Nambla

[Sprayber]

Originally posted by MrFun
So then you despise pedophiles when they pratice their freedom of speech, but not act upon it.

But you do not despise Ku Klux Klan members when they pratice their freedom of speech, but do not act out any violence towards blacks??

I think the KKK is on par with the Black Panthers(I'm sure che will write me a paper about why they are really good guys),nation of islam, nazies in general, and anyone who spreads ignorance and hate.

However, (I'll say this one more time) I think pedophiles are much worse than the groups that I mentioned above. And I support anything that limits their ability to organize in anyway what so ever. You can make this as being anti gay or anti-minority if you want to MR Fun. But my views are really simple on the matter.

[WhiteElephants]

So (trying to change the subject again) if both man/boy and man/girl relationships are so equally reviled why is there no man/girl love association? Why, in the case of the Catholic Church scandals, do so many pedophelia victims seem to be along the lines of man/boy? Or has my outlook been skewed by the liberal media?

[OzzyKP]

Everyone needs to shed their contemporary bias and look at NAMBLA impartially. Of course we think they are sick ****s, but how would our grandparents view homosexual organizations (if there were any) 50 years ago or more? They would say "those sick ****** ****s deserve to die, no one should be allowed to engage in sick criminal sodomy."

Remember that sodomy was once a very frowned upon thing and term, now it is pretty normal. There is no real difference between this change in societies' view on sex and the change that is advocated by NAMBLA.

One issue of course that people has is that the sexual freedom advocated by NAMBLA is with minors. While I don't advocate sex with children at all, and I think it is a sick practice (I kinda get quesy thinking about adult men screwing each other too), but in a free society who is the government to tell people what to do with their bodies?

The opposing argument of course is that minors can't consent to anything, they have empty minds that can't grasp rational decisions. Well this is pure BS. I don't know what kind of idiots you all were, but I didn't walk around in a gray fog for the first 18 years of my life. I knew damn well what I was doing and could make very educated decisions. I first had sex at 14, and I guess my first "sexual encounter" was around 10 or so. Maybe even before that I'd go to neighborhood kids and say "i'll show you mine if you show me yours" it was curiousity, and my thoughts at 9 are no different than my thoughts now.

[Caligastia]

Your ignorance is amazing Ozzy.

You seriously think a 14 year old can make this kind of decision??? Maybe you think you could at that age, but does that mean all can? Of course not.

This is even worse than your campaign for a younger voting age.

[OzzyKP]

Originally posted by Caligastia You seriously think a 14 year old can make this kind of decision??? Maybe you think you could at that age, but does that mean all can? Of course not.

I absolutely do. Do you actually know any 14 year olds? You don't know what you are talking about, you are only repeating the entrenched prejudices you have been fed you entire adult life. In many states 14 year olds are allowed to legally marry. I would think that marriage is a larger decision than just sex. Why then is sex a stricter standard than marriage?

Also as we speak there are thousands of 14 year olds having sex all across the country. This is not some new growth of hethanistic satanism, this is how things have been for decades. If you want to look at human history people have been having sex at much younger ages since the beginning of time. Surely you don't believe that young people as as a demographic have GOTTEN DUMBER since the stone age, do you?

If you believe that it is clear your arguments stand on no reasonings, just a pile of hatred and prejudice.

[Arrian]

my thoughts at 9 are no different than my thoughts now.

Hmm. Can't say the same for myself. I've matured *just a bit* since I was 9.

Sure, the age of consent is arbitrary, but you have to draw the line somewhere. It's pretty easy for an adult (lets say age 25) to take advantage of a minor (lets say 16).

-Arrian

p.s. I personally feel there is a big difference between my 25/16 example and two 16 yr-olds having sex. Just my $.02

[Caligastia]

Originally posted by OzzyKP
Do you actually know any 14 year olds?

I was one once, and I knew many my age.

You don't know what you are talking about, you are only repeating the entrenched prejudices you have been fed you entire adult life. In many states 14 year olds are allowed to legally marry. I would think that marriage is a larger decision than just sex. Why then is sex a stricter standard than marriage?

Also as we speak there are thousands of 14 year olds having sex all across the country. This is not some new growth of hethanistic satanism, this is how things have been for decades. If you want to look at human history people have been having sex at much younger ages since the beginning of time. Surely you don't believe that young people as as a demographic have GOTTEN DUMBER since the stone age, do you?

If you believe that it is clear your arguments stand on no reasonings, just a pile of hatred and prejudice.

You really are a crazy loon arent you!

