Another idiot who is living in cloud cuckoo land. If photos exist of children being raped by sick men like you do you really think women want to be reminded of of the perverted scum who perpetrated this crime do you really think it meand so little to them that they wil sell it to make a few bucks so that you and your perverted friends can masturbate and perpetuate other crines against children you are clearly certifiable and should be locked up the rest of your life as a danger to society
Your missing my point. I am talking about children that are being brutally raped, having their photos taken against their wishes, and being plastered all over the internet for people to download.
I don't know of any grown adult that would sell their photos of them being raped for others to see. I want to prevent child abuse/rape from happening.
I don't think any child should be exploited. Not all children are little "adults" either. Legalizing CP will never stop the abuse no matter which way you twist it or turn it.
Fine voyce, but you do realize that such images of brutal rape probably represent only a very small fraction of the material currently banned as kiddie porn, don't you? Of course I totally agree that pictures of kids **being brutally raped, having their photos taken against their wishes** is a horrific thing, but that is only a tiny fraction of kiddie porn. Most kiddie porn probably **stars** teenagers and is made by other teenagers with cell phone cameras.
Try coming out with some imperical evidence and not these casual one liners from the girl chat forums.A great many of the pedophiles who call themselves 'girllovers' wouldn't even be interested in teenagers you're either seriously deluded or naieve
Whether 'girllovers' are interested in teenagers means nothing to me. Fact is that any sexually explicit (or lewd exhibition of the genital area, even if clothed) image of someone even one day under 18yrs old is child porn in the USA. If an 18yr old takes a picture of his 17yr old GF giving him a blow job he just made CP and she's a 'victim'. That's way different from brutal rape of a child.
Its important that we refrain from confusing "Rape" (to have intercourse with another person by force), and "Statutory rape" which means having sex with a class of people who have been deemed incompetent by 'statute'.
In other words for no other reason other than the congress deemed it so. Just because it is 'statutory' does not make it 'rape' in the former sense.
So you think it should be ok to watch a child getting raped? Are you sick fucks supposed to care about kids? Instead you think child rape should be sold in stores?
At least you made your point about children being used as sexual tools something you clearly promote. Just as you label all anti's pedophobes, would it be appropriate to label all pedophiles as sociopaths? You care nothing of the child, just your own gratification. Thank you for proving how false yoru claims of love are.
I don't think either act of 'labeling' is appropriate. Just like labeling all CP as the 'rape of a child' is not appropriate. In some cases CP is brutal rape, but in many cases it is not. Just to be clear, I don't think CP that does show the 'brutal rape of a child' should be legal.
But then we go back to the manipulation of an underdeveloped mind to perform sexual acts. Is that rape? Yes. Of course the ones not involving sexual acts may not be rape butintead are exploitation or those less vulnerable. All so some pedophile can masterbate. You call that love?
Semantics? I assumed you were saying that children are not *capable* of consenting to sexual acts. I don't think that's always true. Neither you nor I should get to speak on the behalf of ALL children.
wow. That was the most flawed logic I have ever heard. You don't even try to sound rational. Your discussion of CP was a suggestion that the rape of children be promoted and encouraged in the public market. Yet, you call those against you mentally ill? Assuming you are not opposed to discussion and don't block me, I will attach a responce to this.
Nudist magazines are on the bookstore shelves in Canada.
visaman 2 years ago
Another idiot who is living in cloud cuckoo land. If photos exist of children being raped by sick men like you do you really think women want to be reminded of of the perverted scum who perpetrated this crime do you really think it meand so little to them that they wil sell it to make a few bucks so that you and your perverted friends can masturbate and perpetuate other crines against children you are clearly certifiable and should be locked up the rest of your life as a danger to society
nb3pc 4 years ago
You are just another sick pedophile failure who tries to use bullshit logic to justify the exploitation of children and child pornography.
ReturnOfKitty 4 years ago
Your missing my point. I am talking about children that are being brutally raped, having their photos taken against their wishes, and being plastered all over the internet for people to download.
voyceoflil 4 years ago
I don't know of any grown adult that would sell their photos of them being raped for others to see. I want to prevent child abuse/rape from happening.
voyceoflil 4 years ago
I don't think any child should be exploited. Not all children are little "adults" either. Legalizing CP will never stop the abuse no matter which way you twist it or turn it.
voyceoflil 4 years ago
Neither will banning it, it only raises the stakes so death and horror occurs in too many cases.
Kenzofeis 3 years ago
Fine voyce, but you do realize that such images of brutal rape probably represent only a very small fraction of the material currently banned as kiddie porn, don't you? Of course I totally agree that pictures of kids **being brutally raped, having their photos taken against their wishes** is a horrific thing, but that is only a tiny fraction of kiddie porn. Most kiddie porn probably **stars** teenagers and is made by other teenagers with cell phone cameras.
