Archive for category Teenage Sexuality

Meredith Maran (My lie): False accusations due to “repressed-memory”-of-child-abuse witch hunt

Posted by Devils Advocate in Men's Rights & Feminism, Teenage Sexuality on

Meredith Maran’s recent book “My Lie” describes how Meredith accused her own father of child abuse and rape. She was fooled into this by then fashionable feminist witch hunt invention of “repressed memory”, that a third of all kids were sexually abused and just had forgotten. She is sorry for it, but does not quite see the monstrosity of how she almost destroyed her father’s life.

“I allow an innocent man to sit in prison if it meant keeping children safe”
(Meredith Maran)

In the middle of the book, while you are still deeply in the mind-set of being molested, there’s a notion you agree with that if one innocent man goes to prison, but it stops a hundred molesters, it’s worth it. Do you still agree with that notion?

I’m fairly close to a man still in prison, and really believe he is innocent. I know how he’s suffered. I know he’s 80 years old and in ill health. He’s spent 20 years in prison, for no reason. If every elementary school child is now taught how to protect themselves from sexual abuse — and even more to the point, some father or preschool teacher who feels the urge to molest a child will be inhibited from doing so because they think there are guys still in jail for doing that — but innocent people are in prison, do I have to make that choice? It is a Sophie’s choice kind of thing. Would I allow an innocent man to sit in prison if it meant keeping children safe?

So would you make that choice?

I think so.

Source of this monstrosity: salon.com/books/int/2010/09/20/meredith_maran_my_lie_interview/

Meredith Maran did not learn. She has a little pity for a guy whose life has been totally destroyed by 20 years of jail in spite of his innocence. No total outrage. No desire ti fight for justice (to make amends for her own injustice).

She still suffers from brainwashing by more recent feminist fables. Meredith Maran  is sorry she destroyed her father’s life. But Meredith wants to totally destroy the life of a totally 100% innocent guys in order to save children from some indecent fondling? In this blog I make it a point that even the true culprit of indecent fondling of a (real) child deserves much lighter punishment then decades in jail. But Meredity wants that the totally innocent guy rots and gets raped in jail?

I use the word “real” child, denoting 3, 5 or 10 year old, because feminist laws
nowadays define 17 year olds as “children”

A child molestor is a guy who talks to children in creepy ways, who has indecent wandering hands. A guy who takes photos.  An old grandpa who is getting a little too cozy. Or a 20 year old having sex with a 15 year old. Some reason for concern, yes. But feminist propaganda confounds senile grandpas with slight errors of judgment and violent penetrative toddler mutilators and (real) infant rapists.

I use the word “real” rapist, because all the above indecent behaviors
nowadays are officially called “rape”, causing total confusion.
• When a “Rape” is not a Rape! The Abuse of the word “Rape”. & the Perversion of Language

Child molestation might not be harmful!!?

Feminists  either totally invent or vastly exaggerate the damage that is being done my low level child molestation. Where is the proof? Inconvenient science gets officially repressed and condemned:

So much that the entire US senate condemned a prestigious peer reviewed study by a 99-0 vote.
Scientific Publications Condemned and Repressed by US Congress and Senate

Wait, there is more! This article continues! Read the rest of this entry » »
Meredith Maran (My lie): False accusations due to “repressed… » continues here »

Share

, , , , ,

No Comments

Sexting: Courts victimize Teens with child porn charges for exchanging their own nude photos

Posted by Devils Advocate in Child Porn Witch Hunt, Teenage Sexuality on

More child porn insanity! Children nowadays need legal counsel to know if and how they can photograph themselves or have relations with other teenagers, or else they can spend years in jail and remain the rest of their lives on sex offender lists.

US court on ‘sexting’: Child porn or child’s play?
01/15/2010 PHILADELPHIA (AP) — The first criminal case involving “sexting” reached a U.S. appeals court on Friday — a case that asks whether racy cell-phone photos of three girls amount to child pornography or child’s play.

A county prosecutor in northeastern Pennsylvania threatened to pursue felony charges if the girls skipped his “re-education” course on such topics as sexual predators and “what it means to be a girl in today’s society.”

