Apparently being a pedo is “In No Way Illegal” for the Radical Left now
(media.patriots.win)
posted ago by BigDaddyTrump2020
+1318 / -0
Comments (66)
sorted by:
DEFAULT COMMUNITIES
•
Front
All
General
AskWin
Funny
Technology
Animals
Sports
Gaming
DIY
Health
Positive
Privacy
"Pedophilia" is the condition of being sexually attracted to children, and may be true of people who never do anything illegal, such as abuse children or acquire chlid pr0n. Most people don't use the word "pedophile" that way, they mean people who actually abuse children. The thing is, the way this thread is worded, it sounds like its worse to be a pedophile than a child rapist, which is ass backwards.
I feel like acquiring child porn is just as bad as raping because you are creating a market for it. That's why I feel terrible after I beat my dick like it owes me money.
Whoa calm down there Jared
Lol I guess I should have elaborated. Searching and viewing porn creates a demand that vulnerable women end up filling. Usually one's with daddy issues
So is regular porn just as harmful?
Many people feel porn in general ONLY leads to it.
Remember how old YOU were when you first were exposed to it? All the disgusting things girls and boys would say and do in like the 1st-7th grade?
That was years ago.
R. Kelly was a pedophile rapist, yet his music got played and listened to like he was Floyd George.
How about Michael Jackson?
Does the art and music of a child abuser - there's no PHILE OR love going on there, just abuse and manipulation - make you inclined to be one too?
Does the sexualized nature of children on TV/advertising play a difference? Because I have a BIG problem with State Farm's sexualizing and exploiting of children in their ad campaigns they show on major media networks at the gym (before I started turning the TV off).
Remember the culture is PERMEATED with the evil, deceptive, twisting of everything good into something counterfeit.
Hollywood/music industry has been openly sexually abusing children since the Shirley Temple and silent film era.
If anything is "systemic" and needs a system to be shut down, destroyed, altered, or abolished, it is the sexualizing and exploiting of people, especially the target young audience to be groomed for life.
This evil world is going to burn, and justly too.
I dont feel regular porn is AS harmful, but yes it creates a demand that exploits vulnerable women. I was 12 or so first time I was exposed to hardcore stuff. I honestly think Michael Jackson was a victim of extortion. Multiple kids denied ever being victimized by him including McCauley Caulkin.
I don't think it's as bad and the penalties reflect that, at least where I live, where possessing actual cheese pizza is about 2 years, whereas raping a child gets at least 14 years, and sub-rape abuse of a child (there are several offenses specific to children regarding behaviours that don't make it into criminal territory when they're between adults) gets about 5 years. There's also a 5 year charge for making cheese pizza which will get stacked on the offenses being recorded.
There is also the area of stories, cartoons, dolls, and now computer generated cheese pizza where real children are not involved, and there is definitely some overreach there. I feel like were getting to a point where a jigglypuff pokemon drawn with a convenient grass blade in the foreground is going to get flagged.
Can't I just say execute them both?
Are you saying you'd like to execute people who have the pedophile bug and do nothing worse than fap to pictures in toy catalogs? People who may be just as disgusted with the actual abuse of children as you are, but fantasize about characters that don't actually exist? An argument to execute players of Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 who decide to open up on the unarmed civilians in No Russian just because they're in a bad mood that day could be made along the same lines. Does the guy who drives in Grand Theft Auto (the video game series) like Samrad deserve the same punishment as the real Samrad?
I don't believe the punishment should be weighed differently because of visceral disgust at a sexuality they don't share themselves, and because fictional children are more tender and innocent than fictional adult non-combatants. I'm not arguing against decriminalizing real cheese pizza where real children are enduring abuse and it is being recorded. Let's set aside the grey area of hentai and stories. But the guy who looks at the kids in water park and beach photos taken with zero intent of being used in that way, or the guy who draws his own stuff and never distributes it (a case which was actually busted and tried in the courts of Canada) deserves the death penalty?
