View Full Version : You thought the baby in the tuble dryer story was bad! Dutch pedophile party launched
Konovalov
05-31-06, 05:39 AM
Having read Skybirds topic here: http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=93832 in which he expressed his rightful disbelief to a news story of an Australian man who put his girlfriends 13-month-old baby in a tumble dryer resulting in serious burns and injuries to the child, I thought that there couldn't be a story more ridiculous than that, at least not in such a short space of time. I was wrong.
I read this article in the Sydney Morning Herald this morning and just could't believe what I was reading.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/outcry-over-launch-of-dutch-pedophile-party/2006/05/31/1148956392681.html
Outcry over launch of Dutch pedophile party
May 31, 2006 - 1:05PM
http://www.smh.com.au/ffximage/2006/05/31/marcdutroux_narrowweb__300x462,0.jpg Belgian child rapist Marc Dutroux.
Dutch pedophiles are launching a political party to push for a cut in the legal age for sexual relations to 12 from 16 and the legalisation of child pornography and sex with animals, sparking widespread outrage.
The Charity, Freedom and Diversity (NVD) party said on its web site it would be officially registered today, proclaiming: "We are going to shake The Hague awake!"
The party said it wanted to cut the legal age for sexual relations to 12 and eventually scrap the limit altogether.
"A ban just makes children curious," Ad van den Berg, one of the party's founders, told the Algemeen Dagblad newspaper.
"We want to make pedophilia the subject of discussion," he said, adding the subject had been a taboo since the 1996 Marc Dutroux child abuse scandal in neighbouring Belgium.
"We want to get into parliament so we have a voice. Other politicians only talk about us in a negative sense, as if we were criminals," Van den Berg told Reuters.
The Netherlands, which already has liberal policies on soft drugs, prostitution and gay marriage, was shocked by the plan.
An opinion poll published today showed that 82 per cent wanted the government to do something to stop the new party, while 67 per cent said promoting pedophilia should be illegal.
"They make out as if they want more rights for children. But their position that children should be allowed sexual contact from age 12 is of course just in their own interest," anti-pedophile campaigner Ireen van Engelen told the AD daily.
Right-wing lawmaker Geert Wilders said he had asked the government to investigate whether a party with such "sick ideas" could really be established, ANP news agency reported.
Kees van deer Staaij, a member of the Christian SGP party, also demanded action: "Pedophilia and child pornography should be taboo in every constitutional state. Breaking that will just create more victims and more serious ones."
The party wants private possession of child pornography to be allowed although it supports the ban on the trade of such materials. It also supports allowing pornography to be broadcast on daytime television, with only violent pornography limited to the late evening.
Toddlers should be given sex education and youths aged 16 and up should be allowed to appear in pornographic films and prostitute themselves. Sex with animals should be allowed although abuse of animals should remain illegal, the NVD said.
The party also said everybody should be allowed to go naked in public and promotes legalising all soft and hard drugs and free train travel for all.
Reuters
I feel absolutely sick in the guts reading about this political party if you could even call them that. This is one of the most appalling political stories that I have ever come across. Just totally sickening. :nope: :nope: :nope: :nope:
Skybird
05-31-06, 05:52 AM
Old news, it's is an attempt being made in Germany as well. It is sick and rotten and shows what Europe has come to, even without any desintegrating influence from outside. There are even psychologists lining up with these sick-minded perverts, trying to raise a tolerant climate and that they also have a right on love. :88) The total arbitrariness of modern psychotherapy, at least in Germany, is one of the reasons why I am so happy that I quit this sh!t and until today never regretted it. If one thing matches the definition of opportunism, then it is psychology.But the faces of these politicians will become known, and they will be recognized when moving around. Hope getting recognized will have consequences for them.P.S. To be fair, there are also some good practicing psychotherapists left. But one needs to search them with quite some effort. Most are endless talkers only.
Konovalov
05-31-06, 06:10 AM
Old news, it's is an attempt being made in Germany as well.
I was not aware that there was a wider movement across Europe. I thought it was simply isolated to the Netherlands.
But the faces of these politicians will become known, and they will be recognized when moving around. Hope getting recognized will have consequences for them.
