Publicly denouncing pedophiles - General

That is kind of ridiculous, no matter how bad the crimes that the person has done. I am not sure of the details of the situation, though. Maybe this guy tore open the doors to a schoolbus loaded with small, innocent children. He pulled out his shiny silver 1911 colt and capped the bus driver, right then in there. Then, the pedophile raped the children, and on his way out, he dropped a nondescript brick on to the gas pedal and sent the children to a fiery grave at the bottom of a five-hundred-meter canyon. The point is that we don't know what this guy did. Maybe he was just suspected of pedophilia, in which case this would be a very big breach of privacy, or maybe he slaughtered a busload of children after raping them through every orifice. How would we know, how can we draw conclusions.

My old teacher from 6th grade turned out to be a pedophile. He was a total dick anyway.

ces ou sa?

[QUOTE=Poltergeist Three;16793704]Indeed. [url]http://www.economist.com/displaystory.cfm?story_id=14164614[/url] It's an article on America's pedophile laws, I advise everyone to read it because it's interesting (and echoes my view of the issue).[/QUOTE] Fascinating read. Have an informative or whatever it is. [editline]05:11PM[/editline] I was also just reminded of this from a while ago:- [quote]A 14-year-old girl in Trenton, New Jersey has been arrested and charged with child pornography after posting roughly 30 nude pictures of herself on her profile at MySpace.com. The pictures were apparently intended to be seen by her boyfriend, but were apparently available for the public to see.[/quote] [url]http://www.buzzle.com/articles/14-year-old-girl-arrested-on-child-pornography-charges-in-new-jersey.html[/url]

[QUOTE=<3 Riutse <3;16790925]Pedophiles are fine.[/QUOTE] No they aren't what the fuck [editline]12:13PM[/editline] that's like saying psychopaths are fine as long as they don't murder people. They're still fucking dangerous

Because fucking a child is just as bad as watching someone else fuck one.

[QUOTE=Lankist;16794794]No they aren't what the fuck [editline]12:13PM[/editline] that's like saying psychopaths are fine as long as they don't murder people. They're still fucking dangerous[/QUOTE] A pedophile can think about whatever he wants in his head, I don't give a shit. As long as he isn't raping children in the real world, then there's no reason for anyone to get in him in trouble. It's the violent pedophiles that are the problem, the ones that actually steal children and shit. I bet there's pedophiles living among us: Your distant uncle, your brother's friend's father always seemed to eye those barbie dolls a certain way..

[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;16786398]How do you know it's French? Looks just like the English.[/QUOTE] Its one of them words what are the same in French as they in English like Duck al orange.

I genuinely hate these kinds of threads. They bring out the worst in Facepunchers.

[QUOTE=Lankist;16786789]Are you seriously defending pedophiles.[/QUOTE] Something you forgot to mention in that memoir of yours? [editline]05:09PM[/editline] [QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;16793758]He's making the point that not all pedophiles are child predators, that some realize that fucking children is unethical, but that pedophiles cannot control what arouses them. All it takes to be a pedophile is a feeling of arousal you can't control. wtf lankist is wrong what is this world coming to[/QUOTE] Na that would be you Johnny. Not a single post by you that I disagree with.

For some strange reason this thread reminds me of these notes we got from school wich warned us about some guy who roamed around my hometown wearing only a long coat and opened the coat and showed his shit to kids.

From that economist article posted earlier, [quote]Sex-offender registries are popular. Rape and child molestation are terrible crimes that can traumatise their victims for life. All parents want to protect their children from sexual predators, so politicians can nearly always win votes by promising curbs on them. Those who object can be called soft on child-molesters, a label most politicians would rather avoid. This creates a ratchet effect. Every lawmaker who wants to sound tough on sex offenders has to propose a law tougher than the one enacted by the last politician who wanted to sound tough on sex offenders[/quote] "Jew registries are popular. Banking and Hanukkah are terrible crimes that can traumatise their victims for life. All parents want to protect their children from Jews, so politicians can nearly always win votes by promising curbs on them. Those who object can be called soft on Jews, a label most politicians would rather avoid. This creates a ratchet effect. Every lawmaker who wants to sound tough on Jews has to propose a law tougher than the one enacted by the last politician who wanted to sound tough on Jews." When society identifies a common enemy, bad things happen...

