Political Crossfire Forums

[ubikk]

Quote:
The sexual dark age was when women were forced into marrage.

This still happens all over the world to 100s of millions of women every year.

[ubikk]

antonio62 wrote:
A lot of psychologists say that watching any kind of porn doesn't make you more likely to do what you saw. A lot would even say they think it lessens the chances.

Considering some of the latest data I've seen on porn consumption, I'd have to agree. The rape rate would be astronomical if porn were a leading cause of it.

[ideal]

perdidochas wrote: micfranklin wrote: But why charge her with "sexual abuse of children?"

Well, if she's the only one involved I agree, it's not a proper charge. However, it doesn't specify if those sex acts were of herself by herself or with others. If they involve others under 18, she is involved in the sexual abuse of children. Also, if she sent them to people under 18, I could see the charge as well.

Age based sexual misconduct charges don't apply when the other person is within your age group. The range for an age group varies state to state, but I think the lowest is three years and I doubt she had pictures of herself doing things with children that much younger than her. That much older and they're adults.

[ideal]

ieatfood wrote: You have to realize WHY child porn is illegal.

It is because child porn increases the likelyhood that a predator will rape a child. That has been shown.

Thus, by distributing photos of herself, she is increasing the likelyhood that a child somewhere will be raped/sodomized. That is the reason.

Now she may be only 15 and not be tried as an adult. But what she did was still a crime, as much so as if she had robbed a convenience store.

Fifteen isn't young enough(usually) to promote pedophilia fantasies. We don't want to accept it, but sexually a fifteen year old is an adult.

[micfranklin]

ideal wrote: ieatfood wrote: You have to realize WHY child porn is illegal.

It is because child porn increases the likelyhood that a predator will rape a child. That has been shown.

Thus, by distributing photos of herself, she is increasing the likelyhood that a child somewhere will be raped/sodomized. That is the reason.

Now she may be only 15 and not be tried as an adult. But what she did was still a crime, as much so as if she had robbed a convenience store.

Fifteen isn't young enough(usually) to promote pedophilia fantasies. We don't want to accept it, but sexually a fifteen year old is an adult.

Well, I gotta agree with you on that. And btw how young is young enough to promote pedophilic stuff?

[00timh]

Regardless if a person is under 18 or not, they are still guilty of child pornography. Because they use themselves makes no difference and shouldn't. Because it is of her own free will should make no differrence. Posting or publishing nude photos or vidoes of someone under the age of 18 is illegal and there is no grey area. A law is a law.

I do agree about a double standard though in regards to the Oprah show. That kid never should have been heralded as a victim if he voluntarily did this, especially after he received money.

I'm not what one would call a person who pushes for any type of sexual repression but I am a firm believe in keeping sexuality of public consumption for the people who engage in the behavior for proliferation to be of legal age.

[micfranklin]

I still haven't found out how the police actually found out about her.

But maybe they just happened to come across someone owning them.

[Gus]

LOL charging a child with child pornography is sort of self-contradictory...the whole point of restricting child porn is because children can't make proper decisions about stuff like that.

[00timh]

Gus wrote: LOL charging a child with child pornography is sort of self-contradictory...the whole point of restricting child porn is because children can't make proper decisions about stuff like that. Why should someone who is under the age of 18 get a free pass on something that is illegal?

[Gus]

00timh wrote: Gus wrote: LOL charging a child with child pornography is sort of self-contradictory...the whole point of restricting child porn is because children can't make proper decisions about stuff like that. Why should someone who is under the age of 18 get a free pass on something that is illegal?
Well to be consistent, the guardians are mostly responsible for the child so they should probably be charged. I'm not saying just ignore it, I'm saying that it's contradictory to charge a child with a crime that is designed to protect her. Interpreting the law literally and without analysis, yeah she's guilty of child porn. Obviously the law is flawed though since it doesn't account for a child distributing pictures of himself/herself (assuming its purpose was to protect children who are deemed unable to make such decisions).

[perdidochas]

BassistVIV wrote: ieatfood wrote: You have to realize WHY child porn is illegal.

It is because child porn increases the likelyhood that a predator will rape a child. That has been shown.

Thus, by distributing photos of herself, she is increasing the likelyhood that a child somewhere will be raped/sodomized. That is the reason.

Now she may be only 15 and not be tried as an adult. But what she did was still a crime, as much so as if she had robbed a convenience store.

In my experience, it seems like the opposite would be true. Looking at porn provides you with sexual release, therefore making you less horny, and therefore less likely to rape someone. I could be wrong, but that seems to make a little more sense to me.