Are you advocating some form of vigilante action against them, perhaps violence? Can you please elaborate on what you mean by "consequences"?
Skybird
05-31-06, 07:03 AM
Throwing eggs, stones and tomatoes, that is what I would find fully acceptable under these circumstances.
I am not in any way supporting them, but i think you cant or shouldn,t forbid them to do so in a free society.
They are for free sexual contact from the age of 12 and free use of hard and softdrugs. No one with a normal mind, apart from being pedofile, should vote for them.
TteFAboB
05-31-06, 12:04 PM
That, in an ideal world.
Now, look at the Europe outside your window again.
There are not enough tomatoes to go around.
Neptunus Rex
05-31-06, 12:17 PM
Last time I checked, encouraging others to commit a felony is in and of itself a felony.
So you're saying that no law can ever be discussed? Laws are changed all the time. And seeking change in laws is not a crime.
I'm not with these dudes either, but it's a bad precident to block people from a political voice. They don't have a chance to win, so let the freaks run. At least you'll know who they are.
Skybird
05-31-06, 03:46 PM
So you're saying that no law can ever be discussed? Laws are changed all the time. And seeking change in laws is not a crime. I'm not with these dudes either, but it's a bad precident to block people from a political voice. They don't have a chance to win, so let the freaks run. At least you'll know who they are.
It is no crime to propagate sexual intercourse with children, and behavior that puts the psychological wellbeing of children at risk and cripples all their life as adults? It is not to be refused when one is propagating sexual intercourse with animals? Moral and ethics are not needed to be considered to be the basis of lawmaking? Everything is relative, context-depending, arbitrary? If there would be a llaw allowing it, having sex with dead bodies is acceptable, then, and should not be object to moral disgust?
You guys loose me here. Children of low ages are psychologically not prepared to be made sexual objects for the pleasure of adults perverts. Here, psychology, for a change, can come up with some valid information and data about the developement of juvenile personality, and the developement of babies and young children. Sex with chidlren is abuse of the meanest kind. I reject to relativize such psychopathic behavior for means of a misunderstood and also perverted political correctness. Before they become a normalized, integrated part of social life of a community (which is the case if you accept these perverts to have the same right like others to form a political party) I indeed prefer to see them dead instead. To allow them to built public representation and legal bodies is totally unacceptable. certain things cannot be discussed, they must be excluded from what can be discussed, they must be consoidered as completely undiscussible. Some thing simply must be forbidden, always, without exeptions. Cannibalism as nomal part of social life, for example. Slavery. Or abusing small children. Such things must be unavailable for any kind of tolerance.
The interests of victims of crime I rank unconditionally higher than those of the offender who attacks them.
They speak of children of the age of 12. Do not be fooled. They will also push their hidden agenda. Sex with 10 years old. ( years, 6 years, 4 years. That is what pedophilia is about. It is unlimited to the lower part of the age scale. It is limited upwards, when puberty turns children's bodies into that of young adults.
Ouh, I have been politically uncorrect again and defended the use of physical force to prevent unacceptable things. I even refuse to accept that all things must be judged on a relative scale. I disrupt the peace of the consensus-society, I disturb the tolerance-waltz of the saints. I really should be taught a lection.
I worked with traumatized people in the past, just for some months, but it was enough. Torture, desaster, rape. Before I accept traumatization being done to somebody who is weak and defenseless and easy to manipulate, I prefer the one doing that to be brought to death. Since I know from direct experience what traumatization could mean for a life.
All I can say is if you have tolerance for such a party being allowed to build up, as if it were just a normal regular party like others, subject to public votes, if you accept them to be made an object of public life and defend their right to be driven away only by normal social events (like elections), then all you have is my deepest contempt. Because such a party is no "normal" thing, but anything than "normal". Accepting them on that basis of normality, and you have no spine and no worth as a human being, then. Period. I hope the Dutch will chase these sickos through the street every day they try to constitute their damn party. There shall not be such a party.
then all you have is my deepest contempt.Well, no offense, but you are ignorant, and I welcome your comtempt.