[QUOTE=Lankist;16794794]No they aren't what the fuck [editline]12:13PM[/editline] that's like saying psychopaths are fine as long as they don't murder people. They're still fucking dangerous[/QUOTE] Pedophilia is a sexual preference. Psychopathy isn't.

[QUOTE=Blobicus;16793791]I don't think that pedophilia should be illegal. I think illegalizing a sexual preference is an ignorant and heavy handed thing to do. If child abuse ever becomes a factor, then it's criminal. But to illegalize a sexual attraction and demonize anyone who has it as a soulless monster who does nothing but destroys lives is ignorant and bigoted.[/QUOTE] Its illegal because it promotes underage sex and when you're a kid you don't want to be raped by a 50-year old pedophile

[QUOTE=cmanatlan;16796817]Pedophilia is a sexual preference. Psychopathy isn't.[/QUOTE] Preference implies choice. I thought it was a mental condition. That's what you've all been saying. [editline]03:15PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Blobicus;16793791]I don't think that pedophilia should be illegal. I think illegalizing a sexual preference is an ignorant and heavy handed thing to do. If child abuse ever becomes a factor, then it's criminal. But to illegalize a sexual attraction and demonize anyone who has it as a soulless monster who does nothing but destroys lives is ignorant and bigoted.[/QUOTE] Pedophilia isn't illegal as long as you don't diddle children or watch someone else diddling children. [editline]03:21PM[/editline] [QUOTE=cmanatlan;16796817]Pedophilia is a sexual preference. Psychopathy isn't.[/QUOTE] Look: [QUOTE=Spacewolf;16786875]Like he said, most pedos can't control it. I think it's a mental problem.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Spacewolf;16786932]Would you ostracize a mentally handicapped person?[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=protoAuthor;16786568]Hey, guys, remember that not all paedophiles are predators. Quite a few that I've heard about just hate themselves for something they have no control over. Doesn't give them the right to touch children inappropriately, but one really can't help what arouses them.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=protoAuthor;16786992]"Castigated"? Really? I'm gonna give you the benefit of the doubt that you actually mean castigated, and not castrated. But why punish someone for something they can't control? I mean, if they become predators, then sure, no defense there, but just being aroused, you might as well castigate someone who prefers anal. Or some shit like that.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=<3 Riutse <3;16790925]Pedophiles are fine. They're attracted to children, they have no control over what they're attracted to. But they do have control over what they do. Child predators are not fine. They have no control over what they are attracted to. But they choose to act incorrectly about the whole situation.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;16793758]He's making the point that not all pedophiles are child predators, that some realize that fucking children is unethical, but that pedophiles cannot control what arouses them. All it takes to be a pedophile is a feeling of arousal you can't control. wtf lankist is wrong what is this world coming to[/QUOTE] Each of these seems to imply an inherent mental condition, akin to psychopathy. Hence the comparison, buddy. Can't have it both ways. Their only excuse is if they have absolutely no choice or preference in the matter. [editline]03:23PM[/editline] Pedophilia is not a sexual preference because there is no consent in that preference. That's like saying rape fantasies are a sexual preference. They aren't. If you don't or can't have consent, it isn't a fucking preference, it is a crime and a violation of basic human rights. Homosexuals, heterosexuals, bisexuals, pansexuals, whatever, THEY can have sex consensually. Children cannot fucking consent to sex when their fucking sex organs don't even work yet. This isn't progressive, it is downright selfrighteous idiocy. There is a line between legal, righteous and consensual personal decisions and criminal rape. Pedophilia is WAY over that line. What next, you're going to say people who like to watch rape/snuff films shouldn't be ostracized too? Nobody has the right to get off to the violation of someone else's most basic rights. I don't care if it's a disease or a condition or a fucking preference, they gotta' find something else to get off on because kiddie porn ain't progressive, kids.

