Printable View
True, it would be like saying to yourself fancying men is wrong and it might not change their minds about whether it's right or wrong.
However, the more of these people that come out for who and what they are, the easier it will be to identify them. Let's hope every single one of them stands up and admits it so everyone can keep their kids away from them.
Rather have them out in the open than sneaking around some suburbian neighbourhood prowling on innocent children.
well freedom of speech and opinion is a great right. So these people have their rights to. I'm not judging if their ideas are good or bad.
Same as i wouldn't about a homosexual party or a moslim or christrian party or democratic party. There is hardly a chance this party will get enough votes for entering parliament.
However, the porn on daytime on public channels will gain a lot of voters :shifty:
They forgot to mention our liberal rights/laws on abortion and euthanasia :pinch:Quote:
The Netherlands, which already has liberal policies on soft drugs, prostitution and gay marriage, has been shocked by the plan. An opinion poll showed that 82 percent wanted the government to do something to stop the new party.
The difference of course being that none of the above are illegal, whereas paedophilia ... ummm ... is. :blink:Quote:
Originally Posted by jetje
Well you hit the nail on it's head, doing is illegat atm, so that's exactly why they started this party. To discuss if that's a good law and if possible change the law over here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Barbarossa
And talking about that isn't forbidden, that's why the judge don't forbid a politicall party that has new 'bright' ideas on issues. If there are enough people that think their ideas should be heared in parliamant they will be elected.
Yes, but freedom of speech and thought dictates that these people be allowed to stand before their fellow citizens and create an argument out of whole cloth that it is normal and healthy for toddlers to be used as sex toys, and society should be happy to sanction this behavior.Quote:
Originally Posted by Barbarossa
After all, here in America, the ACLU (a well-known and respected civil-rights organization) is "fighting the good fight" on behalf of pedophiles so that they might enjoy children as only pedophiles can, and everyone knows the ACLU is always on the "right" side of whatever cause it takes up.
Right? :dry:
Do I detect a bit of sarcasm? :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by j2k4
@Skweeky, I absolutely agree with your last. I only wish to add that not only do parents and children need to be vigilant, but the authorities need to be vigilant as well. If they want to do it, they will. In my opinion the only safe pedophile is one who is locked up.
If you cut of any debate that you think is wrong you never get anywhere in these kind of debates.
How long ago was it that they said you were mentally ill when you were a homosexual?
If you think about rape... Are you a Rapist? If you think about killing, Are you a killer? If you think about having sex with children? Are you a child abuser?
I don't know, none of it is my cup of tea. But i won't bring one of them to trial, cause they didnt wrong imho.
I rather have people with ideas that are way of what 'general public' finds 'normal' debate about it then seeing them forced to go underground and hide it. So we all can say "we don't see it, so it isn't out there"
Yes, yes, you do.Quote:
Originally Posted by NikkiD
My apologies for malfeasance with respect to the use of the word "right". ;)
To not ban it was probably the right decision. It is not illegal to campaign for all speed restrictions in towns to be lifted for cars. It is illegal to speed at 150 through a housing estate.
It is probably a vain hope but if the matter is discussed in the open there is always a possibility that it will crystalise in the minds of those who might think otherwise that current laws are sensible and correct and should stay after all. If such people merely network with each other there is a danger that their own propaganda is not subject to the full rigour of open examination they will believe it without question. Equally I would argue that it is right for people like the BNP to have access to air their views - so people can see exactly how suspect their arguments are too.
There is also the advantage that if such people are prepared to stand-up then they are unlikely to be actively participating in what they are arguing for. In that respect the fewer secret paedophiles the better.
Tough to have a silly thread about serious stuff with you around, Les. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Biggles