What you are for is fascism, plain and simple. It says the age there is 16. It's 16 in a lot of US states as well. I think that's too low, personally. I'm 35 and really don't think I should be allowed to legally sleep with a 16 year old. But people discussed, and then voted on these laws. And it's not up to me beyond my one vote.
Try for some perspective. When alcohol was illegal in the US, I'm sure many people ran for office on the 'undo prohabition' idea. By your logic, this was criminal of these people.
You want to be a child and not discuss the issue and act like I'm saying I'm for pedophiles, then go ahead if you need to do that. I'm just pointing out that shutting out any political voice is fascism. So, have fun with that!
Skybird
05-31-06, 05:29 PM
If I am a fascist when defending 12, 10, 6 year old children from getting abused, raped and consumed, then I will carry that title with pride and honour. Thank you very much for this noble title, then.
But your misunderstanding of tolerance, and your willingness to relativize even the most disgusting deeds and events, makes you the poison that our culture currently is dying of. you are so unlimited in your tolernace, that you can no longer differ between right and wring, me and you, because you have completely dismantled your cultural identity. By not having an identity, you have no scale left by which to judge what a culture could and should supoort, and what not.
This will not hinder you to help evil with your tolerance for it. Of course, the guilt for the destruction being done always will be with the others.
Comparing the prohibition with pedophilia. You are sick.
gdogghenrikson
05-31-06, 05:31 PM
Wow is that sick and twisted
Wim Libaers
05-31-06, 05:37 PM
I indeed prefer to see them dead instead. To allow them to built public representation and legal bodies is totally unacceptable. certain things cannot be discussed, they must be excluded from what can be discussed, they must be consoidered as completely undiscussible. Some thing simply must be forbidden, always, without exeptions. Cannibalism as nomal part of social life, for example. Slavery. Or abusing small children. Such things must be unavailable for any kind of tolerance.
Yep. Just like certain prophets. Make a funny picture of the wrong guy, off with your head! :hmm:
Oh, don't misunderstand me, I'm not in favour of these guys. But as long as there is no proof that they are committing criminal acts, putting them against the wall for thoughtcrime would set a rather dangerous precedent. Besides, do you think this is a new group? There has been a pro-pedophile lobby group and periodical in the Netherlands for some time. The only difference now is that they are also making a party. Some of their other issues seem intended for getting some extra votes. Getting the junkie vote, for example.
The only thing thise type of person have the right to discuss, is how they wanna be executed.
Bullit, Rope, Gaschamber etc etc
Markus
Comparing the prohibition with pedophilia. You are sick.And you're still ignorant.
I was raised Protostant. I have to guess my mom switched from Catholic because all of her brothers were raped by the priest at their church. That's awful, I know.
But you know what? Her family was a lot more well adjusted then mine.
Why was my family so bad off? Alcohol. I'll bet my life that booze causes more damage to children everyday than sexual abuse.
To think otherwise is to be blind.
Skybird
05-31-06, 06:00 PM
Yep. Just like certain prophets. Make a funny picture of the wrong guy, off with your head! :hmm:
Oh, don't misunderstand me, I'm not in favour of these guys. But as long as there is no proof that they are committing criminal acts, putting them against the wall for thoughtcrime would set a rather dangerous precedent. Besides, do you think this is a new group? There has been a pro-pedophile lobby group and periodical in the Netherlands for some time. The only difference now is that they are also making a party. Some of their other issues seem intended for getting some extra votes. Getting the junkie vote, for example.
We have comparing groups in Germany as well. So far they are hiding in underground and do not dare to come out. Well so.
Again, they may have an agenda naming an age level of 12 (which already is a cynical act in itself), but that is nonly the firts step, I assure you. Now they say "12", tomorrow it means "special deal for 8 years old", "tolerance for eventual mishappenings with 10 years" old, and a general pushing to anchor a growing tolerqance for pedophilia in general in society.
