Author Topic: should peadohpiles be allowed to live ?  (Read 27231 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Traveler

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2056
  • Darwins +142/-2
  • Gender: Female
  • no god required
    • I am a Forum Guide
    • Gryffin Designs
Re: should peadohpiles be allowed to live ?
« Reply #406 on: June 20, 2012, 08:21:33 PM »
...They do experiment sexually in different ways at ages we are uncomfortable with sometimes...

Of course. But we're not talking about children exploring their bodies. We're talking about adults and children together.
If we ever travel thousands of light years to a planet inhabited by intelligent life, let's just make patterns in their crops and leave.

Offline rickymooston

Re: should peadohpiles be allowed to live ?
« Reply #407 on: June 20, 2012, 08:30:39 PM »
...They do experiment sexually in different ways at ages we are uncomfortable with sometimes...

Of course. But we're not talking about children exploring their bodies. We're talking about adults and children together.

Well, i am not a psycologist and i think some objective psycological data could be called for here, if there were a way to obtain it ...

I do know for example, my ex, mentioned, she "explored" as young as 6. Another girl, admitted to me, without any regret, that she had sex with a 30 year old at 11. I di not remember jow old she was when she first had sex. I was lol, 24, when i had my first time. ;).

Now, at the time that i hesrd this, i was shocked and if i were her parents, i would want thst 30 yesr old locked up.

It does however, beg the question as to whether or not we may be projecting?

Again, for modt of human history, people were "adults" in their teens.
"i had learn to focus i what i could do rather what i couldn't do", Rick Hansen when asked about getting a disabling spinal cord injury at 15. He continues to raise money for spinal cord research and inspire peoople to "make a difference". He doesnt preach any religion.

Offline MadBunny

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3560
  • Darwins +110/-0
  • Fallen Illuminatus
Re: should peadohpiles be allowed to live ?
« Reply #408 on: June 20, 2012, 08:53:47 PM »
Ricky,

Perhaps the girl managed to do her thing at 11 with no regrets.
I can't however accept that anything like that would, or should be considered normal.

I fully admit that I may be in the wrong, but that's a hurdle that I can't get past and honestly don't really feel inclined to.

Maybe it's because I work with children on a regular basis, but I just don't see them being all that mentally mature despite their occasional early onset of puberty.
I've seen a lot of girls turn into very sexualized people who use it as a tool at young ages, but they never seem quite.... 'balanced'.  I'm not sure how to describe it really.
Maybe its just a byproduct of American culture or something.
Give a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a night.  Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.

Offline Chronos

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 2278
  • Darwins +121/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Born without religion
    • Marking Time
Re: should peadohpiles be allowed to live ?
« Reply #409 on: June 20, 2012, 09:33:38 PM »
....puberty is when a girl can have sex, they will probably being having sex with guys THEIR age, most do...

I completely disagree with you. Most girls at puberty still think sex is icky. Remember that the average age of puberty in girls is 12ish. We're talking about elementary school kids.

My daughter was 9 when puberty hit. She was in 4th grade. She's now 16 and the idea of sex was icky until about a year ago. She still hasn't had sex with a boy, but she started dating a girl about 4 months ago. So far, I believe the most she has accomplished is a hickey.

John 14:2 :: In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you.

Offline rickymooston

Re: should peadohpiles be allowed to live ?
« Reply #410 on: June 20, 2012, 09:50:10 PM »


My daughter was 9 when puberty hit. She was in 4th grade. She's now 16 and the idea of sex was icky until about a year ago. She still hasn't had sex with a boy, but she started dating a girl about 4 months ago. So far, I believe the most she has accomplished is a hickey.

I dont know your kid but you do realize that kids dont actually tell their parents when they have sex, right?

I am glad that you are accepting of her apparent homosexuality.

I first had sex when i was 24. I didnt tell my family. ;). Generally, family members feel a bit uncomfortable discussing sex with each other.

Of course, i amva pretty private guy myself. I dont tend to vokunteer my sex life very often.

I am not saying your assessment is wrong but certainly one can put at least some doubt on it.
"i had learn to focus i what i could do rather what i couldn't do", Rick Hansen when asked about getting a disabling spinal cord injury at 15. He continues to raise money for spinal cord research and inspire peoople to "make a difference". He doesnt preach any religion.

Offline rickymooston

Re: should peadohpiles be allowed to live ?
« Reply #411 on: June 20, 2012, 10:07:38 PM »
I can't however accept that anything like that would, or should be considered normal.

On an emotional level, neither can I. My point was, in past societies, that was normal.

I should add, that the girl was not particularly stable. She was balimic. She slept with a large number of men. She had issues with her family and self esteem. I do not think thatvwas caused by her having sex young but
I really dont know.



Quote
I fully admit that I may be in the wrong, but that's a hurdle that I can't get past and honestly don't really feel inclined to.

I can relate. As i said, I am not really comfortable with kids having sex when they are under 18. ;).

It is not really in their best interest to do so. I do not think any modrn parent woyld really be comfoftable with
this happening earlier. If my kid were involved, i definitely would not want my kid to have sex that young for all the obvious reasins.