I'm with you on this thread; I'm 100% against prosecuting thought crimes.
You can be disgusted with and hate these people if you want, freedom of association should mean you can ban them from your shop, you can avoid their shop, you can shun them, but you cannot execute force for a non crime. (A fine, etc. is the same as per your speeding ticket; pay this money for not doing something or we'll exercise force against you.)
I haven't crawled through the lexicons and concordances on the matter, but I do believe the biblical concepts of sin and crime overlap in a specific way: a crime must have a judicially measurable damage and victim(s), while a sin can be merely against oneself and God, not having "real world" damage (it does in terms of wasting the sinner's resources, opening him up to spiritual attack, and separating him from God, but these are not things men should measure in others. So all crimes are sin, but not all sins are crime. There are a couple of examples in Matthew 5 - in the one I linked, v. 27 is the crime, v. 28 a non-crime sin.
In the case of cheese pizza, you have a real child, a real victim, the abuse of whom is being recorded, and the consumption of which fuels the demand for such recorded abuse and so more may happen, so I don't have a problem with it being criminalized. The counter argument is that the victim isn't undergoing any further abuse if the recording is consumed privately - I think it's weak because the victim's trauma would be increased by its public consumption, and the argument disintegrates if this victim is still available and demand for abuse of that particular victim can lead to further abuse of that victim (I would be surprised if there weren't already such a thing as live streams with chat polls like we have in gaming. TV and radio call-in shows have been a thing for decades - I'm talking about for legal things; I have no idea where the state of the art is for this junk.) Overall, I think my jurisdiction's penalties for real cheese pizza is at about the right level, maybe even a bit on the low side.
Then there's the fictional victims, and that's a grey area. Arguably, it should be criminalized or regulated for the same reason as substances that can be abused, but overreach is so incredibly easy with this sort of thing. Abused substances cause drains on the medical system, and a dealer trapping someone in an addiction is arguably a crime; substance impairment can lead to vehicle and industrial accidents. This argument for the pr0n side is relatively straightforward, but it would be very difficult to build a case against an uncooperative suspect - there's no Breathalyzer(tm) for perv. I've heard some anonymous tales of rear end vehicle collisions resulting from drivers goosenecking too much at the pretty lady on the sidewalk (I think billboards like the spicy Buffalo David Bitton underwear billboards of the early 20-oughts should be illegal for that reason; whether they are desirable or disgusting, they are distracting to the driver either way.) Overreach arguments for drugs and fiction are somewhat similar and, in a lot of cases, thoroughly debunked: while often argued, there is no consistently measured causality between one partaking in video game violence and the commission of violent crime. Similarly, no one has ever died overdosing on marijuana (maybe there's one, but I don't think it was proven conclusively.) On the other hand, those who use marijuana often descend into nastier stuff, how to draw that? In some cases, the war on drugs have clearly and catastrophically caused more damage than the drugs themselves. All this is hard to measure in the case of fictional underage freshwater shrimp because of how walled off this underbelly of society is and how irrational some who partake in the discussion are, e.g. the people right here saying that someone who gets a wee bit horny in the kid's aisle of the clothing store should get the death penalty. That's worse than some of the extremes of Twitter's cancel culture!
I'm currently of the opinion that real Cheese Pizza should be punished heavily; indeed, private consumption isn't hurting the kid again, but the demand for a real product doing harm strikes me as a real crime. If someone wanted to argue that they, now a consentual aged adult, wanted to sell child porn of themselves, I could hypothetically be a little less sure. I mean, a sixteen year old can probably take pictures of themselves and, at 25, decide they want to sell them. But if we're looking at actual pedophile age--pre-pubescent and all, certainly no one else should be taking such pictures for them to consider selling later. But all of this is so far into absurd hypotheticals that I think we'd need to settle on what to do with the standard pervs.
Cartoon porn, I could not care less about. Nobody's hurt. They're not real.
