Comments on: Charity, freedom and diversity

By: Joe90

Joe90 — Fri, 09 Jun 2006 20:50:33 +0000

Fe’reeha asks: “Just because children are curious about sex does not mean they are entitled to it.”

I really doubt these creeps in Holland have the welfare of children uppermost in their minds.

By: V

Fri, 09 Jun 2006 20:16:13 +0000

If they had forbidden the out-marriage sex relations, they’d have to abolish it later for “exchanging” their wifes… but that ain’t a bad strategy in a first time: considered as a sect, they can easily gather pedophilians and make internal changes:

start:
“religious paty” face, dressed as puritans -â–º social-acception -â–º gather members and keep them.
then:
internal changes, only visible for members who already joined -â–º pedophilia enabled

dressed a first as a political party, then do not have any chance. Hope they will quickly disappear, they make me sick.

By: IanLondon

IanLondon — Fri, 02 Jun 2006 15:35:27 +0000

They’ve gone all about it in the wrong way, they should have dressed themselves up as a religious party, promote the idea of no sex outside marriage, and then lowered the age of marriage for females to 12.

By: Fe'reeha

Fe'reeha — Fri, 02 Jun 2006 12:08:30 +0000

I think there is a fundamental fault in the party proposals. Just because children are curious about sex does not mean they are entitled to it.
Children are curious about almost everything. From rubbish, guns, kitchen utensils to washing powder, space, aliens etc…children want to know and experiement with everything. Does it mean we should let them drink detergents and fire guns as well.
Just to satisfy their curiosity?

By: Roger

Roger — Fri, 02 Jun 2006 11:59:40 +0000

The age of consent is an arbitrary thing that varies from country to country. It’s still necessary because the main objection to sexual behaviour involving adults and people who are legally still children is that adults are- just because they are adults- in a position of power.
There’s a difference between the changing the age of consent and paedophilia: the latter iis sexual attraction to children before they have adult sexual characteristics. For obvious reasons, apart from the moral aspects, having sexual relations with such children can cause permanent physical and psychological harm.

By: Kismet Hardy

Kismet Hardy — Fri, 02 Jun 2006 11:49:38 +0000

Votes for goats

By: sonia

sonia — Fri, 02 Jun 2006 11:38:39 +0000

i’m sure lots of animal rights activists will get worked up about this

still they did say something about free train travel for everyone – ha! now why can’t some sensible political parties opt for that one hmm?

By: Chris Stiles

Chris Stiles — Fri, 02 Jun 2006 11:19:25 +0000

It’s a function of both birth control, and teens being less sexually active overall, which in turn is a function of education and societal attitudes.

By: sonia

sonia — Fri, 02 Jun 2006 09:42:23 +0000

makes sense what you say above Sajini.

By: SajiniW

SajiniW — Fri, 02 Jun 2006 09:38:01 +0000

I think the difference in teenage pregnancy rates in Holland + Scandinavia compared to the UK, is birth control, not age.

By: SajiniW

SajiniW — Fri, 02 Jun 2006 09:36:30 +0000

Most molestation, be it rape/of a child happens with a ‘known’ person.

It certainly contributes to the hysteria about having the right to know where child sex offenders live.

By: sonia

sonia — Fri, 02 Jun 2006 09:34:09 +0000

hmm teenage pregnancy rates are high despite the age of consent being what it is – i don’t really see how lowering the age of consent is going to make any difference! the only thing is if teenagers are encouraged more to use birth control and that’s hardly likely to happen the more ‘undercover’ and ‘illicit’ the kids feel their sexual actitivity is.

By: sonia

sonia — Fri, 02 Jun 2006 09:31:03 +0000

strange as it may be, i do agree that ‘paedophiles’ ( or potential ones perhaps!) ‘announcing’ themselves is better than not announcing themselves. still i don’t think all molesters are about to join this party – sexual molestation of children is far far more widespread than we imagine. and statistically, more children are more at risk from close family members and trusted people rather than strangers hiding behind bushes waiting to pounce.

By: SajiniW

SajiniW — Fri, 02 Jun 2006 09:18:51 +0000

The one thing that stops the UK from lowering the age of consent (once the less pleasant consequences of teenage pregnancy are put to one side) is the ‘slippery slope’ argument.

By: sonia

sonia — Fri, 02 Jun 2006 09:14:56 +0000

interesting! well perhaps one could simply say -and are there any children in this party?

its one thing to talk about the sexual rights of children ( its obvious children are sexually curious before they’re ‘legal’ – there’s no point in people denying that) but it’s quite another matter talking about the rights of an adult to have sex with a child.

By: Kismet Hardy

Kismet Hardy — Fri, 02 Jun 2006 08:40:13 +0000

It’s not an answer Sajini, but it sure as hell would satisfy my curiousity

By: SajiniW

SajiniW — Fri, 02 Jun 2006 08:34:12 +0000

Whilst I find the actions of those who enjoy molesting children deplorable, I don’t think a Newsoftheworld-style ‘lynching’ is the answer.

By: funkg

funkg — Fri, 02 Jun 2006 08:33:51 +0000

at least those perverts are identifying theirselves, they should now be locked up and dealt with.

By: Kismet Hardy

Kismet Hardy — Fri, 02 Jun 2006 08:24:59 +0000

To be honest, I’d rather paedophiles didn’t hide in their filthy murky shadows and came out to make their sickening demands. They should all do it. Get other paedos to sign up for the party. At least this way they’re identified by the authorities instead of hidden away. Who knows? Maybe the dutch might just sober up from their stupor for long enough to go lynch the fuckers

By: SajiniW

SajiniW — Fri, 02 Jun 2006 08:04:03 +0000

At which point do we define ‘potential criminal’ though?

People who’d like to legalise an act that’s currently not so?

People who have committed recent crimes, e.g. certain BNP members we laughed at last week?