Quote
Maybe it's because I work with children on a regular basis, but I just don't see them being all that mentally mature despite their occasional early onset of puberty.
I've seen a lot of girls turn into very sexualized people who use it as a tool at young ages, but they never seem quite

I do not disagree with you and travelar that many are immature at that age and hell even beyond 18. I suppode i could say most.

While our culture is sexualized, i am suspicious in fact, it could also be a product of biology?

"i had learn to focus i what i could do rather what i couldn't do", Rick Hansen when asked about getting a disabling spinal cord injury at 15. He continues to raise money for spinal cord research and inspire peoople to "make a difference". He doesnt preach any religion.

Offline MadBunny

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3560
  • Darwins +110/-0
  • Fallen Illuminatus
Re: should peadohpiles be allowed to live ?
« Reply #412 on: June 21, 2012, 12:09:36 AM »
I don't think anybody disputes that children begin experimenting and feeling the effects of their biological imperatives young.
Sure, that's a given.  Pretty much everybody has agreed on that point, even in the discussions with Joe, where the tendency has been to disagree with his viewpoint strongly.



The part that people have a problem with is the large age differences.
To a point, it's an emotional argument, but a very powerful one.  The idea is that the younger person is powerless in comparison, in my opinion is where the issue lies.

When I say age differences I'm not just talking about the basic: one person is older.



People were weirded out by this, but accepted it despite the apparent age difference. (Demi = 49 Ashton = 34)  There is a 15 year difference which is roughly analogous to your 11 year old sleeping with a 26 year old.

Ashton was already a successful and independent person, (also legally an adult) it didn't matter what others thought because he had the capability to make his own choices.



This vibe feels different.  Not just because I used a picture of Robert Pattinson when he was 26 either.  Ok, maybe it has to lot to do with vampire boy.. but my point stands.  It feels weird.  Also Shipka can't make her own choices legally.
Give a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a night.  Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.

Offline Atheistisaweirdword

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 51
  • Darwins +2/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: should peadohpiles be allowed to live ?
« Reply #413 on: June 21, 2012, 12:54:25 AM »
Not even a small fraction of 12 year olds would ever be considerable to porn. NOT ONE.

While I agree with your conclusion, I'm having a hard time getting through that thick shell of emotion. Try logic for once. You (and others like you, who are arguing from emotion) make me ashamed to be on your side. You're like that one atheist who thinks atheism is about "rebelling against god".

You're smarter than me

Just to emphasize that this is your claim; not mine.

and think some 12 year olds can do porn.

"Can" in the sense that they can consent to it and be fully aware of what they're doing. Not "can" in the sense that they should. They might (and some would) regret it later in life, but we all make decisions we regret. It's just another part of growing up.

No I'm not like that one atheist who thinks he's rebelling against god. I'm not arguing from emotion either, I think it's just morally long to say a girl who hits puberty at 12 could do porn just based on puberty. We're all the same, no humans better than another human. Insulting my intelligence just makes you an asshole who thinks he's better due to higher knowledge. If I'm wrong feel free to tell me.
I strive to simply just make sense.

Offline Atheistisaweirdword

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 51
  • Darwins +2/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: should peadohpiles be allowed to live ?
« Reply #414 on: June 21, 2012, 01:00:29 AM »
....puberty is when a girl can have sex, they will probably being having sex with guys THEIR age, most do...

I completely disagree with you. Most girls at puberty still think sex is icky. Remember that the average age of puberty in girls is 12ish. We're talking about elementary school kids.

My daughter was 9 when puberty hit. She was in 4th grade. She's now 16 and the idea of sex was icky until about a year ago. She still hasn't had sex with a boy, but she started dating a girl about 4 months ago. So far, I believe the most she has accomplished is a hickey.

That was a terrible point I was trying to make. I was referring to more when they're a little bit more developed around 14-16 is when they usually start experimenting with teenagers their age. Sorry, definitely right for you to disagree, I agree.
I strive to simply just make sense.

Offline joebbowers

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1074
  • Darwins +91/-47
  • Gender: Male
    • My Photography
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: should peadohpiles be allowed to live ?
« Reply #415 on: June 21, 2012, 03:03:03 AM »
Welcome to the forum, Atheistisaweirdword.

First, let me say that we here place a very high value on logic and reason. Your emotionally charged blanket-statements without support will not fly around here. We welcome your opinions, but please back them up with explainations. Otherwise, what can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed just as easily.

Now, on to my reply to your initial comment...

Thoughtcrime, 1984 much?

We live in a world where people like us can be put to death for their beliefs or lack thereof. Legally. By their own governments. Thought crime is not a joke.

Specifically with relation to possession of child pornography, I believe it is a thought crime. I have three arguments to support this.

1. Pornographic animations and stories featuring imaginary children are also illegal, despite their being no victim in their creation. This demonstrates that the law is not designed to protect children, but to punish the dirty thoughts of pedophiles.
2. Expert have conducted studies that conclude that increased access to pornography (including child pornography) leads to a reduction in sexual assaults and rape.[1] Despite the fact that it's continued ban very likely leads to more child victims, politicians refuse to decriminalize it. This again demonstrates that the law is not designed to protect children.
3. Illegally obtained and hidden camera sex tapes, as well as videos depicting torture, rape, beastiality, animal cruelty, and murder, are all legal to possess despite being illegal to produce. This demonstrates an understanding that merely possessing and watching these types of videos is not harmful in and of itself. Why is child porn an exception? To punish pedophiles for their thoughts.