The photos show two 12-year-olds in training bras at a sleepover and a topless 16-year-old stepping out of the shower.[. . . ]

“You’re going to see more provocative photos in a Victoria’s Secret catalog,” [ . . . ]
newsok.com/us-court-on-sexting-child-porn-or-childs-play/article/3432301

Feminist “Logic”

Analogies
“Naked pictures of children on the Internet draws predators the same way a swamp draws mosquitoes,” argued lawyer Michael Donohue of Scranton, who represents the prosecutor’s office. Authorities must sometimes protect children from themselves, he argued. newsok.com/3-face-charges-in-texhoma-sexting/article/3480534 “Texas Chainsaw Massacre” movies really attract chainsaw murderers like a swamp draws moskitoes.

Cop Killer rap music really incites violence against police and school authorities.Soccer stadiums attract violent hooligans like a swamp draws mosquitoes. Let us close down all soccer stadiums.

Photos of knives, swords, and guns attract murderers.

Actually, the analogies are much more convincing then the lawyer’s statement in column 1, which is devoid of any logic or scientifc support. Pure manipulative nonsense. It is intriguing how utter nonsense is socially acceptable whenever it is  backed by feminism and women’s studies. No clue about logic and scientific method. But absolute masters in manipulating public opinion.

Here is the root of the insanity.  Unproven hysterical statements, with no scientific backing, are the excuse for a witch hunt. Feminists use real predators, real rapists, kidnappers and child murderers as an excuse for their political goals.  So innocent girls photographing themselves naked get arrested!  Why should it be a crime to photograph yourself? Maybe it is also a crime for the girls to look into the mirror?

I dare to say something really taboo:  what is the problem if dirty old men like to look at nude adolescent pictures and do absolutely no harm whatsoever. Why should they get 10 years in jail?

So even if it were true that naked pictures of children on the internet draw predators. For what? To look at photos in the privacy of their home? What is the problem? Maybe this is positive, so they don’t go out trying to check out what real adolescents look like naked.

Compare:

  • Supreme Court oks indefinite detention for possession of photos. But violent robbers get freed.
  • Pedophile witch hunt & underage sex law excesses: why the witch hunt and how to change it?
  • Nude adolescent photos: a Crime. Videos of lynching, killing, beating adolescents are legal Prime Time TV.
  • Years of Jail for “clicking on child porn link”. But lynching videos are legal.

    • There must be a special evolutionary skill how feminists manage to convince male law makers to support their warped feminist  “women studies” logic (Feminist arguments against prostitution debunked)

    Wait, there is more! This article continues! Continue reading this article about sexting (courts victimizing adolescents) »
    Sexting: Courts victimize Teens with child porn charges for exchan… » continues here »

    Share

    ,

    9 Comments

    Rape Laws: dismantling of due process explained step by step

    Posted by admin in Men's Rights & Feminism, Teenage Sexuality on

    How all due process got dismantled in rape accusations. Feminst power at its best.

    Feminism overrides the constitution! Amazing! Rules of due process, presumption of innocence, “innocent until proven guilty”,  are fundamental or constitutional law in most countries. Feminists managed to override  constitutional guarantees, as they managed to change thousand year old definitions of legal terms like “rape” and “child”  (see: Female evolutionary Superiority in social manipulation causes feminist Language Distortions’ universal acceptance ).

    Highly recommended reading:
    Domestic violence fairytales threaten constitutional protections
    SPECIAL REPORT
    Are Domestic Violence Policies Respecting
    Our Fundamental Freedoms?

    All the following content was shamelessly copied from falserapesociety.blogspot.com/2010/07/if-presumptively-innocent-are-given.html I could not say it any better, and shortening it is a pity.