I know a little bit about these things, due to my past in that profession. I am absolutely unforgiving about it. Zero tolerance. This is not some Haschisch-workaround-policy. It's s##t, and it is sick, it is cynical and evil, it is against all hope of mankind - our children. If you tolerate this political project to get through and be run by the same rules that are valid for other parties and factions of community, then it is as if you abuse your own child yourself. It's as if you accept that children get sold to transplant their organs while they are still alive, and healthy. It is sick, and evil.
If you tolerate this political project to get through and be run by the same rules that are valid for other parties and factions of community, then it is as if you abuse your own child yourselfNo. It's not as if that in any way. It's good that you put those words together, doesn't mean it's true.
The only thing thise type of person have the right to discuss, is how they wanna be executed.Jesus? Is that you?
The age of consent in Spain was 12 as late as 1999. Now it's 13 I think.
Should we kill everyone in Spain?
Because I have no problem with that.
Onkel Neal
05-31-06, 06:42 PM
One of the sad consequences of a free society, sick people are free to push their twisted agendas, and we are afraid to call it for what it is: perverted.
TteFAboB
05-31-06, 06:43 PM
Who will dare to speak against an age of consent of 13? What sort of monster would raise his voice against such a thing?
You can all note in your books that in less than a generation whoever opposes the idea of children being raised by sex maniacs will be considered cruel and without feelings, a fascist oppressor of minorities, a Nazi.
Every act of pedophilia is a consenting act, otherwise it would be a RAPE, to legitimize consented pedophilia is to legitimize any and all pedophilia. Who is going to reject the wonderfull love between Man and Boy or Girl as an attitude socially unacceptable?
Today it's a political party, tomorrow it's a law, the next day your Grandchildren (Europeans do not apply, as you barely have any children anyway) will live in a world where the kids saturday play activity is going to his best friend's house to have a sex party with his friend's father, and the friends of his father, everything consented, everything legal, everything fine, everything politically correct.
Skybird
05-31-06, 06:47 PM
Spain? The same spain thatb currently thinks on giving higher primates the same legal rights like humans?
Age of consent does not mean that at that age sexual intercourse with an fulla< dult automatically is legal. Usually it still is object to many restrictions specified in laws. That is a definite in Germany, at least. Here age of consent is 14 and 16. If you have sex with a 15 year old, you nevertheless get into trouble, if you are above 18 yourself.
However, you do not get the imprtant point: pedophilia is not about discussing the age of consent. it is about sex with children of ridiculously low age, or even babies. the point is that their agendy may say "12" now, but tomorrow they will call everyone a intolerant extremist who does not agree to a lowering of that age to 10, on the basis of having previously accepted that a politcal party is accepted in society that explicitly focusses on issues like sex with animals, sex with children.
ever have been busy with pedophiles yopurself? I have been psychologist. I needed to learn about that a bit. Believe me, pedophilia is something that no society and culture should respect and accept. A party making that issue a part of it's agenda, and is shameless enough trying to make sex with animals an object of public debate, openly sympathizes with pedophiles. And this is unacceptable, because pedophiles do not stop being attracted at an age of 12, but even far more younger, sometimes the age is not given in years, but months.
People who got abused in their early childhood, and even at oh so high and mature ages like 10, 12 years, mostly suffer from that for the rest of their life, especially if it is no experience with some child of the same age, but with an older adult of fourty, for example (why does a 40 year old want to come to deal with a child of 12 or lower, btw?). could be that they will never be able to maintain a loving relation. Experience sexual satisfaction, or evemn have distant relations to the other sex. Friends. Family. Carreer in a job where they have to deal with people. Nightmares. Deep traumatization. Deep wounds inside. Mistrust. Depression. Suicidal tendencies
All this only because some . horny old bastards want to make around with a babyface.
Wehret den Anfängen.
I also could argue on the basis of that at least in Germany "unterlassene Hilfeleistung" (denial of assistance?) is under legal penalty.
Giving direct or indirect support to such a movement by tolerating it to be treated like an ordinary faction inside community is as if you are raping a child yourself - the guilt is the same. Because such a faction is no normal ordinary faction. It is sick, and evil. And it should be brandmarked as that: sick, and evil.