If you disagree, explain why.

if you really actually like child porn you have a problem, that's not a regular fetish

Do you think people who like gay porn have a problem? Do you understand that sexual orientation is an involuntary trait?

Also, studies estimate the prevalence of pedophilia to affect around 3-9% of the population. That would make them roughly equal to or possibly outnumbering homosexuals.

I think liking getting shit on would be more rational than liking children.
Um... good for you?

Liking children is not rational or logical and your point of view is saying puberty?

This is meaningless. Sexual orientation is not rationally or logically determined. It is a result of biological and environmental factors.

That's not logical, they're not smart enough and not old enough to make decisions for themselves.

That is your opinion, though the past few hundred thousand years of human history would disagree with you. Children were considered adults at puberty and paired for mating, more recently known as marriage.

Do you understand that age of consent laws are fairly new? And even in the modern world, the US standard of 16 years is among the highest.

Also, why do we try young children as adults for committing crimes? In the US, children as young as 9 are regularly tried as adults for violent crimes. They are considered capable of making decisions and held responsible for their actions. Why the double standard when sex is concerned?

In other words, most people in the world today, and most people since the beginning of time have considered a pubescent child capable of making decisions for themselves.

Child pornagraphy is sick, no rational or logical mind will ever agree with you that it would be legal.

This is just flat-out wrong. Blanket statements like that will get you no-where here.

Many rational and logical people including federal judges and university professors are advocating the decriminalization of the simple possession of child pornography on the grounds that it is harmless to possess and may in fact lead to fewer cases of abuse against real children.

It would not be legal in any developed country, if it ever does get legal in your country than you live in a fucked up country.

Another ridiculous false statement followed by another ridiculous moral judgement. You really shouldn't say things like that around here, we place a very high value on intellectual honesty. Do your research before making such bold claims.

It is legal to possess in most of the world, including many developed countries such as Japan and Denmark, which both have lower crime rates and higher quality of life standards than the United States.
 1. Others have questioned the results of these studies, however I find their methods to be accurate. Furthermore, the fact that multiple studies across multiple countries conducted by multiple independent organizations have reached the same conclusion lends veracity to the claim.
"Do you see a problem with insisting that the normal ways in which you determine fact from fiction is something you have to turn off in order to maintain the belief in God?" - JeffPT

Offline joebbowers

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1074
  • Darwins +91/-47
  • Gender: Male
    • My Photography
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: should peadohpiles be allowed to live ?
« Reply #416 on: June 21, 2012, 03:09:28 AM »
While our culture is sexualized, i am suspicious in fact, it could also be a product of biology?

I don't believe it is. I believe children are maturing later because we are treating them like kids longer. We shield them from harsh realities and responsibilities, of course they seem more immature than earlier generations.

I believe that the longer lifespan has nothing to do with it. If that were true, you would expect children to be reaching puberty later, but in fact the opposite is true.
"Do you see a problem with insisting that the normal ways in which you determine fact from fiction is something you have to turn off in order to maintain the belief in God?" - JeffPT

Online One Above All

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 10611
  • Darwins +266/-34
  • Gender: Male
  • Supreme ruler of the multiverse; All In One
Re: should peadohpiles be allowed to live ?
« Reply #417 on: June 21, 2012, 03:16:20 AM »
No I'm not like that one atheist who thinks he's rebelling against god.

We'll see. Read the bold part.

I'm not arguing from emotion either, I think it's just morally long to say a girl who hits puberty at 12 could do porn just based on puberty.

And as a justification[1] you offer... nothing. Well, not "nothing", but simply what joebbowers has already pointed out as being irrelevant/wrong/emotion-based[2].

We're all the same, no humans better than another human.

Wrong. Many people are better than other people.

Insulting my intelligence just makes you an asshole who thinks he's better due to higher knowledge.

Probably would. I've yet to insult your knowledge, however. Or your intelligence. Why do you keep complaining about something that didn't happen?

I don't believe it is. I believe children are maturing later because we are treating them like kids longer. We shield them from harsh realities and responsibilities, of course they seem more immature than earlier generations.

It could be a little of both. I'm fairly certain that in the "Nature versus Nurture" debate, nature has a bigger influence than nurture. That's why homosexual homophobes still have sex with other men/women.
 1. Also note that my argument has nothing to do with puberty.
 2. Note that this (all three things) is just my view of your points.
« Last Edit: June 21, 2012, 03:26:34 AM by One Above All »
The truth is absolute. Life forms are specks of specks (...) of specks of dust in the universe.
Why settle for normal, when you can be so much more? Why settle for something, when you can have everything?
We choose our own gods.

A.K.A.: Blaziken_rjcf/Lucifer/All In One.

Offline Quesi

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1986
  • Darwins +371/-4
  • Gender: Female
  • WWGHA Member
Re: should peadohpiles be allowed to live ?
« Reply #418 on: June 21, 2012, 05:04:02 AM »

First, let me say that we here place a very high value on logic and reason.

And facts. 