    1. Prior to the great wave of rape reforms starting in the 1970s, rape advocates reported, with seemingly infinite invention, that women were too scared, too embarrassed, too certain of its futility to report their own rapes. The sexual grievance industry insisted that rape was underreported, and that reforms were needed to do justice to countless women who suffered in silence the brutal indignity of rape. So we kowtowed to the sexual grievance industry to solve “the problem.”
    2. First, we adopted laws that eliminated the requirement of corroboration, which de facto served to flip the old law on its head: now, women don’t need any corroboration of their claims, but men and boys are arrested based solely on even the far-fetched say-so of any woman or girl if they can’t produce corroborating evidence of their innocence.
      That wasn’t enough, they said. So we adopted rape shield laws that forbade almost any evidence of the accuser’s prior sexual history with persons other than the accused, a rule that resulted in innumerable innocent men and boys being sent to prison for alleged rapes that never occurred.
    3. That wasn’t enough, they said. So we adopted laws that eliminated the requirement of force, and innocent men and boys who misunderstood the acquiescence of a woman were sent to prison.
    4. That wasn’t enough, they said.  So we enacted laws that eliminated the mens rea requirement for rape.  Historically, in a rape prosecution, the guilty defendant must have had the intention to have intercourse with a woman without her consent.  Too stringent, said the sexual grievance industry, and the requirement was lightened or dropped altogether.
    5. That wasn’t enough, they said.  So we enacted laws (in the UK and a handful of US states) that legally forbade naming rape accusers. In the US, the news agencies and outlets have, by common consensus, agreed not to name rape accusers. The mere allegation of rape by the anonymous female, without any other evidence and no matter how far-fetched, invites a man’s name to be splashed all over the newspaper, TV, radio and Internet for the world to titillate at the details of his humiliation.
    6. That wasn’t enough, they said.  So we enacted laws that lengthened and even eliminated statutes of limitations for rape, and now, men are sometimes accused of and charged with alleged rapes that occurred 20, 30, 40 or more years after they supposedly occurred, effectively foreclosing the accused from mounting a meaningful defense because the evidence of their innocence has long disappeared.
      Wait, there is more! This article continues! That still was not enough. Keep reading and click here »
      Rape Laws: dismantling of due process explained step by step » continues here »

    Share

    , , ,

    23 Comments

    EU Requests To Retain User Data From Search Engines to protect children from pedophiles

    Posted by admin in Child Porn Witch Hunt, Teenage Sexuality on

    The most recent tension came from Pakistan’s decision that it will monitor Google, Bing, Yahoo (and other sites) for blasphemous content. Now it is the EU’s turn to try to impose checks on search engines through its controversial "Written Declaration 29."

    Written Declaration 29
    Italy’s European Member of Parliament, Tiziano Motti, is the author of the proposal, commonly known as Written Declaration 29, adopted last week. His aim was to protect children from abusers and paedophiles lurking on the web by requesting that user data from search engines be stored and used by governments to track sexual offenders.

    Source: http://blog.searchenginewatch.com/100629-053942

    Don’t we have enough REAL problems?

    • A large percentage of children grow up in poverty stricken families, unintegrated into middle class society, condemned to low level of schooling and an unsuccessful life. 
    • Hundreds of millions of our children will live an unhealthy life and die early, due to obesity, wrong nutrition, lack of exercise.
    • Hundreds of millions of children also will be victims of bullying at school, threatened, intimidates, psychologically damaged.

    And now, search machines are supposed to become government spies? In violation of civil rights of hundreds of million law abiding internet users. With the intent to catch a few dozen dangerous "pedophiles" and entrap a couple of thousand harmless surfers who have bad taste and seek photos of young kids?

    Watchdog Privacy International immediately stepped up to the plate by issuing a joint statement with search engine Ixquick, entitled: Ixquick: Search Engines Should Become Government Spies, Says EU Parliament. Ixquick has built its reputation on not storing any user search data and therefore feels it has been singled out by the Declaration. For Robert Beens, CEO of Ixquick, Written Declaration 29 would jeopardize the privacy of over 500 million people across Europe when it should really uniquely concern known offenders. "Sex offenders exchange files through underground networks. They don’t find this stuff through search engines," Alex Hanff of Privacy International said in the statement. "I spent eight years helping law enforcement track down online sex offenders and never once did we see a case where search engine data was useful."

