The difference between child rape and child consentual sex is the
difference between night and day. While rape is the worst thing in
the world, sex is the the best thing in the world. Some pedophiles
love children and have consentual giving sex with them. Some rapists,
force children and brutally rape and terrorize them. The difference
is as distinct as the difference between rape and sex is in adults.
Rape is one of the worst things in the world. Sex is one of the best
things in the world. In between the two is date (like) rape. Sex
with children should be legal at any age if it is consentual. Rape of
people should be illegal at any age.
Sometimes minors may think that adults are a sort of authority and
that they have to obey. Given this can be the case, perhaps a
requirement for any sort of sexual activity between adults and minors
should be that the adult has to first tell the child they have an
unalienable right to say no. Without this distinction we could have
forced sex P.E. in school, where kids were forced to have sex during
P.E. or get "F's." Right now kids are forced to play dodge ball or
get "F's" but if you throw a dodge ball at someone on the street, you
may be charged with assault. So if a requirement for adult-child sex
was that the children were uncoerced and informed of their right to
say "no," then there could be no forced sex P.E., for isn't such
forcing like rape? Nevertheless, we could still have _optional_ sex
P.E. for the children where they are informed of their constant right
to say "no" and stop any sexual activity at any time with no
consequences. Otherwise sex becomes like any other sport which
children are currently FORCED to play. But in the case of sex, how is
this any different than rape?
See http://www.wikisposure.com
and http://www.silentlambs.com
for a
myriad of interage sexual reports from which one can discern the
extreme differences between the two types of activities of loving
giving sex and brutal terrorizing rape of minors.
Oh, and child porn is freedom of speech, and freedom of the press.
Such censorship is damaging as we need to know what is going on out
there, we need to be free thinkers and see whatever we choose. Only
the producers of child porn should get jacked and only if they are
FORCING children to do sexual things. If you are specifically paying
someone to committ a crime and this can be proven, you are an
accessory to a crime. But buying copies of pictures after the fact
does not make you a criminal in my book.
I for one am not a pedophile or a homosexual and have no special
interest in minors, but I honestly don't see why I should care what
age a person is, and I think consentual loving sex is a positive and
healthy thing for everybody of all ages. I also do not think that it
should be up to a child's parents if it is legal for them to have sex
or not. If an adult has sex with a minor that should be legal, but
the parents only recourse should be to easily get a restraining order
keeping anyone over the age of 18 away from their children. This goes
even they didn't have sex. So if you daughter is dating some bad
influence biker boyfriend over the age of 18 you should be able to
just get a restraining order. If the restraining order is broken by
the adult the penalties should be as follows: 1st offense: 2 days in
jail. 2nd offense: 2 weeks in jail. 3rd offense: 2 months in jail,
4th and all subsequent offenses: 6 months in jail. Of course, this
would be if jail were a safe place and not somewhere where any petty
criminal might die.
What if you just happened to love someone who was young? And if a kid
doesn't want it, try again another day. Even if you're married,
raping your wife is still a crime even if she'll fuck you another day.
No one should get married until age 18 unless they or their partner is
pregnant and it has been ascertained by a competent third party such
as a judge that they are making the choice of marriage of their own
free will and not being forced or unduly pressured into it. But this
only stands for marriage recognized by the state. Trully marriage
exists only the hearts and minds of the married people.
Everyone having sex where pregnancy is possible should use two forms
of birth control, such as condoms and the pill or the pull-out method
and condoms. With two forms of birth control it is safer than a
vasectomy and there is no risk of pregnancy and thus it is not
immoral. With 1 or 0 forms of birth control there is a risk of
pregnancy and this makes it more immoral, but it depends on the number
of times you have sex also. If it it just just a few times the risk
is obviously less and one form of birth control might not be immoral,
but if it is lots then you need two forms of birth control to be
moral. Taking a risk with an unborn baby is bad to you and the
potential baby. So use condoms and the pill or condoms and the pull-
out method. Or the pill and the pull-out method. Or a diaphragm OR
sponge AND condoms OR the pill OR the pull-out method. Then there's
near no risk of pregnancy and you are moral.
|