I don't believe it is. I believe children are maturing later because we are treating them like kids longer. We shield them from harsh realities and responsibilities, of course they seem more immature than earlier generations.

No Joe.  CHILDREN ARE NOT MATURING LATER. As I've cited a few times, children are maturing earlier.  Puberty at 8.5 years for girls is now considered within the normal range.  As I stated earlier, there are various theories about why puberty is coming earlier and earlier, ranging from hormones fed to cows and chickens that make their way into the foods we eat, to chemicals in our soaps and shampoos, to obesity.   

http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/forums/index.php/topic,22752.msg512418.html#msg512418

If you didn't bother to read the links in my previous posts discussing the topic, here is a small quote from one article: 

Earlier breast development is now so typical that the Lawson Wilkins Pediatric Endocrine Society urged changing the definition of "normal" development. Until 10 years ago, breast development at age 8 was considered an abnormal event that should be investigated by an endocrinologist. Then a landmark study in the April 1997 journal Pediatrics written by Marcia Herman-Giddens, adjunct professor at the School of Public Health at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, found that among 17,000 girls in North Carolina, almost half of African Americans and 15% of whites had begun breast development by age 8. Two years later, the society suggested changing what it considered medically normal.

The new "8" -- the medically suggested definition for abnormally early breast development -- is, the society says, 7 for white girls and 6 for African American girls.
http://articles.latimes.com/2008/jan/21/health/he-puberty21


Online One Above All

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 10611
  • Darwins +266/-34
  • Gender: Male
  • Supreme ruler of the multiverse; All In One
Re: should peadohpiles be allowed to live ?
« Reply #419 on: June 21, 2012, 05:06:03 AM »
No Joe.  CHILDREN ARE NOT MATURING LATER.

I think he meant emotionally. Even if he didn't, I did. Just wanted to make that clear.
The truth is absolute. Life forms are specks of specks (...) of specks of dust in the universe.
Why settle for normal, when you can be so much more? Why settle for something, when you can have everything?
We choose our own gods.

A.K.A.: Blaziken_rjcf/Lucifer/All In One.

Offline Chronos

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 2278
  • Darwins +121/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Born without religion
    • Marking Time
Re: should peadohpiles be allowed to live ?
« Reply #420 on: June 21, 2012, 05:14:04 AM »
I dont know your kid but you do realize that kids dont actually tell their parents when they have sex, right?

I'm sure most kids don't say "Hey, Dad, guess what? I had sex today!" However, there are clues if you are observant. Teenagers often are not good at hiding certain things for very long.

My daughter will tell me things that most kids won't tell their parents.

One thing about dating a girl, she won't get pregnant, which is a major plus.

John 14:2 :: In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you.

Offline Quesi

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1986
  • Darwins +371/-4
  • Gender: Female
  • WWGHA Member
Re: should peadohpiles be allowed to live ?
« Reply #421 on: June 21, 2012, 06:56:14 AM »
Joe has been making up facts throughout this thread.  First of all he repeatedly presented his argument that child porn reduces child abuse, by insisting that there is a consensus among experts.  When I cited various sources (like the Mayo Clinic) that indicate that child porn has the opposite effect, he retreated by saying that he has read the studies and disagreed with them.  Disagreeing with studies that you don’t like does not indicate a consensus among experts.”                           


2. Expert have conducted studies that conclude that increased access to pornography (including child pornography) leads to a reduction in sexual assaults and rape.

Bullshit.  There are no comprehensive, global studies that track child sexual abuse period.  And there are certainly no longitudinal studies that track pre-porn cultures to post-porn cultures.  I suspect you are citing data about how countries with more relaxed attitudes towards sexuality (including access to adult porn) appear to have lower instances of female sexual abuse, and then you are pretending that those studies have something to do with child porn. 

I notice that no one is following up on this statement.


Often child pedophiles have tumors, orbitofrontal cortex tumor's have led to a man's sexual preference to turn to children, it's obviously not a natural thing that natural selection has given a man's brain the preference of a child, it's sickness.


Or my much earlier statement citing studies indicating the a disproportionately high percentage of pedophiles were themselves victims of abuse.  For many it is a vicious cycle in which the abused becomes the abuser.  For others, it is a diagnosable medical disorder.  In some cases, the causes, just like the causes of precocious puberty, are unknown,

I am interested in stopping the cycle of abuse and supporting treatment of the medical disorders, not apologizing for an industry which perpetuates the abuse. 

I keep promising myself that I am not going to continue responding in this thread.  But when I see the same lies being repeated over and over again as if they were facts, I have trouble just ignoring them. 

Offline joebbowers

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1074
  • Darwins +91/-47
  • Gender: Male
    • My Photography
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: should peadohpiles be allowed to live ?
« Reply #422 on: June 21, 2012, 07:04:57 AM »
No Joe.  CHILDREN ARE NOT MATURING LATER.

I think he meant emotionally. Even if he didn't, I did. Just wanted to make that clear.

I quite obviously meant emotionally. I even added that physically puberty was coming earlier than before.