Skybird
05-31-06, 06:54 PM
How could a young human being too young by mind to decide reasonably and understandingly on the question of consent - decide on consent...? We are talking not of young adults, with fully developed characters, knowledge, experience- we are talking about CHILDREN! A ten year old does not express consent, because she/he does not know what he/she is talking about, and what it all is about. Pedophiles are perverts that try to make the approach maybe tender and persuasive, manipulating the child over a, longer time. first the candies, than the playtoys, than an occasional storke or hug, than some relief in clothing, and then... children of too young ages do not know how to defend, they get "paralysized", for example, and let it happen simply because they do not know any better. They are CHILDREN, dammit!
An act of pedophilia always is a rape - the rape of a child. For the same reason children are not rgarded as capable of contracting at a too young age, they also cannot be assumed to be able to decide on the question of consent.
TLAM Strike
05-31-06, 06:58 PM
Age of Consent around the world:
http://img256.imageshack.us/img256/592/800pxageofconsent7pb.th.png (http://img256.imageshack.us/my.php?image=800pxageofconsent7pb.png)
From Wi[k]ipedia article:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_consent
Usually it still is object to many restrictions specified in laws. Yes, that's true of many of the US states. But what I just read about Spain said this was not the case. (Not sure if it's right or not, just did some quick research.) As 14-50 is just as legal as 14-17.
I guess my point is that Spain's age was 12 within the past decade. And here you have people calling for murder of a would be political party that seeks that same age of consent.
I'll state again that I have very strong feelings about protecting children from sex with adults. Both because of my family history and because I feel it's clearly immoral. But reactionary attitudes upset me. No matter how just you may think you are, you must repsect others rights. And in this specific case, the rights to seek change in current laws is a right I would die for.
Do I want these people to win and change the laws? Hell no. But as a citizen you have the right to vote. Not to murder. If the rest of the population disagrees with your morality, then move or seek to change the laws yourself.
To state redundently that this issue cannot be discussed makes me sick. The only issue being discussed is a persons right to legally change the law. And no matter how distasteful you find this particular case, you can't make exceptions.
Or, you can. But you won't like the end result. Trust me.
A ten year old does not express consentThat's true. But who mentioned a ten year old? The article says they are seeking to change it to 12.
I hope you understand that no one here on this thread is saying this is okay. I'm debating I think it's wrong to prevent anyone from seeking to legally change a law. If it's sick and immoral, then you've nothing to worry about. It won't pass. Understand?
I personally think South Park was right when they said no one should have sex before they are 17. That seems about right to me.
squigian
05-31-06, 07:18 PM
We must not take this matter lying down. These nutters may be able to pull it off, seeing how other madmen managed to get their policies passed. They must be attacked as the sick and twisted people that they are, and have their 'ideas' :doh: challenged at every step.
It's the old paedo line of 'the children want sex; we fulfill their desires' is ridiculous. The children must be vindicated (I love that word) of any compliance with these sick perverts who manipulate their young and naive minds. Retribution must be exacted and these 'people' charged with any and all applicable offensives.
If this fails, we will resort to plan B :yep:. Meet me in Amsterdam with several caltrops, a brazier, two iron pokers and a Luger :rock:
http://cyborgcow.net/gallery/albums/userpics/10002/normal_paedofinder-general.jpg
If this fails, we will resort to plan B. Meet me in Amsterdam with several caltrops, a brazier, two iron pokers and a LugerSounds good, Hitler.
One of the sad consequences of a free society, sick people are free to push their twisted agendas, and we are afraid to call it for what it is: perverted.
I'm not afraid...ITS PERVERTED!
And I think that we haven't declined too much to the point that most people won't stand up and say what a stupid and sick idea it is.... most people anyway...hopefully?
TteFAboB
05-31-06, 07:34 PM
Hitler was elected democratically.
The people doesn't always know what's best for them, and sometimes must even be protected from their own short-sighted brutality.
Make a referendum for the death penalty in a region where crime is rampant and it will win.
The people doesn't always know what's best for them, and sometimes must even be protected from their own short-sighted brutalityAgreed. But by whom? People?
And you're right about Hitler being elected. Just as Jesus was legally executed by a state. Yet, most of his followers are in favor of the death penalty.