GLdude 4 years ago
Shut the fuck up.
Jizzrish282 4 years ago
Can you source that or did you make it up?
ShuddupStupid 4 years ago
Try coming out with some imperical evidence and not these casual one liners from the girl chat forums.A great many of the pedophiles who call themselves 'girllovers' wouldn't even be interested in teenagers you're either seriously deluded or naieve
nb3pc 4 years ago
Whether 'girllovers' are interested in teenagers means nothing to me. Fact is that any sexually explicit (or lewd exhibition of the genital area, even if clothed) image of someone even one day under 18yrs old is child porn in the USA. If an 18yr old takes a picture of his 17yr old GF giving him a blow job he just made CP and she's a 'victim'. That's way different from brutal rape of a child.
GLdude 4 years ago 4
I am sure that when child sex offenders are arrested the circunstances are taken into considereation
nb3pc 4 years ago
Its important that we refrain from confusing "Rape" (to have intercourse with another person by force), and "Statutory rape" which means having sex with a class of people who have been deemed incompetent by 'statute'.
In other words for no other reason other than the congress deemed it so. Just because it is 'statutory' does not make it 'rape' in the former sense.
Zexion5 4 years ago 5
nice attempt to pervert the truth for your purpose again. "no other reason other than congress deemed so".
No, they based it on more information than a whim and you know it. Why do you lie?
dynascatlovesme 4 years ago
Zexion5 so this class of people you mean is children under a certain age right?
nb3pc 4 years ago
You want to restrict activities between two consenting adults. One adult that authorizes the publication, one that buys it.
rzr1911 4 years ago
no consideration for the child used as a sexual tool? Or do you purposly forget that part because it doesnt fill your needs?
dynascatlovesme 4 years ago
He never said rape. Those are your semantics; your subjective reality.
I could call every sex act with an adult rape if I wanted to. But that would only be a reflection of my constructed reality.
The law and it's terminology is also subject to change, it is not absolute. Think deeper than what you are told, if possible.
TheHellLicker 4 years ago 4
He said child porn. Are you suggesting no child porn is rape? The law and terminology are clear at this point.
Think less of your own personal needs, if possible
dynascatlovesme 4 years ago
I am greatly offended that you think you can label your mental illness as a sexual orientation.
VioletLeaves 4 years ago
So you think it should be ok to watch a child getting raped? Are you sick fucks supposed to care about kids? Instead you think child rape should be sold in stores?
dynascatlovesme 4 years ago
I am actually baffled myself, honestly.
voyceoflil 4 years ago
At least you made your point about children being used as sexual tools something you clearly promote. Just as you label all anti's pedophobes, would it be appropriate to label all pedophiles as sociopaths? You care nothing of the child, just your own gratification. Thank you for proving how false yoru claims of love are.
ShuddupStupid 4 years ago
I don't think either act of 'labeling' is appropriate. Just like labeling all CP as the 'rape of a child' is not appropriate. In some cases CP is brutal rape, but in many cases it is not. Just to be clear, I don't think CP that does show the 'brutal rape of a child' should be legal.
GLdude 4 years ago 3
But then we go back to the manipulation of an underdeveloped mind to perform sexual acts. Is that rape? Yes. Of course the ones not involving sexual acts may not be rape butintead are exploitation or those less vulnerable. All so some pedophile can masterbate. You call that love?
ShuddupStupid 4 years ago
Since children cannot consent to sexual acts then that would be rape.Anything else is a violation of their minds, their bodies and their image
nb3pc 4 years ago
Nice opinion nb3pc, but rather arrogant to speak for all children (everyone under 18 in the USA when it comes to CP) in such an absolute manner.
**Since children cannot consent to sexual acts**
Maybe you meant to say **since the law does not permit minors to consent to sexual acts** ???
GLdude 4 years ago 3
Since both are the same your attempt to play semantics is pointless. it is also apparent that your focus is not on 17 year old girls
nb3pc 4 years ago
Semantics? I assumed you were saying that children are not *capable* of consenting to sexual acts. I don't think that's always true. Neither you nor I should get to speak on the behalf of ALL children.
GLdude 4 years ago 2
wow. That was the most flawed logic I have ever heard. You don't even try to sound rational. Your discussion of CP was a suggestion that the rape of children be promoted and encouraged in the public market. Yet, you call those against you mentally ill? Assuming you are not opposed to discussion and don't block me, I will attach a responce to this.
ShuddupStupid 4 years ago