But hey, thanks for the smite anyway Quesi. A reminder in future debates with you that you don't read very carefully.
"Do you see a problem with insisting that the normal ways in which you determine fact from fiction is something you have to turn off in order to maintain the belief in God?" - JeffPT

Offline joebbowers

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1074
  • Darwins +91/-47
  • Gender: Male
    • My Photography
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: should peadohpiles be allowed to live ?
« Reply #423 on: June 21, 2012, 07:09:18 AM »
My daughter will tell me things that most kids won't tell their parents.

Then that by your own words would make your relationship an exception, and doesn't invalidate Ricky's point that most children don't tell their parents when they have sex.

One thing about dating a girl, she won't get pregnant, which is a major plus.

Yes, I think no unexpected pregnancies is a major marketing point for homosexuality. They should put that in their recruiting pamphlets. That and if you date a guy your size you double your wardrobe.
"Do you see a problem with insisting that the normal ways in which you determine fact from fiction is something you have to turn off in order to maintain the belief in God?" - JeffPT

Offline Quesi

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1986
  • Darwins +371/-4
  • Gender: Female
  • WWGHA Member
Re: should peadohpiles be allowed to live ?
« Reply #424 on: June 21, 2012, 07:10:39 AM »
No Joe.  CHILDREN ARE NOT MATURING LATER.

I think he meant emotionally. Even if he didn't, I did. Just wanted to make that clear.

You have not been changing the goal posts and making up data.  I may not agree with some of your conclusions, but I have no problem with the consistant arguments that you present. 

Joe has stated that when a girl starts developing breasts, she is sexually mature.  I have repeatedly pointed out that the age of puberty has been decreasing rapidly.  There has always been "premature puberty" that can effect even toddlers or babies.  But among the students in the 3 kindergarten classes at my daughter's school, there are quite a few 5 and 6 year olds who are showing breasts now, including one of my daughter's friends.  These are kindergartners.   But it is not that uncommon now.

So you can't argue that when a kid develops breasts, she is ready for sexual activity, and then in the same thread argue that "children are maturing later" in spite of evidence demonstrating that the onset of puberty at 7 or 8 or 9 (or even 5 or 6) is no longer unusual. 

Offline joebbowers

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1074
  • Darwins +91/-47
  • Gender: Male
    • My Photography
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: should peadohpiles be allowed to live ?
« Reply #425 on: June 21, 2012, 07:56:38 AM »
Joe has been making up facts throughout this thread.  First of all he repeatedly presented his argument that child porn reduces child abuse, by insisting that there is a consensus among experts.

There is a concensus among literally dozens of studies that have reached the same conclusion. I didn't say everyone in the world agreed. I think you're taking the word concensus too literally.

When I cited various sources (like the Mayo Clinic) that indicate that child porn has the opposite effect, he retreated by saying that he has read the studies and disagreed with them.

I read the links you provided, and clearly explained that I don't believe their data concludes that porn use leads to sexual abuse, but instead that most sexual abusers use porn. I'm not sure you understand what 'retreat' means. I did not run away or surrender.

And by the way, the Mayo Clinic did not conduct any studies, they merely regurgitated and inflated figures from an earlier paper from the American Prosecutors Research Institute, which in turn got it's data from a U.S. Postal Inspection Service report that was quoting a statement by the director of The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children.

Source: http://www.politifact.com/ohio/statements/2011/nov/30/mike-dewine/mike-dewine-cites-link-between-viewing-child-porno/

And as I pointed out, even the authors of the Mayo clinic paper prefaced the article with a statement casting doubt on it's accuracy. As the 2005 National Center for Missing & Exploited Children report puts it "we do not know if these child porn possessors were representative of all Internet-related child porn possessors."

I have repeatedly welcomed any of you to read the studies I linked and dispute them. If you can conclusively prove that increased access to pornography leads to an increase in sexual crime, I am sure you can get published in some prestigious peer-reviewed scientific journals. Kind of like the studies I linked.

Disagreeing with studies that you don’t like does not indicate a consensus among experts.
And disagreeing with the findings of multiple studies without explaining why doesn't make you right.

Bullshit.  There are no comprehensive, global studies that track child sexual abuse period.  And there are certainly no longitudinal studies that track pre-porn cultures to post-porn cultures.  I suspect you are citing data about how countries with more relaxed attitudes towards sexuality (including access to adult porn) appear to have lower instances of female sexual abuse, and then you are pretending that those studies have something to do with child porn. 

You can "suspect" all your want, or you can actually read the studies.

From Clemson professor Todd Kendall
http://www.law.stanford.edu/display/images/dynamic/events_media/Kendall%20cover%20+%20paper.pdf
Quote
The bottom line on these experiments is, "More Net access, less rape." A 10 percent increase in Net access yields about a 7.3 percent decrease in reported rapes. States that adopted the Internet quickly saw the biggest declines. And, according to Clemson professor Todd Kendall, the effects remain even after you control for all of the obvious confounding variables, such as alcohol consumption, police presence, poverty and unemployment rates, population density, and so forth.