Not really. The best approach to not getting horny is to abstain totally. The first 3 weeks is rough, but after that, you get less horny if you have stayed away from sexual release.

[perdidochas]

Enoch wrote: Silkheat wrote: You know in the context of this thread I pose this to you;

Any underage person who sees themselves naked is actively involved in child pornography. Furthermore any person who is underage and having sex is involved in child pornography, and rape. Also the people who take care of their children by changing diapers see their babies naked, which is child pornography. We should arrest every child who has seen themselves naked, and also arrest the vilain parents who have seen their babies naked.

Pathetic, adults are children in so many ways..... Man...then I should definately be in jail if that is the case. When I was 21 I had a 15 year-old brother of a friend who got incredibly sick one night, and I had to take care of him. He threw up all over himself, and I helped him undress, helped him in and out of the bathtub so he could clean up, and then dressed him again before getting him to bed. Guess I'm a child pornographer then.

Did you take pictures of him? If not, then you aren't a child pornographer.

[The Grandmaster]

perdidochas wrote: BassistVIV wrote: ieatfood wrote: You have to realize WHY child porn is illegal.

It is because child porn increases the likelyhood that a predator will rape a child. That has been shown.

Thus, by distributing photos of herself, she is increasing the likelyhood that a child somewhere will be raped/sodomized. That is the reason.

Now she may be only 15 and not be tried as an adult. But what she did was still a crime, as much so as if she had robbed a convenience store.

In my experience, it seems like the opposite would be true. Looking at porn provides you with sexual release, therefore making you less horny, and therefore less likely to rape someone. I could be wrong, but that seems to make a little more sense to me.

Not really. The best approach to not getting horny is to abstain totally. The first 3 weeks is rough, but after that, you get less horny if you have stayed away from sexual release.

Ridiculous. No, this does not work. The best way to remain not horny is a healthy real life sexual outlet. In the absense of that, pornography is the next best thing. Refraining does nothing but build pressure like a steam valve.

[cap'n queasy]

Bolshevik wrote: In Russia, many beautiful girls were forced into prostitution at a young age. It's a living. That's probably what this enterprizing young woman was trying to accomplish. She was stopped, sadly, in her tracks. I thought America was supposed to be a country of freedom? What kind of country do you live in; where a young girl can't sell herself as a sex item? What a sad, sad age we live in.

So, Communism presents folks with the opportunity to prostitute young women?

Lovely.

[eXploiTeD]

The age of consent should be lowered to 16 - and this holds for "pornography," driving laws, voting rights, criminal liability etc. A standard age at which people are deemed mature enough to take responsibility for their actions...

[perdidochas]

The Grandmaster wrote: perdidochas wrote: BassistVIV wrote: ieatfood wrote: You have to realize WHY child porn is illegal.

It is because child porn increases the likelyhood that a predator will rape a child. That has been shown.

Thus, by distributing photos of herself, she is increasing the likelyhood that a child somewhere will be raped/sodomized. That is the reason.

Now she may be only 15 and not be tried as an adult. But what she did was still a crime, as much so as if she had robbed a convenience store.

In my experience, it seems like the opposite would be true. Looking at porn provides you with sexual release, therefore making you less horny, and therefore less likely to rape someone. I could be wrong, but that seems to make a little more sense to me.

Not really. The best approach to not getting horny is to abstain totally. The first 3 weeks is rough, but after that, you get less horny if you have stayed away from sexual release.

Ridiculous. No, this does not work. The best way to remain not horny is a healthy real life sexual outlet. In the absense of that, pornography is the next best thing. Refraining does nothing but build pressure like a steam valve.

Have you ever tried it? I have. The first two or three weeks are rough, but after that your sex drive lessens. Yes, you do end up having the occasional wet dream, but overall the best approach is abstinence.

[cap'n queasy]

eXploiTeD wrote: The age of consent should be lowered to 16 - and this holds for "pornography," driving laws, voting rights, criminal liability etc. A standard age at which people are deemed mature enough to take responsibility for their actions...

I think it should be raised to 30. :lol:

[The Grandmaster]

perdidochas wrote: The Grandmaster wrote: perdidochas wrote: BassistVIV wrote: ieatfood wrote: You have to realize WHY child porn is illegal.

It is because child porn increases the likelyhood that a predator will rape a child. That has been shown.

Thus, by distributing photos of herself, she is increasing the likelyhood that a child somewhere will be raped/sodomized. That is the reason.