Photo manips of real kids to try to make them look nude or such.... is more uncertain territory. I'm definitely on the "would shun the viewer" side, but as far as legal reprocussions, that's hazier. I'm not comfortable with thought crimes as a standard.
Like you said, someone getting a chub in the kid's aisle shouldn't get the death penalty. Or any legal penalty. I would be disgusted with and not wish to associate with such a person, but I can't see a justification for violence against them. And that'd only be if they somehow told me about this. I don't know when someone else is turned on, and frankly I remember being 13; sometimes boners just happen. What if you're in the kid's aisle and another shopper comes by with a perfume that brings up some sexy memories, or whatever? How do you prove a state of mind, if you allow punishing thought crimes?
Minute you actually victimize a child, we're in completely different territory. I'm all in for hating on them. I'm not even arguing for sympathy or empathy for non-practicing pedos. But you're never going to fix any of this if you make even thinking about it a crime. Nobody's going to talk, you're never going to have the conversations you need to have about it to understand it to stop it---and I don't mean therapeutically, I mean, to profile the practicing pedos, to know the culture, to navigate investigations.
I doubt that's what Chris Hansen was trying to accomplish, but he did present it that way. But yeah, it's so obvious if you think about it: nobody cares if you think about robbing a bank, or think about stealing a car, or think about running over hordes of people like is possible in the Grand Theft Auto franchise, the most profitable series of video games as far as I know. And, as this thread shows, it's okay to think about murdering thousands, possibly millions, of people who obviously don't deserve the death penalty. And they double down on their bullshit in the exact same manner as vanilla SJWs, and in the process put more children at risk because now we can't think about those crimes in order to catch the real offenders and maybe stop them at job interviews before they're working at schools and day cares.
You think they just stop here, at looking at pictures in toy catalogs? Nah, it only gets worse from there. These are the kind of people you can't leave children alone around. Even if up until that point they've done nothing illegal. It's only a matter of time.
Think, if it doesn't get worse from there, how would you even find out? And if it doesn't ever get worse from there, and say this kind of person even knows you can't leave children alone around them and specifically avoids any sort of compromising situation where an accusation could develop. They still deserve to die? "Even if up until that point they've done nothing illegal"?
You're out the door 15 minutes late for work; getting there in time without speeding is hopeless. But still you stay at the speed limit because you're a good, law-abiding citizen, if still sweating about the tardy slip your boss is about to write you up for. A cop pulls you over and starts to write you a speeding ticket. "But I wasn't speeding, officer." "No, but you were thinking about it." Maybe your neighbour doesn't know all that much about you, just that you're pulling out of the drive later than usual that morning as in, not before he did, but he's the cop. If the toy catalog guy deserves to die, then you deserve this speeding ticket.
Found the guy that jerks it to pictures of kids.
If someone finds themselves sexually attracted to children and don't seek out help, and instead are a creepy basement dweller who fuels the demand for child pornography, I'd have no problem with execution. It's a sick and twisted mental illness and if someone doesn't seek help, they're going to cause harm.
Fuck you for trying to defend pedophiles
I'm not talking about child pornography. I'm talking about someone who has the pedophile bug but never acts upon it. Do you think a sober alcoholic, a teetotaler for years but knows he's just one drink away from falling off the wagon, is fueling the demand for liquor? How about the guy who's never had a drink in his life because both his parents were alcoholics, all four of his grandparents were alcoholics, three uncles and a sister, all raging drunks and he's highly suspicious that he has a heritable tendency towards alcoholism and thus avoided ever having that first drink? He's the liquor industry's finest customer, is that right?
So a person walking down the drugstore aisle, glances over at a package of diapers for two seconds and gets a wee bit of wood or a little drop of wet because of the picture of the child on the package before moving on. That person should die?
Jesus Christ, are you reading what you're typing? Shit like this brings the world closer and closer to normalizing pedophilia. If that person doesn't get help after that scenario, then it's only going to get worse and worse. Execute pedophiles, no sympathy from me or any sane parent out there
Are you reading what YOU are typing, you little shit? You are normalizing guilty until proven innocent; you are normalizing MURDER on suspicion of victimless thought crime. Go die in a fire, hypocrite.