From University of Hawaii Ph.D. Milton Diamond
http://www2.hu-berlin.de/sexology/BIB/DIAM/effects_pornography.htm
Quote
The concern that countries allowing pornography and liberal anti-obscenity laws would show increased sex crime rates due to modeling or that children or adolescents in particular would be negatively vulnerable to and receptive to such models or that society would be otherwise adversely effected is not supported by evidence. It is certainly clear from the data reviewed, and the new data and analysis presented, that a massive increase in available pornography in Japan, the United States and elsewhere has been correlated with a dramatic decrease in sexual crimes and most so among youngsters as perpetrators or victims. Even in this area of concern no "clear and present danger" exists for the suppression of SEM. There is no evidence that pornography is intended or likely to produce "imminent lawless action" (see Brandenberg v. Ohio, 1969). It is reasonable that the U.S. Supreme Court has consistently rejected the principal that speech or expression can be punished because it offends some people's sensibilities or beliefs. Compared with "hate speech" or "commercial speech" there seems even less justification for banning "sex speech."

I notice that no one is following up on this statement.


Often child pedophiles have tumors, orbitofrontal cortex tumor's have led to a man's sexual preference to turn to children, it's obviously not a natural thing that natural selection has given a man's brain the preference of a child, it's sickness.

Because it was embarassingly stupid and not worth addressing.

Or my much earlier statement citing studies indicating the a disproportionately high percentage of pedophiles were themselves victims of abuse.  For many it is a vicious cycle in which the abused becomes the abuser.  For others, it is a diagnosable medical disorder.  In some cases, the causes, just like the causes of precocious puberty, are unknown,

Many people think homosexuals are victims of abuse, and that's why they are the way they are. This is an ignorant way of rationalizing behavior you can't understand or can't accept.

I am interested in stopping the cycle of abuse and supporting treatment of the medical disorders, not apologizing for an industry which perpetuates the abuse. 

Sexual orientations are not medical disorders, and do not need to be cured. Fuck off.
"Do you see a problem with insisting that the normal ways in which you determine fact from fiction is something you have to turn off in order to maintain the belief in God?" - JeffPT

Offline Atheistisaweirdword

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 51
  • Darwins +2/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: should peadohpiles be allowed to live ?
« Reply #426 on: June 21, 2012, 09:26:33 AM »
Welcome to the forum, Atheistisaweirdword.

First, let me say that we here place a very high value on logic and reason. Your emotionally charged blanket-statements without support will not fly around here. We welcome your opinions, but please back them up with explainations. Otherwise, what can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed just as easily.

Now, on to my reply to your initial comment...

Thoughtcrime, 1984 much?

We live in a world where people like us can be put to death for their beliefs or lack thereof. Legally. By their own governments. Thought crime is not a joke.

Specifically with relation to possession of child pornography, I believe it is a thought crime. I have three arguments to support this.

1. Pornographic animations and stories featuring imaginary children are also illegal, despite their being no victim in their creation. This demonstrates that the law is not designed to protect children, but to punish the dirty thoughts of pedophiles.
2. Expert have conducted studies that conclude that increased access to pornography (including child pornography) leads to a reduction in sexual assaults and rape.[1] Despite the fact that it's continued ban very likely leads to more child victims, politicians refuse to decriminalize it. This again demonstrates that the law is not designed to protect children.
3. Illegally obtained and hidden camera sex tapes, as well as videos depicting torture, rape, beastiality, animal cruelty, and murder, are all legal to possess despite being illegal to produce. This demonstrates an understanding that merely possessing and watching these types of videos is not harmful in and of itself. Why is child porn an exception? To punish pedophiles for their thoughts.

If you disagree, explain why.

if you really actually like child porn you have a problem, that's not a regular fetish

Do you think people who like gay porn have a problem? Do you understand that sexual orientation is an involuntary trait?

Also, studies estimate the prevalence of pedophilia to affect around 3-9% of the population. That would make them roughly equal to or possibly outnumbering homosexuals.

I think liking getting shit on would be more rational than liking children.
Um... good for you?

Liking children is not rational or logical and your point of view is saying puberty?

This is meaningless. Sexual orientation is not rationally or logically determined. It is a result of biological and environmental factors.

That's not logical, they're not smart enough and not old enough to make decisions for themselves.

That is your opinion, though the past few hundred thousand years of human history would disagree with you. Children were considered adults at puberty and paired for mating, more recently known as marriage.

Do you understand that age of consent laws are fairly new? And even in the modern world, the US standard of 16 years is among the highest.

Also, why do we try young children as adults for committing crimes? In the US, children as young as 9 are regularly tried as adults for violent crimes. They are considered capable of making decisions and held responsible for their actions. Why the double standard when sex is concerned?

In other words, most people in the world today, and most people since the beginning of time have considered a pubescent child capable of making decisions for themselves.

Child pornagraphy is sick, no rational or logical mind will ever agree with you that it would be legal.

This is just flat-out wrong. Blanket statements like that will get you no-where here.

Many rational and logical people including federal judges and university professors are advocating the decriminalization of the simple possession of child pornography on the grounds that it is harmless to possess and may in fact lead to fewer cases of abuse against real children.

It would not be legal in any developed country, if it ever does get legal in your country than you live in a fucked up country.

Another ridiculous false statement followed by another ridiculous moral judgement. You really shouldn't say things like that around here, we place a very high value on intellectual honesty. Do your research before making such bold claims.