Now she may be only 15 and not be tried as an adult. But what she did was still a crime, as much so as if she had robbed a convenience store.

In my experience, it seems like the opposite would be true. Looking at porn provides you with sexual release, therefore making you less horny, and therefore less likely to rape someone. I could be wrong, but that seems to make a little more sense to me.

Not really. The best approach to not getting horny is to abstain totally. The first 3 weeks is rough, but after that, you get less horny if you have stayed away from sexual release.

Ridiculous. No, this does not work. The best way to remain not horny is a healthy real life sexual outlet. In the absense of that, pornography is the next best thing. Refraining does nothing but build pressure like a steam valve.

Have you ever tried it?

No, of course I haven't. If your drive does go down, then I'm even less interested in doing it. I don't believe wanting sex is a bad thing, and something that should be pushed into the shadows or forced away. Again, I am not of the opinion that sexuality is an evil thing that shoould be remedied.

perdidochas wrote: I have. The first two or three weeks are rough, but after that your sex drive lessens.

I would rather be dead than have so sex drive. See my next paragraph. The reason I am alive is to pursue that which I enjoy. Taking away my ability to enjoy gives me less incentive to even live.

perdidochas wrote: Yes, you do end up having the occasional wet dream, but overall the best approach is abstinence.

Not really. I believe just the opposite. I have never been happier in my life than when I was getting regular sex. It quite literally made the difference. I am of the opinion that we should enjoy our lives, not get rid of all of our desires so that we are dead inside, and pursue nothing of enjoyment.

I am not saying this is nessesarily the what you believe, but many around here do.

cap'n queasy wrote: eXploiTeD wrote: The age of consent should be lowered to 16 - and this holds for "pornography," driving laws, voting rights, criminal liability etc. A standard age at which people are deemed mature enough to take responsibility for their actions...

I think it should be raised to 30. :lol:

Now Cap'n...are you serious, or are you just being facetious.

[perdidochas]

The Grandmaster wrote: perdidochas wrote: The Grandmaster wrote: perdidochas wrote: BassistVIV wrote: ieatfood wrote: You have to realize WHY child porn is illegal.

It is because child porn increases the likelyhood that a predator will rape a child. That has been shown.

Thus, by distributing photos of herself, she is increasing the likelyhood that a child somewhere will be raped/sodomized. That is the reason.

Now she may be only 15 and not be tried as an adult. But what she did was still a crime, as much so as if she had robbed a convenience store.

In my experience, it seems like the opposite would be true. Looking at porn provides you with sexual release, therefore making you less horny, and therefore less likely to rape someone. I could be wrong, but that seems to make a little more sense to me.

Not really. The best approach to not getting horny is to abstain totally. The first 3 weeks is rough, but after that, you get less horny if you have stayed away from sexual release.

Ridiculous. No, this does not work. The best way to remain not horny is a healthy real life sexual outlet. In the absense of that, pornography is the next best thing. Refraining does nothing but build pressure like a steam valve.

Have you ever tried it?

No, of course I haven't. If your drive does go down, then I'm even less interested in doing it. I don't believe wanting sex is a bad thing, and something that should be pushed into the shadows or forced away. Again, I am not of the opinion that sexuality is an evil thing that shoould be remedied.

I mainly did it because I didn't have a SO, and I got tired of the futility of masturbation. It's actually a much easier life.

The Grandmaster wrote: perdidochas wrote: I have. The first two or three weeks are rough, but after that your sex drive lessens.

I would rather be dead than have so sex drive. See my next paragraph. The reason I am alive is to pursue that which I enjoy. Taking away my ability to enjoy gives me less incentive to even live.

It comes back :-) It's not a permanent thing.

The Grandmaster wrote: perdidochas wrote: Yes, you do end up having the occasional wet dream, but overall the best approach is abstinence.

Not really. I believe just the opposite. I have never been happier in my life than when I was getting regular sex. It quite literally made the difference. I am of the opinion that we should enjoy our lives, not get rid of all of our desires so that we are dead inside, and pursue nothing of enjoyment.

Not saying its a good replacement for regular sex (nothing is as good as regular sex), but it's a better thing than masturbating to porn.

[cap'n queasy]

Quote: Now Cap'n...are you serious, or are you just being facetious.

Just kidding around, but making that comment wanting people to think about being a little more mature.

If you look at the demographics it is the under thirty crowd that will be the most dangerous in nearly every category. And it's mostly just due to unrestrained, reckless behavior that could easily be prevented.