I am not willing to put out the effort that you did to track which post came before the other post because I have no vested interest in “winning” a battle with you. You’re just not that important to me.
You don't even have to read my entire post. You could simply click on the two links that demonstrate which one came first. You're willing to type almost a whole printed page reply here but can't click on two links? I think that clearly proves that you know you're wrong and yet again not willing to admit it.
I do not lie.
You do. Repeatedly. In fact that statement itself is a lie.
Joe, I know you think you know more than the AMA and Harvard Medical Journal Researchers and the Mayo Clinic and everyone else I’ve cited over the past few months. But I don’t think you do.
No, as I've explained several times,
YOU think you know more than they do. THEY freely admit that they know their research is biased as the data collection methods are heavily based on interviews with convicted pedophiles, and do not represent the overall population. YOU are claiming they have drawn conclusions that support your argument, but they haven't. They have theories based on incomplete data.
From the "Mayo Clinic study" (which was actually a study by the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children), under the section titled PROBLEMS WITH PEDOPHILIC RESEARCH:
When reviewing research studies on pedophilia, it must be remembered that there is a strong potential for sampling biases. Many studies obtained their pedophilic or sexual offender populations from prisons or legally mandated sexual treatment groups. The prison populations also exclude pedophiles who have not been caught, those whose level of offense was not severe enough to result in jail time, those who could control their impulses, and those who were more financially successful and better able to prevail in their legal troubles through the retention of private attorneys.
In other words they are clearly warning the reader that the data is incomplete and that their conclusions are based on convicted pedophiles, and do not represent the overall pedophile population. YOU are the one who thinks you know more than the
AMA and Harvard Medical Journal Researchers and the Mayo Clinic and everyone else you’ve cited over the past few months. This has been pointed out to you several times, you dismiss it because I am not a doctor, I am not qualified to discredit their studies, however at least I am smart enough to read a fucking disclaimer.
I do not have an opinion on whether porn quenches or amplifies the appetite to molest children
You don't have an opinion yet you clearly didn't read the studies that favored my argument, and went out of your way to find studies to contradict it, including
discredited studies, and you ignored the disclaimers in those studies that admitted their data was biased. For someone without an opinion, you went a long way to say nothing.
From the beginning of this series of threads relating to pedophilia and pornography, my concern has always been the exploitation of children.
If you are so concerned about protecting children, then why didn't you read the studies I cited that demonstrate that legalizing the possession of child pornography could lead to fewer victims? Why did you post BAD SCIENCE to contradict it? Seriously, think about that. Good studies with solid methodologies conducted across the world have concluded that it would lower the incidences of sexual abuse against children. You counter with admittedly biased and discredited studies. You put bad science against good science because you don't want me to be right. Honestly, if you really cared about the children, wouldn't you consider an idea that could lead to significantly fewer children being abused and raped? An idea backed up by decades of research? An idea that has already been tested in other countries including Japan, Denmark, and the Czech republic and had demonstrably good results?
Let me ask you plainly.
If it were proven that legalizing the possession of child pornography lead to fewer cases of child abuse and rape, would you support it?I have mixed feelings about “sex offenders” lists, even though as a mom, I’ve studied the lists of sex offenders in my neighborhood.
Even murderers don't have to register on such lists. Why pedophiles?
Thought crime. We persecute them for what they are, not what they do.
I strongly advocate for harsh prison terms for those producing pornography...
I am guessing you mean child pornography, not all pornography.
You have a vested interest in downplaying the negative impact of pornography and pedophilia. I have a vested interest in advocating for victims.
You have a vested interest in downplaying the negative impact of
banning pornography. I have a vested interest in advocating for victims
of prosecutorial witchhunting.
And after a few months of going back and forth, I don’t see any way to reconcile our competing interests.
You're not willing to face the possibility that you're wrong, and you haven't offered one iota of solid evidence to counter my position.