    Source: http://blog.searchenginewatch.com/100629-053942

    Human-Stupidity wrote more about these issues are in these topics: Child porn wich hunt and Teenage Sexuality witch hunt

     

    Related articles about European Union Data Retention Plans
    1. EU Politicians Tricked Into Supporting Data Retention On Search Terms… ‘For The Children’ (techdirt.com)
    2. European MPs back web-search data retention plan (newstatesman.com)
    3. MEPs back web search history plan (independent.co.uk)
    4. Ixquick: Search Engines Should Become Government Spies, Says EU Parliament (eon.businesswire.com)
    5. Italian MEP Wants To Eliminate Anonymity On the Internet (search.slashdot.org)
    6. EU Request To Retain User Data From Search Engines Sparks Widespread Anger (searchenginewatch.com)
    7. EU Parliament plans Google-powered paedo detector (go.theregister.com)
    8. MEPs call for search engines to store web search histories for two years (telegraph.co.uk)
    9. EU Ministers Want ISP and Google Logs To Fight Paedos (dvorak.org)
    Share

    , ,

    1 Comment

    "Once Fallen" Derek Logue about sex offender registration

    Posted by admin in Teenage Sexuality on

    ONCE FALLEN is a site that provides comprehensive information site on sex offender
    issues. The ONCE FALLEN mission:

    1. Provide fact guides on a variety of sex offender laws and related issues
    2. Provide support and referral services for individuals impacted by these laws

    The site ONCE FALLEN: comprehensive research about all topics related to “sex offenders”.

    I am a FORMER Registrant currently residing in Alabama. On February 20, 2000 I was arrested in Alabama for making sexual contact (kissing) with an 11-year-old girl I had known while I was in college (around my 23rd birthday). I plead guilty to one count of 1st degree sexual abuse and received a six year sentence. I served 3 years at Bullock County Correctional Facility in Alabama, voluntarily took sex offender treatment sources, and was released on April 1, 2003.  About Derek Logue

    We cannot really know if this story is true, because by our language distorting laws, a child kisser gets called a “child rapist”. This is how our language has been redefined (see other articles   about Child porn wich hunt and Teenage Sexuality witch hunt in this blog)

    In 2003 I began posting at www.sexcriminals.com under the screen name “fallenone.” From my time as a regular poster there and at www.sohopeful.org, I found my calling as an advocate for the rights of sex offenders who have paid their debts to society and seek to rebuild their lives.   About Derek Logue

    Murderers, burglers, arsonists, extortionists, mob killers, child kidnappers, child mutilators, child killers, everyone gets a chance after they served their term. Interestingly, society is much more afraid of a child kisser then of a child murderer.

    As a former sex offender, Derek Logue humbly questions the life sentence of the sex offender law, the fact that they are singled out forever.  He does not even dare question the obvious:

    Why would one have to spend 3 years in jail for kissing a 11 year old, if she participated willingly. Maybe her father should have watched the child more closely and slapped Mr. Logan. Looks more appropriate to me, That is what would have happened 50 years ago, before the underage witch hunt began. When age of consent was 12 years old, but that referred to sexual activity, not to kisses. (human-stupidity.com)

    If these sex offender laws applied to predators that drag little children into the forest and mutilate and kill them, they probably would make sense. But even then, why are these people singled out? An arsonist who sets a school ablaze with a few child victims, he does not need to register after he gets out of jail! Nor will his neighbors and schools be notified of his presence.

    Meet Derek Logue, legal rights activist, book author and former sex offender. Derek speaks out about the sex offender registry, Adam Walsh Act and Ohio’s sex offender residency restrictions.

    Wait, there is more! This article continues! Read the rest of this entry » »
    "Once Fallen" Derek Logue about sex offender registratio… » continues here »

    Share

    , , ,

    12 Comments

    Change.org sucks: "womens rights" feminists censor & silence dissent

    Posted by admin in Manipulative Language, Teenage Sexuality on

    Change.org silences dissent

    Hi Stupidity, it seems that you have been on a bit of a crusade the past day or so on lots of posts from the last month related to rape.

    Call it an anti-crusade. Feminists have been on a very successful crusade to re-define language and change legal due process. So a vengeful women’s lone unproven accusation can instantly get the real victim, the falsely accused, into jail. Unlike all other crimes, where proof or multiple witnesses are needed.

    Specifically, you have posted fairly demeaning dismissals of victims and the definition of rape.