It is legal to possess in most of the world, including many developed countries such as Japan and Denmark, which both have lower crime rates and higher quality of life standards than the United States.
 1. Others have questioned the results of these studies, however I find their methods to be accurate. Furthermore, the fact that multiple studies across multiple countries conducted by multiple independent organizations have reached the same conclusion lends veracity to the claim.

You don't think it's logical enough to say that children are not meant for porn? How can you compare gays to liking child porn? I just don't get your point. An adult and a child should not be having sex. It's just wrong, that's my opinion. Just because something's legal in other countries doesn't make it right. I'm not emotionally charged, I just couldn't see child porn ever being morally ok, they're kids. Children and adults having sex could just never seem right. Of course I don't think gays and children aren't comparable, children and adults have 2 different places in the sexual world. You only have a childhood once, why ruin it by the adult perverse world? Thanks for welcoming me. Morally that will always be wrong to me, they're not adults, they shouldn't be doing adult things especially with adults at that age.
I strive to simply just make sense.

Offline Traveler

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2056
  • Darwins +142/-2
  • Gender: Female
  • no god required
    • I am a Forum Guide
    • Gryffin Designs
Re: should peadohpiles be allowed to live ?
« Reply #427 on: June 21, 2012, 09:40:58 AM »
...You only have a childhood once, why ruin it ...

When all is said and done, this is what it boils down to for me. In the animal world, the more complex a species is, the later they mature. Humanity, at the "top" of complexity, requires the longest childhood in order to "properly" mature into responsible adulthood. I don't understand why anyone would want to shorten that maturing time, except to satisfy their own wishes. Any of those "reasons" have nothing to do with the best interest of the child, and everything to do with selfish motives. For me, and I believe for most of society, its very important to protect those who can't yet protect themselves. And all the argueing in the world will not change the fact that a child's brain is not yet mature enough to understand the ramifications of adult sexual relationships.
If we ever travel thousands of light years to a planet inhabited by intelligent life, let's just make patterns in their crops and leave.

Offline Atheistisaweirdword

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 51
  • Darwins +2/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: should peadohpiles be allowed to live ?
« Reply #428 on: June 21, 2012, 09:49:05 AM »
I meant to say I don't think gays and children are comparable.* sexual preference is about gender, not children. They're not mature enough to make their own decisions.
I strive to simply just make sense.

Offline Traveler

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2056
  • Darwins +142/-2
  • Gender: Female
  • no god required
    • I am a Forum Guide
    • Gryffin Designs
Re: should peadohpiles be allowed to live ?
« Reply #429 on: June 21, 2012, 09:50:41 AM »
I meant to say I don't think gays and children are comparable.* sexual preference is about gender, not children. They're not mature enough to make their own decisions.

Exactly.

I think Joe is talking about his own orientation/preference rather than the child's, but comparing that to homosexuality isn't fair, since in a gay relationship both partners are adults.
« Last Edit: June 21, 2012, 09:52:23 AM by Traveler »
If we ever travel thousands of light years to a planet inhabited by intelligent life, let's just make patterns in their crops and leave.

Offline pianodwarf

  • Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 4350
  • Darwins +206/-5
  • Gender: Male
  • Je bois ton lait frappé
Re: should peadohpiles be allowed to live ?
« Reply #430 on: June 21, 2012, 10:12:32 AM »
A story about this matter from CNN today:

http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/21/opinion/cantor-pedophila-sandusky/index.html?hpt=hp_bn7

In a nutshell: pedophiles are born that way, they don't choose to be that way, and if they had some support (which they very often can't get), they need never engage in any harmful behavior toward children.
[On how kangaroos could have gotten back to Australia after the flood]:  Don't kangaroos skip along the surface of the water? --Kenn

Online jaimehlers

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4633
  • Darwins +511/-12
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: should peadohpiles be allowed to live ?
« Reply #431 on: June 21, 2012, 10:25:44 AM »
I think I need to see verifiable proof that the existence of child pornography reduces the cases of child sexual abuse, not simply a "consensus of experts".  If for no other reason than the fact that we often have such consensuses in other areas, such as health and diet, which are prone to changing periodically depending on the experts asked and the information cited.

Second, I think it is extremely important to differentiate between prepubescent children and pubescent adolescents in this discussion.  When I hear "child porn", I don't think of a sixteen-year old who is mostly through puberty, I think of a ten-year old who hasn't even started it yet.  I suspect that's true of a lot of the people in this argument.  Regardless of emotional maturity, the simple fact is that a child, such as the ten-year old I just mentioned, is almost certainly not physically or sexually mature enough to desire having sex with an adult in the first place.  Thus, any porn that involves adults having sex with children is not made for the benefit of such children, but for the benefit of an adult who presumably is sexually attracted to such a child.

Such a one-sided benefit has no real chance of being helpful to any child.  In fact, it has the very real potential to be detrimental to actual children, even if the porn itself did not use actual children, for the simple fact that human nature accustoms someone to doing something as they do it and makes it easier to do things which would have been unthinkable beforehand.  Of course this doesn't mean that everyone who watches child porn will move up to sexually abusing an actual child, but there's no good reason to discount the very real potential for that to happen.  In fact, that's enough of a reason to retain the ban on such material until it is proven that it does not increase the incidence of child sexual assaults.

