Debate, and discuss, just dont Bore me.
Sacraficing Freedom for Security
Published on July 15, 2008 By Dr Guy In Current Events

Pedophelia is a truly horrendous crime.  It robs the innocence from the most trusting and innocent members of society.  There is no level in Dante's Inferno for Pedophiles as the crime itself is too horrofic for even his 7 circles.  Yet it exists.  No one denies that it exists and no one denies that we must prosecute the criminals to the fullest, and hopefully put them away so that they can never practice their perversion again.

But we have gone too far.  To the point of branding people with the scarlet P for being what?  A teenager in love, or a loving father.  And that is as scary as the perpertrators themselves.  In the latest episode of throwing the baby out with the bathwater, a father in England had to call the cops to prevent from being assaulted by a bunch of do-gooder bystanders for simply snapping pictures of his 2 boys.  What parent does not snap thousands of pictures of their children?  In almost every waking moment!  They change sop fast, that it is the only way to capture their joyful innocence and carefree nature.  Yet now every parent is suspect.  Every parent is a pedophile.  For taking pictures of their children.

Before this insanity became an obsession, I took a picture of my daughter taking a bath with her cousin.  It was a cute picture that my ex still has to this day.  2 3 year olds playing in a tub with their rubber duckies.  Today, I would be arrested and branded with a scarlet P.  For what?  For wanting to capture a youthful exuberance of my child.

A teenager in George is arrested and convicted and sent to jail for life.  his crime?  Having Oral sex with his 15 year old girl friend.  A life ruined because of a bit of passion - and it was consensual.

Children are taken from their parents for what?  A picture of their child, without clothes, they had developed at a store.  Their children, not in any sexual pose.  And they lose their children (and one wonders why I have no compassion for the CPS gestapo).

We have gone to far when we are locking up innocent people on the mere suggestion (sometimes made out of spite) of pedophelia.  The days of "innocent until proven guilty" are gone when it comes to this crime.  Many rejoice at this travesty. "It will save one child, that makes it worth it!"

And so another freedom is lost in the jihad to security.  Today pedophiles, tomorrow "Future Crimes Division" will get you before you can spit on the sidewalk - because it looked like you would. 

Many will laugh at this lament. Others will tar and feather the author for the message, and yes, even brand me a Pedophile for daring to speak out against this injustice.  Today.

Tomorrow they will not be able to.  For they will be in jail on a future crime as well.  That one will be less heinous than pedophelia, but the door has been opened.  And it is only a matter of time before it spreads to a lot more areas.  Freedom lost is a lot harder to regain than freedom maintained.  It is safer to outlaw all activity, but not freer.  There was no crime in the old USSR.  There was also no freedom.


Comments (Page 2)
2 Pages1 2 
on Jul 25, 2008

Gary Snyder wrote a poem about his partner/wife and their children bathing in which he lovingly described their nudity. Earlier this year in a class on birth and motherhood I saw a home birth in a pool where the entire family was naked helping the mother give birth. As for the case of the boy in Georgia, that was under reported. I actually had to hear it on the CBC. America has a huge problem with its sexuality and is ashamed of its collective naked body, so we see demons everywhere. We are so busy demon hunting that the real evil goes unseen.

I have, by the way, responded to your response.

on Jul 25, 2008
One thing I won't do is tell anyone how to raise or feed thier children... lol


We have enough Dr. Spocks.
on Jul 25, 2008
Now if we could only use our Constitutional rights to make sure things like this don't get out of hand.


They are out of hand - all in the name of the "children". People scream about the supposed liberties we have lost under Bush, not realizing they were lost a long time ago in the name of "safety". Before Bush.
on Jul 25, 2008
Earlier this year in a class on birth and motherhood I saw a home birth in a pool where the entire family was naked helping the mother give birth.


Eh, we went natural with all 4 of ours, but I dont think I would have gotten into a pool with her for the birth! But still, with 4 children, almost 10 years from oldest to youngest, the difference in what we could and could not do from the first to the last was remarkable. The first was sterile city! The last, I walked in from digging ditches and picked up my baby, no qualms from anyone.
on Aug 14, 2008
teenager in George is arrested and convicted and sent to jail for life. his crime? Having Oral sex with his 15 year old girl friend. A life ruined because of a bit of passion - and it was consensual

The girl in question is 15 and as per the law is a child and her boyfriend has certainly broken the law.