    Demeaning dismissals of linguistic definitions. That is how far we have gotten. Even definitions of terms can not be questioned. The essence of taboos to perpetuate witch hunts and make sure the masses are deceived by misleading perverted re-definition of terms like “rape”

    Your comments are not particularly welcome here. Rape is a serious offense and it is incredibly traumatizing for it’s victims. I have removed all of your comments, links and have blocked your account before you post any more comments which would cause pain to real victims of real crimes.

    And real victims of real rape get confused with “victims” that consented to fondling!? That is demeaning. And the “perpetrator” of consensual acts then gets gang-raped in prison, because of a pervasive attitude that (falsely convicted) rapists deserve getting raped. That is pain to real victims of real prison rape.

    ‘Women’s rights at change.org perpetuate manipulative language distortion to foster feminist political goals

    It is essential for a witch hunt that dissent gets silenced, made taboo.  Change.org’s feminist watchdogs invoke emotional terms (“cause real pain to real victims of real crimes”) in order to avoid discussing the issues and silence dissent easily.  This is the central issue of Human-Stupidity.com: how Taboos, Dogmas, Religion make even the Intelligent blind, irrational, “stupid”. And self deception makes the censor believe s/he is a liberal person.

    Thus, of course, the real pain caused to real victims of witch hunts is totally ignored.  Guys who spend years in jail for consensual sex with an adolescent, or for a unproven false rape accusation. And who get special attention from prison rapists who like to prey on alleged rapists in order to exert cruel and usual punishment.

    But my main issue here is not even sex laws. It is manipulative Abuse of Language to deceive the masses. The concerted world wide conspiracy to use the word “rape” for “seducing an adolescent” or for “indecently fondling a minor”. And the perverted inversion of due legal process. Alleged sex offenders are “guilty until proven innocent” and any accusation by a lone alleged victim is taken as proof of a crime.

    Change.org dispute: full text follows here

    Wait, there is more! This article continues! Read the rest of this entry » »
    Change.org sucks: "womens rights" feminists censor &… » continues here »

    Share

    , , , , , ,

    11 Comments

    Definition of “Rape”: When a “Rape” is not a Rape! The Abuse of the word “Rape” & the Perversion of Language

    Posted by Devils Advocate in Manipulative Language, Teenage Sexuality on

    Abused Language: When a “rape” is not a rape

    “Fondling a child”, or “consensual sex with an adolescent” nowadays can be called “rape”, in press reports, even in legal code (“statutory rape”).
    This purposeful confusion created by the dilusion of the word “rape” helps to whip up punishment frenzy for crimes of “adolescent seduction” or “child fondling” at the expense of banalizing real forceful violent penetrating non-consensual rape.

    So the word “rape” is abusively re-defined to serve an agenda: to make smaller transgressions look like heinous crimes.

    The entire World Press,  the United Nations, everyone swallowed the bait and became manipulated! Amazing!

    Similarly,  “adolescent nudity” no can be called “child porn”.  Defining 17 year olds as children has the collateral effect that now there is no word for real children of 12 and under, as there is no word  left for real rape.  This confusion must have a manipulative motive, as there is no logical need to change the meaning of words that had a clear definition for centuries.

    Real meaning of the word “rape”

    What do most people understand by the word “rape”? What was the meaning of “rape” for centuries? Non-consensual intercourse with penetration, usually involving violence or threats.

    In criminal law, rape is an assault by a person involving sexual intercourse with another person without that person’s consent. Outside of law, the term is often used interchangeably with sexual assault,[1][2][3] a closely related (but in most jurisdictions technically distinct) form of assault typically including rape and other forms of non-consensual sexual activity.[4][5]
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape

    A criminal offense defined in most states as forcible sexual relations with a person against that person’s will.

    Rape is the commission of unlawful sexual intercourse or unlawful sexual intrusion. Rape laws in the United States have been revised over the years, and they vary from state to state.