People. Whatcha gonna do? :damn:
TteFAboB
05-31-06, 08:24 PM
Yes, indeed.
When people are looking in the long-term, to write a constitution or a bill of rights for example, they are protecting themselves from moments where all they care is short-term.
Unless we're willing to lower the voting age to 12 too, then the abused children get the chance to vote against their abusers, otherwise, who's going to defend them? The Fascists?
Unless we're willing to lower the voting age to 12 too
That's a very good point. Pretty much sums it all up.
scandium
05-31-06, 10:44 PM
Try for some perspective. When alcohol was illegal in the US, I'm sure many people ran for office on the 'undo prohabition' idea. By your logic, this was criminal of these people.
Any comparison between legalizing pedophelia and legalizing alcohol falls on its face for one simple reason: alcohol use when it was prohibitted was a victimless crime. My decision to consume this beverage doesn't require a partner. Further, to do so legally now I must be 19 years of age or older. In some places it is 21. Do you not see how abusrd it is to compare the legalization of a substance, for those 19 to 21 years of age, to legalizing sexual relations with someone who is 12?
That is the second aspect of absurdity in your arguement: the notion that were this so called "political party" (which they are not, they are an association of perverts FYI) voted into office by adults that it would then be ok for them to legalize sexual relations with children.
Society does not even permit children to vote and for good reason. It does not permit them to consume alcohol either and again for good reason. But it is "free political expression" to attempt to change the laws to allow adults to have sexual relations with 12 year olds? No, it is perverted. As Skybird has said, there are certain things in society that don't belong within the realm of political debate and sexual relations with 12 year old kids is one of them. This is not "politics", this is perversion.
It doesn't matter what you say. To say that someone can't use the system in place to change laws like everyone else because you don't agree with them is nonsense.
In this case, sure. It's pretty clear what's right and wrong. But it's just like free speech. Allow one restriction and you open the door for total control (like we do pretty much have).
You missed my point completely with your rebutal.
I want to insult you for not understanding the fundimental idea behind this attitude, simply because I know explaining it won't do any good.
But I'm not gonna bother.
Skybird
06-01-06, 03:26 AM
Agreed. But by whom? People?
And you're right about Hitler being elected. Just as Jesus was legally executed by a state. Yet, most of his followers are in favor of the death penalty.
What? most followers of Jesus are pro death penalty? Strange. I have exactly the opposite perception. maybe many american fundamentalists are. Wannabe-christians who label themselves as soemthing that they are not. Because I am usually very strict and precise in my differing between church/Christianity/sects, and those who truly follow the message of Jesus , I see that statement as absurd. There is not one favouring death penalty and following Jesus.
And Hitler being elected. Of course public intimidation and misinformation never have anything to do with electorial processes. Elected is elected.
Skybird
06-01-06, 03:58 AM
Yes, that's true of many of the US states. But what I just read about Spain said this was not the case. (Not sure if it's right or not, just did some quick research.) As 14-50 is just as legal as 14-17.
I guess my point is that Spain's age was 12 within the past decade. And here you have people calling for murder of a would be political party that seeks that same age of consent.
No, I was talking about raising a basis of public acceptance for pedophilia. And that wannabe-party also is about sex with animals. And I did not talk of murder, but letting representatives of such a group know what public opinion thinks of them, by throwing eggs, tomatoes and stones at them wherever they appear on the scene. I also said that if I have to choose between death for a pedophile, and the wellbeing of a child, I choose for the child. Which makes killing him an act of prevention. I am an opponent to "detah penalty". The term itself even does not make sense and is unlogical, becasue a penalty is a sanction meant to change somebody's behavior, not to make him seize to exist. death penalty, imo, is nothing else than taking revenge. But under certain conditions, force and violence is acceptable for me in order to prevent some major evil deed being done.
I'll state again that I have very strong feelings about protecting children from sex with adults. Both because of my family history and because I feel it's clearly immoral. But reactionary attitudes upset me. No matter how just you may think you are, you must repsect others rights. And in this specific case, the rights to seek change in current laws is a right I would die for.
