who viewed child pornography and 76% of individuals who were arrested for Internet child pornography had molested a child, however they note that it is difficult to know how many people progress from computerized child pornography to physical acts against children and how many would have progressed to physical acts without the computer being involved.[8]
American Federal Bureau of Prisons

A study conducted by psychologists at the American Federal Bureau of Prisons has concluded that "many Internet child pornography offenders may be undetected child molesters", finding a slightly higher percentage of molesters among child pornography offenders than the Mayo Clinic study, though they also "cautioned that offenders who volunteer for treatment may differ in their behavior from those who do not seek treatment." The study was withdrawn by Bureau officials from a peer-reviewed journal which had accepted it for publication, due to concerns that the results were not applicable to the general population of offenders.[citation needed] Some researchers argued that the findings "do not necessarily apply to the large and diverse group of adults who have at some point downloaded child pornography, and whose behavior is far too variable to be captured by a single survey".[9] Child protection advocates and psychologists like Fred Berlin, who heads the National Institute for the Study, Prevention and Treatment of Sexual Trauma, expressed disapproval over the failure to publish the report.[9] A 1987 report by the U.S.A. National Institute of Justice described "a disturbing correlation" between traders of child pornography and acts of child molestation.[10]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relationship_between_child_pornography_and_child_sexual_abuse

If Joe says "consensus among experts" enough times, it might just come true.

[pianodwarf]

"a disturbing correlation" between traders of child pornography and acts of child molestation

And what do we know about correlation...?  (Which is all that the studies you cite demonstrate.)

[One Above All]

Thanks, Lucifer, for playing the role of the Christian.

Learn the difference between speaking like a theist and arguing like one. You're embarrassing yourself. The "dodging" you perceived had a subtle message encoded underneath it. I see it has gone over your head. Not to worry; I'm sure other, more intelligent, atheists got it.

[joebbowers]

If Joe says "consensus among experts" enough times, it might just come true.

I've already read both of the studies you mentioned, they are highly flawed as even their authors repeatedly point out. First, the claim that 30-80% of child porn consumers have molested a child is ridiculous. 30-80% is hugely vague and it's impossible to know how many child porn consumers are really out there, or how many of them have molested children.

Sure, you can interview pedophiles arrested for molesting children and ask them if they viewed child pornography, and I'm sure most of them did. I'm sure most rapists of adult victims also viewed pornography. I'm sure most of the people arrested for unpaid parking tickets also viewed pornography. Is there a connection between bad parking and pornography use or are these numbers simply reflecting the fact that most people watch porn?

[joebbowers]

Joe, you're an idiot. You really are. I mean, if a person who watches legal porn now can get sick of what's out there now, and there's a lot of legal porn out there, then there'd be no reason for people to make more of it since there's plenty out there?

Nobody is sick of the porn that's out there now as nobody's ever seen all of it. If it were made illegal to produce, there's enough to watch it 24 hours a day for the rest of your life and not see it all. They continue to make new porn because they can and people buy it.

[jaimehlers]

I'm completely against child[1] pornography, whether it's production, distribution, or ownership.  There's a very simple reason for this; in order for it to exist at all, someone has to make it.  In order for someone to make it, they have to use a child in it.  To use a child in something like that has the very real potential to do lasting harm to them.  There is no good argument for risking such serious harm to a child in something like that so that adults can get sexual enjoyment out of it.  That includes so-called "virtual" porn.  Even if it involves a virtual construct instead of an actual child, it's still got a lot of potential for causing problems that can and should be avoided.

1.	child, in this case, means someone who's prepubescent or within a year or so of when pubescence begins