    Historically, rape was defined as unlawful sexual intercourse with a woman against her will. The essential elements of the crime were sexual penetration, force, and lack of consent. Women who were raped were expected to have physically resisted to the utmost of their powers or their assailant would not be convicted of rape.
    http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/rape

    Barman freed despite admitting raping 12 year old girl

    A barman who admitted raping a 12 year old girl he met through a social networking site has walked free from court after convincing a judge he was tricked into believing she was 19. Barman freed despite admitting raping 12 year old girl (telegraph.co.uk)
    Man who had sex with girl, 12, admits rape but is freed after woman judge says he was ‘duped’ into thinking she was 19

    Shocking, is it not? He raped a girl and was set free because he was mistaken about her age! It is ok to rape a girl if she is 19 years old?

    Well, he did not REALLY rape her. If she is 19 years old then consensual sex, initiated by the girl who brought the condoms, is not called rape.  Dear Reader, haven’t you understood that any sex with a 12 year old is rape?  Our language has changed in the last 25 years! But, of course, this is on purpose. Once you understand that rape is not rape, the intended shock effect gets lost.

    So the 12 year old was eager to have sex with him, actively initiated sex and purposefully deceived the barman into thinking that she was 19.  So, miraculously, he was freed. Doesn’t sound so shocking any more.

    See Why I hate statutory Rape Laws | A Public Defender

    After breaking marriage vow, sex becomes rape

    Having a sexual relationship with a woman with a false promise of marriage can also be termed as rape. The case was being heard in a Delhi Court and it involved a man having sexual intercourse with his neighbour. The man was found guilty of rape and sentenced to seven years of rigorous imprisonment.

    In the present case, Chhotey Lal, the convict and father of six children, had eloped with his neighbour in New Delhi in September 2004, and took her to far away places like Jaipur and Chandigarh. According to the girl, the duo established sexual relations after Lal assured her that he would marry her ‘very soon’. Meanwhile, the girl’s father lodged a ‘missing’ report with the police. The police detained Lal and the girl in March 2005 at Sarai Kale Khan Bus Terminal when they were returning to Delhi. Chhotey Lal was prosecuted for abducting the girl and having sexual relationships with her on false pretext.

    “The so-called consent under a false promise to marriage is no consent,” additional sessions judge Mahavir Singhal said.

    Highlighting the difference between ‘will’ and ‘consent’, the court said that a nod for sexual relations obtained by a man on the false pretext would not amount to a ‘legal or valid’ consent to save him from punishment for rape.

    The Court observed that, even if the woman is assumed to be a willing partner in having a physical relationship, that the accused had no intention to marry her would make it a case where consent was given under misconception of facts, nullifying the efficacy of the nod.
    Rape by promising marriage in India

    Adolescent raped repeatedly?

    Due to the language confusion, we really can not know if she was raped, or more likely, seduced. But most women don’t get raped repeatedly on various days.

    In 1997, 15-year-old Tina Anderson became pregnant after being raped repeatedly by an older man she knew from church. Shockingly, when her pastor found out, he forced her to apologize in front of the entire congregation in Concord, New Hampshire, and then promptly helped whisk her away to live in Colorado.

    According to Tina, the first time she was raped by Ernest Willis, it was in the backseat of car after he’d given her a driving lesson. She didn’t tell anyone because she was terrified that she’d be blamed. After being raped by Willis again, Tina became pregnant.
    http://womensrights.change.org/blog/view/ teenager_forced_to_apologize_to_her_church_for_being_raped

    Did she get “raped” or seduced? we don’t know

    What does the average reader of this article think? They guy attacked the girl in a dark alley and had sex with her under the threat of violence.  Strange, though, that he raped her repeatedly on different days.
    Now it is amazing that feminists and moralists managed to put such manipulative language even into penal codes. It is easier to promote your agenda with misleading language. “Teenager forced to appologize for being seduced” does not sound so shocking.  The word manipulation must  be planned and purposeful.
    http://human-stupidity.com/irrationality/stupid-dogma/teenage-sexuality
    http://human-stupidity.com/irrationality/stupid-dogma/child-porn-witch-hunt

    Language confusion obfuscates facts

    So no matter if you think sex with underage should be punished, I hope you agree that the truth should be said and that manipulative language should be abolished.
    By the way, Ernest Willis is a child rapist. Because according to new definitions of child pornography, a child now is anyone under 18. The United Nations, the US, and Europe have adopted that definition.