Blue collar is working class. He seems more white collar.

[QUOTE=Lankist;16797997]Preference implies choice. I thought it was a mental condition. That's what you've all been saying. [editline]03:15PM[/editline] Pedophilia isn't illegal as long as you don't diddle children or watch someone else diddling children. [editline]03:21PM[/editline] Look: Each of these seems to imply an inherent mental condition, akin to psychopathy. Hence the comparison, buddy. Can't have it both ways. Their only excuse is if they have absolutely no choice or preference in the matter. [editline]03:23PM[/editline] Pedophilia is not a sexual preference because there is no consent in that preference. That's like saying rape fantasies are a sexual preference. They aren't. If you don't or can't have consent, it isn't a fucking preference, it is a crime and a violation of basic human rights. Homosexuals, heterosexuals, bisexuals, pansexuals, whatever, THEY can have sex consensually. Children cannot fucking consent to sex when their fucking sex organs don't even work yet. This isn't progressive, it is downright selfrighteous idiocy. There is a line between legal, righteous and consensual personal decisions and criminal rape. Pedophilia is WAY over that line. What next, you're going to say people who like to watch rape/snuff films shouldn't be ostracized too? Nobody has the right to get off to the violation of someone else's most basic rights. I don't care if it's a disease or a condition or a fucking preference, they gotta' find something else to get off on because kiddie porn ain't progressive, kids.[/QUOTE] Thank you. Besides the criminal aspect, obviously none of you are phased by how degenerate, vile, and pathetic pedophilia is.

[QUOTE=snuwoods;16798325]Thank you. Besides the criminal aspect, obviously none of you are phased by how degenerate, vile, and pathetic pedophilia is.[/QUOTE] And that it creates an entire market for people to video-tape child rape and then sell it to some of these so-called "responsible" pedophiles.

[QUOTE=Lankist;16794794]No they aren't what the fuck [editline]12:13PM[/editline] that's like saying psychopaths are fine as long as they don't murder people. They're still fucking dangerous[/QUOTE] Uhh, many psychopaths are CEOs of large corporations.

[QUOTE=tarkio;16798504]Uhh, many psychopaths are CEOs of large corporations.[/QUOTE] Do you even know what psychopathy is. [editline]03:48PM[/editline] I'm talking clinical shit. Calling a CEO a psychopath is like calling someone gay. You're only using it as an insult.

[QUOTE=Lankist;16797997]Pedophilia is not a sexual preference because there is no consent in that preference. That's like saying rape fantasies are a sexual preference. They aren't. If you don't or can't have consent, it isn't a fucking preference, it is a crime and a violation of basic human rights.[/QUOTE] You are equating pedophilia to child rape. It is not. Pedophilia is being attracted to prepubescent girls. You don't pick and choose what you're attracted to. You sound like Ayn Rand, saying homosexuality is immoral because it's somehow built on logical fallacies. That's idiotic. You don't choose what arouses you. [QUOTE=Lankist;16797997]What next, you're going to say people who like to watch rape/snuff films shouldn't be ostracized too? Nobody has the right to get off to the violation of someone else's most basic rights. I don't care if it's a disease or a condition or a fucking preference, they gotta' find something else to get off on because kiddie porn ain't progressive, kids.[/QUOTE] You don't have to watch kiddie porn to be a pedophile, and I agree. They do have to find something else to get off on because child pornography and sex with underage girls (I'm not talking 16-17 here) is immoral and disgusting. But being attracted to underage girls and not acting on it doesn't make you not a pedophile. You still have a sexual attraction to children either way. The distinction that you don't seem to get here is between being attracted to children sexually and possessing child pornography and sexually assaulting a child. [editline]03:55PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Lankist;16798353]And that it creates an entire market for people to video-tape child rape and then sell it to some of these so-called "responsible" pedophiles.[/QUOTE] If they've got child pornography in which children are exploited THEY ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE PEDOPHILES. No one is arguing against that here.