As a civil libertarian I am concerned about the publicity that surround convicted pedeophiles. If reformed they should not be made to carry the burden of their past conviction. Everyone has the right of privacy but as they say this should be balance with the rights of society to protect itself. Now that is noe difficult question.
on Aug 14, 2008
The girl in question is 15 and as per the law is a child and her boyfriend has certainly broken the law.


It is indeed a crime. But it is not pedophelia, and the penalty should not be long prison terms and the scarlet letter.

If reformed they should not be made to carry the burden of their past conviction.


Unfortunately, real pedophelias apparently cannot be reformed. Thankfully, there are not a lot of them. But the bathwater here is branding all crimes as such, and so the "frisky" are stigmatized along with the true animals.

If indeed the "experts" (and I use that term loosely) are correct and real pedophiles cannot be rehabilitated, then yes, I see them losing their "right of privacy" as a part of their punishment for their crime. But I am scared by how easily the charge rolls of the lips of "do-gooders" for anyone paying ANY attention to a child - even when it is their own.
on Aug 14, 2008
Bizarrely in the UK if a 15 year old boy sleeps with a 15 year old girl, the boy can be arrested and put on the sex offenders register, meaning they can never work with children for the rest of their lives+in other positions, I think. Oh, the girl can't be put on the sex offenders list I think, only the boy. It's crazy - who in their right minds would call a 15 year old having consensual sex with another 15 year old a paedophile?! Ironically only a few headlines away you then hear of some group proposing sex education from the age of 3...
on Aug 14, 2008
It's crazy - who in their right minds would call a 15 year old having consensual sex with another 15 year old a paedophile?!


Apparently the UK and the US. The same situation happens here as well.
on Aug 14, 2008

maudlin27 I'm am 99% convinced that you are mistaken.  Both parties can be arrested and put on the sex offenders register - there is no difference for males or females or the law would be take to the European Court for sexual discrimination.  There is also no formal defense for being under 16 as you are over the age of criminal responability but the police pretty much always turn a blind eye unless there is something else going on (for example if one party is mentaly hanicapped).

on Aug 15, 2008
There is also no formal defense for being under 16 as you are over the age of criminal responability but the police pretty much always turn a blind eye unless there is something else going on (for example if one party is mentaly hanicapped).


This is the insidious part too. A law that is enforced selectively is a tyranical law. It denies equal justice to everyone. While I am not familiar with the UK Tenets of law, I know that it in the US it violates the very core of the Constitution. Unfortunately, that does not seem to wake people up to the fact that a bad law is worse than no law.

on Aug 15, 2008
maudlin27 I'm am 99% convinced that you are mistaken. Both parties can be arrested and put on the sex offenders register

Maybe it's just that only the boys are chosen to be prosecuted by the police (most likely), or alternatively that the media only tends to report on those cases, if the law applies equally to male and female. Regardless IMO neither should be if it was consensual, and if it wasn't consensual then it would be rape not paedophilia anyway. You also then move on to other greyer areas - e.g. if the boy is 16 and the girl is 15, which might have been what I was thinking of with my original post, which is another reason I dislike the law because it seems a bit too clear cut in it's treatment.
on Aug 15, 2008
Maybe it's just that only the boys are chosen to be prosecuted by the police (most likely), or alternatively that the media only tends to report on those cases, if the law applies equally to male and female


I think it is a little of both. After all, until recently there was no such thing in the states of statutory rape of a male minor (he was just lucky). Now we see it a lot (more so than the female minor kind). I dont think it is more prevalent today, just more reported and more prosecuted.
on Aug 26, 2008

And still it continues.  Crude remarks are crude, not criminal.

 

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,410422,00.html

on Aug 27, 2008

Excellent article and I couldn't agree more.  It makes me wonder ... when do we change the "land of the free" from the star-spangled banner to a multi-sentence small print disclaimer, or at least put an asterisk next to it pointing to the fine print?

on Aug 28, 2008

when do we change the "land of the free" from the star-spangled banner to a multi-sentence small print disclaimer, or at least put an asterisk next to it pointing to the fine print?

I am not sure we have not already done that. Change is not always apparent during the event, only in hindsight.

2 Pages1 2