    Whoppi Goldberg differentiates “rape-rape” and non-violent so called “rape”

    Hollywood has rallied behind Roman Polanski after his arrest in Switzerland over the weekend, with the actor Whoopi Goldberg suggesting that whatever he was guilty of it wasn’t “rape-rape”.

    As a guest on The View chatshow on US television, she said: “I know it wasn’t rape-rape. It was something else but I don’t believe it was rape-rape. He went to jail and and when they let him out he was like, ‘You know what, this guy’s going to give me a hundred years in jail. I’m not staying.’ So that’s why he left.”

    Polanski was not guilty of ‘rape-rape’, says Whoopi Goldberg

    Age discimination: why is a 15 year old capable to consent to sex with a 16 year old but not with a 35 year old?

    Then we can disagree on the last point: if a 15 year old can decide who to have sex with. Interestingly, she can decide to have sex with a 16 year old. How come she cannot have sex with a 35 year old? Age discrimination by law?

    Mandatory psychological counselling before underage sex?

    Are you worried about manipulation of the tender 15 year old? what about legalizing sex with underage girls, if they first undergo an hour of mandatory counselling and a 2 day cool off period? That should take care of this issue. This would guarantee safety for the 15 year old against being conned or manipulated. And it would be a good idea even for sex between consenting teenagers. So there would be no age discrimination!

    Click on “more” for the rest of the story ……..

    Wait, there is more! This article continues! Read the rest of this entry » »
    Definition of “Rape”: When a “Rape” is not… » continues here »

    Share

    , , , ,

    14 Comments

    Supreme Court oks indefinite detention for possession of photos. But violent robbers get freed.

    Posted by admin in Child Porn Witch Hunt, Teenage Sexuality on

    Indefinite detention for possession of photos ok’d by Supreme Court.  But violent Robbers must be freed after their term is over. Strange justice.

    People who watch tasteless photos (youth erotica, or real child porn) in the privacy of their own home, first spend years in jail, then can be held indefinitely, the US Supreme Court confirmed. People who rob, threaten, pick fights, bully, hurt children while driving drunk, these offenders are set free after their prison term is over.

    The Supreme Court ruled Monday that federal officials can indefinitely hold inmates considered “sexually dangerous” after their prison terms are complete.[...]

    “The statute is a ‘necessary and proper’ means of exercising the federal authority that permits Congress to create federal criminal laws, to punish their violation, to imprison violators, to provide appropriately for those imprisoned and to maintain the security of those who are not imprisoned by who may be affected by the federal imprisonment of others,” said Justice Stephen Breyer, writing the majority opinion.
    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/37192279

    So far, so good. I wonder, though, why don’t you add dangerous violent people, who habitually commit violent robberies, habitually drive drunk and get involved in accidents, gang banger bullies who will return terrorizing others on the street. The idea is good, just why exactly worried about sex offenders  only?

    The act, named after the son of “America’s Most Wanted” television host John Walsh, was challenged by four men who served prison terms ranging from three to eight years for possession of child pornography or sexual abuse of a minor. Their confinement was supposed to end more than two years ago, but prison officials said
    there would be a risk of sexually violent conduct or child molestation if they were released.

    Here is the serious problem: People who possessed computer files, a set of 0′s and 1′s that decode into the depiction of some nude teenagers, can be detained indefinitely? Even if it were the rare and unusual case that they possessed real violent rape photos of 5 year olds, what danger do these people pose to you, me, or our kids? Did they abuse? No! did they even take the photos? No! So why all the fuzz?

    So the Supreme Court legalizes locking up, indefinitely, people who in the privacy of their home look at pictures? To protect whom? I worry about being run over by a habitual drunk driver, my kids being beaten up by a gang bully or robbed by a violent drug addict in urgent need to rob 5 times a day to support his drug addiction. But why should I care about a guy who stares at child porn in the privacy of his home? No matter how gross the pictures might be! And one can go to jail for nude photos of 17 year olds.

    Wait, there is more! This article continues! Read the rest of this entry » »
    Supreme Court oks indefinite detention for possession of photos. B… » continues here »

    Share

    , ,

    9 Comments

    Switch to our mobile site