There are ways to deal with pedophilia that don't involve the unacceptable risk of allowing a child to be harmed as a result of it.  I'm in support of those ways, but I simply do not see child pornography as one of them.

Offline Gnu Ordure

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3832
  • Darwins +109/-9
  • Gender: Male
Re: should peadohpiles be allowed to live ?
« Reply #432 on: June 21, 2012, 10:42:21 AM »
They say to themselves that sometimes it's OK for a 30-year-old to have sex with an 11-year-old, even though it's rare.
I welcome to to submit [sic] your proof that it was harmful in 100% of cases.
And that's another strawman. Did I say that adult-child sex is always harmful? No. But such sexual abuse is highly likely to be harmful, which is sufficient reason that it should never be permitted.

Quote
A lot of people agree with me; no-one agrees with you. That's because you're a paedophile, and we're not.
Oh? No-one agrees with me? Well then I change my mind and officially agree with whatever you're saying.

Appeal to popularity? Really? Doesn't work when Christians use it, doesn't work on me either.
It was a simple statement of fact. And where the Law is concerned, numbers do matter; that's how democracy works.
 
Quote
Possession of child pornography isn't a thought-crime. It's an objectively verifiable crime.

I disagree. The fact that pornographic drawings and stories which involve no real children are also illegal demonstrates that it is not about protecting children, but punishing impure thoughts.
No. You can have all the impure thoughts you like, Joe, and you won't be breaking the law and you won't be arrested. But possesing child porn is an action, not a thought.

Quote
1. I am talking about removing my daughter only from your presence, based on your admission of paedophilia and other statements on this thread.
Would you keep other teenage boys away from your daughter?
No. I'd keep her away from self-confessed paedophiles. So you don't have a point.

Quote
2. I do not control my hypothetical wife's movements as I do my child's. She's a free agent, so I don't 'remove' her from situations. Also she's a karate black-belt and always carries a gun, so I'm not too concerned about her safety.
A ridiculous moving goalpost. If you're going to play that game, I can just say that your wife is leaving you for me because she likes my pretty eyes and says you spend too much time on the internet.
You introduced this red herring of what I should permit my hypothetical wife to do. I've pointed out that this is comparing apples to oranges, and giving my wife certain self-defence skills is a way of highlighting the difference.

Quote
Give it up, Joe. Your fantasy isn't going to become reality. The Age of Consent isn't going to be reduced to puberty. Your dream has to stay a dream.
My argument is about legalizing the possession of child pornography, not lowering the age of consent.
Well, you've spent a lot of time on this thread trying to justify adult-child sexual behaviour in some circumstances, and that's what I'm arguing against. The issue of child pornography is of less concern to me.

But as I just said, I agree with you that the punishments for possession are too high; nobody should go to prison for possession.

Quote
All your arguments on a forum like this aren't going to change a thing.

First, I disagree with that. This is not the only forum I post on, and if I can open a few eyes to the injustice of our current overly-harsh punishments for possession of child pornography, I don't feel my time has been wasted.
Fair enough.

Quote
If you don't accept that, I recommend you get professional help, else you may end up in prison like your friend.
I'm sorry. I can't accept or tolerate thought crime. Edit: What professional help would you suggest I get? Perhaps attending a religious camp where they try to pray away my abnormal sexual feelings? I've heard those are all the rage these days.

Sexual orientations can't be cured.
I'm suggesting you get help regarding your delusional thinking about child sexual abuse.

It is never OK for a 31-year-old to groom an 11-year-old into a sexual relationship, because there is a high probability that the child will suffer pervasive harm. If you disagree with that, you are deluded.

Offline joebbowers

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1074
  • Darwins +91/-47
  • Gender: Male
    • My Photography
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: should peadohpiles be allowed to live ?
« Reply #433 on: June 21, 2012, 10:50:17 AM »
You don't need to quote an entire  thread. Just cut out the relevant parts.

You don't think it's logical enough to say that children are not meant for porn?

Nobody here, including me, has said children were meant for porn. Nobody has even said that the production of child pornography should be legal.

How can you compare gays to liking child porn? I just don't get your point.

Homosexuality and pedophilia are both involuntary sexual orientations that are misunderstood and discriminated against.

Just because something's legal in other countries doesn't make it right.

This is absolutely true. But it does demonstrate that your definition of right is not universally held.
"Do you see a problem with insisting that the normal ways in which you determine fact from fiction is something you have to turn off in order to maintain the belief in God?" - JeffPT

Online One Above All

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 10611
  • Darwins +266/-34
  • Gender: Male
  • Supreme ruler of the multiverse; All In One
Re: should peadohpiles be allowed to live ?
« Reply #434 on: June 21, 2012, 10:55:32 AM »
I may not agree with some of your conclusions, but I have no problem with the consistant arguments that you present.

Just to reiterate and emphasize: I think that some children are perfectly capable of consenting to having a relationship with older people, but I still don't think they should do it. This is (probably) more commonly known as informed consent.
The truth is absolute. Life forms are specks of specks (...) of specks of dust in the universe.
Why settle for normal, when you can be so much more? Why settle for something, when you can have everything?
We choose our own gods.

A.K.A.: Blaziken_rjcf/Lucifer/All In One.