[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;16798706]You are equating pedophilia to child rape. It is not. Pedophilia is being attracted to prepubescent girls. You don't pick and choose what you're attracted to. You sound like Ayn Rand, saying homosexuality is immoral because it's somehow built on logical fallacies. That's idiotic. You don't choose what arouses you.[/QUOTE] Then it IS a mental condition like psychopathy and NOT a preference. [editline]03:56PM[/editline] [QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;16798706]If they've got child pornography in which children are exploited THEY ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE PEDOPHILES. No one is arguing against that here.[/QUOTE] If you do not ever ever ever indulge or consider indulging whatever the fuck dark urge you have so much to the point that you don't even act like it's there, you aren't a pedophile. That's like saying we're all murderers on the inside who just don't murder. I'm talking criminality, buddy.

[QUOTE=Lankist;16798737]Then it IS a mental condition like psychopathy and NOT a preference.[/QUOTE] I don't see the difference. I like pizza and I don't like pasta. These are food preferences but I didn't choose them.

[QUOTE=snuwoods;16798325]Thank you. Besides the criminal aspect, obviously none of you are phased by how degenerate, vile, and pathetic pedophilia is.[/QUOTE] umm that's child abuse you're talking about, not pedophilia. oh i see you're snuwoods, you meant it that way

[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;16798759]I don't see the difference. I like pizza and I don't like pasta. These are food preferences but I didn't choose them.[/QUOTE] Fucking children is hardly as simple an issue as pizza v. pasta. Food preferences can be changed. You have all been talking like Pedophiles have this disease they can't control.

[QUOTE=Lankist;16798737]If you do not ever ever ever indulge or consider indulging whatever the fuck dark urge you have so much to the point that you don't even act like it's there, you aren't a pedophile.[/QUOTE] Come again? Anyway, yes you are. All it takes is a sexual attraction to children to be pedophile. I'm not even arguing that there's a single pedophile out there that hasn't possessed child pornography or had sex with a child, all I'm arguing is that a sexual attraction to children is, in itself, not a violation of anyone's rights. [editline]04:00PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Lankist;16798808]Fucking children is hardly as simple an issue as pizza v. pasta. Food preferences can be changed. You have all been talking like Pedophiles have this disease they can't control.[/QUOTE] Are you saying that particular attractions cannot wax and wane over time like a taste for certain food can?

[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;16798813]Come again? Anyway, yes you are. All it takes is a sexual attraction to children to be pedophile. I'm not even arguing that there's a single pedophile out there that hasn't possessed child pornography or had sex with a child, all I'm arguing is that a sexual attraction to children is, in itself, not a violation of anyone's rights.[/QUOTE] We're talking about the public display of pedophiles on billboards. If you don't rape children or watch them being raped nobody gives a fuck. You don't get your face on a billboard like that if you haven't diddled something. [editline]04:00PM[/editline] [QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;16798813]Are you saying that particular attractions cannot wax and wane over time like a taste for certain food can?[/QUOTE] No, you guys have been saying that.

[QUOTE=Lankist;16798844]We're talking about the public display of pedophiles on billboards. If you don't rape children or watch them being raped nobody gives a fuck.[/QUOTE] Okay. That's what I'm arguing. If you don't give a fuck then problem solved I suppose. I don't see what you were arguing. It seems like you're making it out that being sexually attracted to children is in and of itself dangerous.

[QUOTE=Lankist;16798844]We're talking about the public display of pedophiles on billboards. If you don't rape children or watch them being raped nobody gives a fuck. [editline]04:00PM[/editline] No, you guys have been saying that.[/QUOTE] obvsly. what are you actually trying to say? i don't understand

[QUOTE=Lankist;16798844]No, you guys have been saying that.[/QUOTE] I most assuredly have not.