No, not all demands, not all requests for rifghts are equal, and not all shall be tolerated. Else you could argue that the Nazis had a right to gas the Jews. It was correctly done - on the basis of rules and orders. Shopuld it be seen as a tolerable act, then? If public torture to please the TV audience would be legalized by the text of a law - is it okay, then? There asre things that shall always be excluded from being regarded as a normal issue being object to regular procedures of law-making and opinion-building. Raping children is one of these. A party propagating this, more or less directly, is not a party like any other party there is. It's success should not be object to public opinion building. Tolerating it as such just indicates to what ammount our society and culture already has detoriated. If their is the plague in your city, you do not have a debate wether you nwant to legalize it by law, or not. You try to kill it by the roots before the whole population has been infested.
Do I want these people to win and change the laws? Hell no. But as a citizen you have the right to vote. Not to murder. If the rest of the population disagrees with your morality, then move or seek to change the laws yourself.
I do not accept any attempt to legalize murder. It is not an issue of majority in opinion building, it is not an issue of public debate. It is my decision not to tolerate it, under no circumstances, no matter what the mob is demanding. Tolerance needs limits, else you do not differ between what you are willing to tolerate, and what not. Man, how often I have written about the need for limits to tolerance...
I also rule out that tolerance for such a party project is acceptable. I don't give anything for what social philosophers and lawmakers think of my attitude. It is wrong. Simply that. Always. No need to gigve it any freedom to maneouver.
To state redundently that this issue cannot be discussed makes me sick. The only issue being discussed is a persons right to legally change the law.
Ethics rank higher than laws. Laws can be for the worst, anbd for the vil, becasue they are man'S work. but there is some universal ethic unaffected by laws, which is valid for every human being that labels it self as a civilized, social being. It is not a question of laws if ritual cannibalism during a parliamentary opening ceremny is allowed or not. It is no question of laws if rape of women is allowed or not. It is no question of laws if the connsumation of children is acceptabel or not. It must be considered as being banned, always. That there is no consensus in this is what is the real scandal here. Keep your laws for regulating traffic, and minor crimes. But don'T dare to subjugate basic humanitarian universal principles to lawmaking. Else you end up to question if living a life as a human being is really legal. And that is the attitude of a mind that led directly to the terms "lebensunwertes Leben" und concentration camps.
Quoting myself: "pedophilia is not about discussing the age of consent. it is about sex with children of ridiculously low age, or even babies. the point is that their agendy may say "12" now, but tomorrow they will call everyone a intolerant extremist who does not agree to a lowering of that age to 10, on the basis of having previously accepted that a politcal party is accepted in society that explicitly focusses on issues like sex with animals, sex with children."
And as Scandium said, and I also indicated, prohibition of a drugs and pedophilia do not compare, because the first crime has no victim, but the second has. That you compare these two nevertheless, and call a person a fashist if he does not agree with your anarchic ideal of unlimited tolerance thta does not make any difefrences anymore, tells volumes about you.
Bye.
"most followers of Jesus are pro death penalty? Strange. I have exactly the opposite perception. maybe many american fundamentalists are."
You are obviously unaware that Jesus was American. Just ask our president.
"No, not all demands, not all requests for rifghts are equal, and not all shall be tolerated. Else you could argue that the Nazis had a right to gas the Jews. It was correctly done"
No, it wasn't. It was fascism. Thanks for making my point for me.
"prohibition of a drugs and pedophilia do not compare, because the first crime has no victim"
Um...you're talking out of your rump there. As I said, my family was destroyed by alcohol. I guess you enjoy drinking so you have to try and tell yourself this. Knock yourself out.
As I said, I know booze does more damage to children everyday than sexual abuse. But, you like to drink, so just ignore that fact I guess?
Again, the entire point is you saying not to allow a political party, whose major issue is lowering the age of consent to 12. Where in Spain, it was 12 not 7 years ago. And is now, I guess, 13. Why aren't you protesting in Spain? Or, throwing rocks, as you say?
Have you bocotted products from Spain? Are you actively trying to get this law changed? Did you even know about it until I told you? No? Didn't think so.