Then we should kill every nazi before they build the gas chambers right? I mean, if they dont seek help after getting a swastika tattoo, they'll only get worse, surely? This mindset keeps them in the dark, keeps them from getting help or submitting to being monitored and quarantined from kids.
YES
Wow. I don't want you anywhere near my children.
If you're someone who walks down the drugstore aisle, glances over at a package of diapers for two seconds and gets wood, same.
Non-offending pedophiles should also be killed. We just put them down the same way we put down a rabid dog. The dog owner could run up to you. “No no, Skippy has rabies but he never bit anyone.” Doesn’t matter. Skippy has rabies so Skippy gets shot. Ditto with pedophiles.
Do you know about the rabies vaccine? Are you going to kill the vaccinated dog who was bit by a rabid animal, is showing no symptoms, and probably never will? Skippy could be someone's well looked after pet, a member of the family for years, fully licensed and up to date on his vaccinations, the owner's waiting to rush Skippy to the family vet and already has him on the phone. Still gets shot?
Perhaps you can't be persuaded to believe that there is an equivalent "pedophile" (quotes because, like I said, most people use the word interchangeably with those who actually abuse children), but let's assume that there is for the sake of discussion. I'll even get more specific and bring in the hypothetical from the other thread: A person walks down a store aisle and sees the picture of a child on a diaper package or clothing tag, gets a wee bit aroused, continues with his or her business and that's the worst of it. Should that person be killed?
If 'therapy' means being taken out of society until those urges are purged 100%, okay.
I don't think so. The only such organization that I care to look up is NAMBLA, and their about pages are clearly talking about real relationships, and their major focus is abolishing age of consent laws - those apply primarily to real relationships, not fantasy freshwater shrimp. They're actually quite the opposite on what you'd call "non-offending pedos": they'll readily go after hentai, manga, and fantasy figurines - famously Hatsune Miku ...fully dressed, non-sexualized Hatsune Miku Check it out! and Dragon Ball Z from the 1990s: Check that out! Both links are perfectly SFW if you consider this thread SFW. TL;DR: They're protecting the sexual abuse of real children, but die if a fire if you want to just fantasize or look at any sort of material they think you can fantasize about. Unless it's that Mignonnes/Cuties thing that just came out - real 11 year olds who twerk = fine; cartoon 17 year olds who don't = strictly verboten.
There's a sick fuck in this thread trying to do this. 0 sympathy for pedos. If someone finds themselves attracted and doesn't immediately seek help, they can fuck off and die.
Do you believe they made a choice to be attracted to kids? If not, are you pro-thought crime?
Yes, pedophilia is a choice, just like rape and murder is a choice. But even if it wasn’t, all pedophiles should be killed by the state. Think of it like a dog with rabies. Is it the dog’s fault that it has rabies? No. But we shoot it anyway. All pedophiles must be executed. Throw in with the pedophile cause if you really want to, but the rest of us are not budging on this.
"You dont want to kill people who hasn't materially hurt anyone so you're pro child rape."
Fuck off with this leftist tactic shit, you dont get to accuse me of this dirt based on not wanting to murder people who literally havent done anything wrong. I guess innocent until proven guilty only applies to people you think it should rather than everyone
Cp sure, but drawn images? You literally want to imprison people for victimless crimes?
Please dont slippery slope me unless you've got data
Ok I guess I'll stick with not killing people who havent hurt anyone. This emotional reaction will accomplish nothing.
No facts, no plan, no principle, nothing of substance. Just an emotional reaction.
You literally think I'm pro child rape because I dont want to kill people who didnt hurt anyone. Fuck off scumbag.
Member when all those crazy Christians were talking about gay marriage paving the way for trannies and pedos?
Ready to listen now?