The fact is that life experience teaches you things that cannot be learned any other way. Things you have yet to learn I see.

[OzzyKP]

I don't think it is all that easy for a 25 year old to take advantage of a 16 year old. That 16 year old can evaluate the worth of the 25 year old just as much as a fellow 16 year old. Why is 16/16 ok and 16/25 not ok? If a 16-year-old can consent to sex with someone her own age, does her reasoning ability suddenly disappear when faced with someone 9 years older? My parents are 8 years apart, should they be jailed for it?

Heck look at Anna Nicole Smith, she was a Playboy model in her 20s (I believe) who married an 80 year old millionare. (maybe billionare) That is an extreme, almost grotesque age difference, but 60 years difference is ok, 9 years, or even 2 years, isn't according to our law.

[Arrian]

Ozzy,

I was not discussing age difference between couples (my parents are seperated by 22.5 years) in general. There is a HUGE difference between the 10 years between 30 and 40 and the 10 years between 15 and 25. You can't see that?

-Arrian

[OzzyKP]

No I don't see that. And if you see that then you don't truly know any 15 year olds and 25 year olds. There is a great deal of prejudice that hits ones mind when they hear "15 year old" they don't actually perceive reality, they perceive their own skewed stereotypes. I am right between the two numbers and I know people at both, and judging their reasoning ability I find no discernable difference.

Granted the longer someone is around the most information they accumulate. I'm not saying that experience doesn't exist, surely it does. But if a 15 year old is given the same amount of information as a 25 year old or a 35 year old their decisions will be just as rational. Strangely rather than trying to provide more information to young people so they can make better decisions the trend is to deny them information and shelter them "for their own good" all this does is perpetuate the ignorant stereotypes about young people.

[centrifuge]

Originally posted by OzzyKP
. But if a 15 year old is given the same amount of information as a 25 year old or a 35 year old their decisions will be just as rational.

A couple of points on this statement, 1st a 15 year old does not have the experience in life to make the same rational decisions as a 25 or 30 year old, the wisdom as to the workings of the world are just not there yet... I was 15 once so I know this to be true. Secondly it is widely accepted in the psychological community that pedophiles are socially inept and that something has stunted their growth relationship wise. Therefore they desire relations with a person much younger, because this portion of their persona is very immature. Sexually they have the brains of 15 year olds, but in other respects they are much older and wiser to the workings of the world. This allows them to take advantage, and results in them acting in the disgusting manner that they do.

I don't understand why many of the people on this post continue to try to rationalize the existance of NAMBLA. this thought alone makes me want to throw up.

[WhiteElephants]

Originally posted by Arrian

Hmm. Can't say the same for myself. I've matured *just a bit* since I was 9.

:looks up from playing with transformers: What? No honey, I'm busy you put the kids to bed! :goes back to playing with transformers:

I don't think it is all that easy for a 25 year old to take advantage of a 16 year old. That 16 year old can evaluate the worth of the 25 year old just as much as a fellow 16 year old.

Me thinks you think this only because your 16, no?

If you want to look at human history people have been having sex at much younger ages since the beginning of time. Surely you don't believe that young people as as a demographic have GOTTEN DUMBER since the stone age, do you?

Though I believe you are incorrect about people having sex at a younger age since the stone age, I still don't see the correalation between this and being dumber or smarter.

There is a great deal of prejudice that hits ones mind when they hear "15 year old" they don't actually perceive reality, they perceive their own skewed stereotypes. I am right between the two numbers and I know people at both, and judging their reasoning ability I find no discernable difference.

Then one of two things are at play here: Your poor judgement of people's ability to reason, or that you know 25 year olds with the mental capacity of 15 year olds.

Granted the longer someone is around the most information they accumulate. I'm not saying that experience doesn't exist, surely it does. But if a 15 year old is given the same amount of information as a 25 year old or a 35 year old their decisions will be just as rational.

The point is you can't just bless someone with this information or experience, but given your lack of experience I can see why you'd think this.

[Jac de Molay]

Well teens are probably having sex earlier because they've been reaching puberty earlier in the past 100 years. Science can't explain why, either. Could be hormones in the food or anything.

NAMBLA or not, the Net created a fool's paradise for these deviants. The equivalent of a printing press in every home is being brought to bear in ways we didn't imagine, unfortunately.



Dave

[MrFun]

I think I will put Ozzy on the same level of Boddington and Wiglaf.

[loinburger]

Originally posted by OzzyKP
If you want to look at human history people have been having sex at much younger ages since the beginning of time.

I fail to see how you can possibly substantiate this claim.