I'm just so sick of seeing about once a month someone on some message board post an article about some pedophile and see the rest of the dimwits line up with comments like 'This is why I'm in favor of the death penalty.' And yes, often they are Christians.
Do you have any idea how many children are murdered each year? How many people are murdered each year?
To me, automobiles are a greater threat to children than pedophiles. But make a thread about the dangers of cars, and see how many people are willing to kill for that cause.
If you think you can have a free society and still pick and choose who runs for office and why, you are a moron. And after fascism has moved in (and in America, we are getting pretty close to that), a child's life won't be worth a plug nickle.
Not that it's worth much more than that now.
You think like a child.
TteFAboB
06-01-06, 11:44 AM
I'm all for coherence, so, here I go.
EDIT: Ok, I'm willing to kill Spanish Chimpanzees and drunk drivers.
So you don't have to get so sick anymore. :up: :D
TLAM Strike
06-01-06, 11:57 AM
If public torture to please the TV audience would be legalized by the text of a law - is it okay, then? Give the FoX network a few years on this one... :roll:
public torture to please the TV audienceI thought that's what American Idol was?
scandium
06-01-06, 12:59 PM
Um...you're talking out of your rump there. As I said, my family was destroyed by alcohol. I guess you enjoy drinking so you have to try and tell yourself this. Knock yourself out.
How exactly do you destroy a family by alcohol? Drown them in it? Not that I don't understand what you're trying to say, but in this discussion precise wording matters. Thus, likely actions by one or more people abusing alcohol almost destroyed your family, and not the beverage itself. This is a very important distinction to make to understand where myself, Skybird, and others are coming from: pedophilia is in itself abusive. Alcohol is enjoyed by many socially with no adverse effect on anyone else. The prohibition against alcohol use was done because society feared it would be abused and lead to the degeneration of society. Pedophilia is in itself abusive and degenerate.
This kind of goes to the distinction between ethics and morality. Prohibition is an ethical choice as alcohol is, in itself, a neutral quantity and the only political decision is whether or not to permit it, and if it is permitted, how to regulate it. It is not considered "evil" although, as with most things in life, it may be abused and result in evil being done. That, again, is an ethical debate as no attempt is being made to define "good" or "evil" in it.
Sexual relations with 12 year olds is a whole other thing entirely. Its a moral debate since the act is condemned by society, labeled as a perversion, and considered in itself evil. In discussing whether or not to permit it you are raising moral questions that have a very fundamental impact on society and which cannot be settled within the political sphere because they are not part of that sphere.
Do you have any idea how many children are murdered each year? How many people are murdered each year? To me, automobiles are a greater threat to children than pedophiles. But make a thread about the dangers of cars, and see how many people are willing to kill for that cause.
Cars are not designed to kill children so there's no "cause" there.
If you think you can have a free society and still pick and choose who runs for office and why, you are a moron. And after fascism has moved in (and in America, we are getting pretty close to that), a child's life won't be worth a plug nickle.
Not that it's worth much more than that now.
You think like a child.
You won't convince anyone of the strength of your arguements by calling them children. I'm all for debate but this is not debate. You are simply rambling here and resorting to unwarranted ad hominen attack.
No. Not an attack. Your logic is that of a child. Sorry.
No. Not an attack. Your logic is that of a child. Sorry.
Oh dear, scandium and skybird are anything but children. :nope:
Skybird said this:
most followers of Jesus are pro death penalty? Strange. I have exactly the opposite perception. maybe many american fundamentalists are. Wannabe-christians who label themselves as soemthing that they are not. Because I am usually very strict and precise in my differing between church/Christianity/sects, and those who truly follow the message of Jesus , I see that statement as absurd.
Now from that, I don't know exactly if they're Christian or not. But it seems so. Not sure. But then 30 minutes later, they posted this:
but letting representatives of such a group know what public opinion thinks of them, by throwing eggs, tomatoes and stones at them wherever they appear on the scene
So yeah, in debate, tact is never my goal. That's just the way I am. But to go from putting people down for not really practicing the teaching of Christ to literally throwing stones at others? I have a problem with that mentality.
Always have. Always will.
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.