Bestiality is next. There's no more chances after that
Abusing children is worse than abusing animals in my opinion. The biblical theonomy is to stone them all, along with gays, rapists, and garden variety marriage cheaters and unwed fornicators, so my opinion doesn't matter much by the "crazy Christian" sola scriptura standard, anyway.
Well, at least we can take solace in that it's not an inferior -iality... Only the BEST for America.
/s
The battle for pedo acceptance will be waged in an upcoming election season. For now it's just another new wedge issue.
Why do they care so much about
then? It's not illegal to be a racist.
If they had their way it would be.
Psychologists say that before people commit crimes they play it out in their head and accept it is something they may do. Starts with "normal" lust and gets to addiction, then fantasy, then sexual crimes, then pedophilia. I mean who dreams about pedophilia except those who would do it...
I don't think that's the typical progression for sex criminals.
People with particularly perverse desires tend to have them early on. They don't generally start out with "normal lust".
I think Internet pornography proves this theory wrong. Twenty years ago people were appalled by incest. Now it is the number one most popular category of porn. This shows that sexual degeneracy is self-fueling. This also explains how the majority of celebrities and politicians could be pedophiles. They are groomed into it. They are led down a path, and the more they accept, the more they are able to accept. We are currently seeing play out in the culture exactly what played out on Epstein’s Island.
I agree with you that internet pornography has had negative effects.
However, incest goes WAY back in human history, and it's been documented in Shakespeare, Greek and Roman literature, and of course the Bible.
Has there been an epidemic of incest in the last 20 years, or are people just fantasizing about it?
u/redshortz44 is describing how he thinks sex criminals progress as individuals in the closet, while you're describing what has become normalized over generations and by progressive paraphiles increasingly coming out of the closet and getting louder in their advocacy of paraphilia. They aren't the same thing. One thing that supports this is the majority of transgenders wanting to apply their gender change retroactively, a famous example being men's (category) Olympic medalist Caitlyn Jenner. The Wachowski sisters wanting to retroactively apply trans allegory to the Matrix movies they directed before they transitioned is another example. This implies that they always believed they were girls, or at least that they'd like to think so.
Psychology is really stupid in these matters, wrong about a great many things, actually. Most, possibly all, of the DSM is made up nonsense, excuses to sell Ritalin, Seroquel, and Xanax to parents who don't want to be responsible for how their children turn out. The founder of the psychology of sex as we know it today was a pedophile named Alfred Kinsey. Sigmund Freud, regarded by some as a founding father of psychology, apparently had an attraction to his mother that he projected onto all men ...the next worst slur you can call a man, he thinks is a normal desire?? Also, paraphilias tend to be consistent throughout life and are very difficult (but not impossible) to change. The downside is, that literally every case of changed or corrected paraphilia that I know of is a Christian testimony, and that makes it nigh impossible to draw any conclusions; no one is gathering statistics on this, and I'm pretty sure a big reason why is because it would destroy the progressive narrative about sexual liberality.
If it doesn't make sense to your common sense......
Dems can't run a city so we shouldn't let them run a country.
That's my common sense
Like I said in my top level comment, it looks like they think being a pedophile attracted to children, but not breaking any laws, is actually worse than being a "'at least' a child rapist." Wow!
yet
Yep. Just kill them now. There are plenty of things where there are grey areas on who's guilty, what should be punished, etc.
Not here. 0 tolerance for pedophilia. Either get immediate help or be gone.
Technically just “being” a pedophile ISNT illegal. Engaging in pedophilic acts IS illegal
This is part of the philosophy that pedophilia is an acceptable sexual orientation and it is just up to those people to not engage with children. Of course that is a flexible philosophy and a later step is defining the conditions by which THEY CAN do it.
0 tolerance is the only answer. Seek mental help or face death
a pedo/child rapist should be removed from society...perhaps same punishment as commies, a helicopter ride out to he ocean.
The solution can be found once we depart from legality and go toward righteousness.
That seems like something a pedo would say.