Quote# 131579

Inappropriate over-reaction to a storm in a teacup. The witch-hunt mentality probably arose as the result of a conservative American-style Christian upbringing that views all expression of sexuality as "evil", regardless of the consequences for the actors and any of their recipients.

People who download child porn are not necessarily the ones who act on it. It could have been a useful release for a guy with feelings he needed to contain in the real world. I am repulsed by people who indulge pornographic fantasies but it is their life, not mine. If they are doing no harm to others, or to themselves, then I have no right to use my repulsion to condemn or punish them. That is a moral maturational level that this Federal Agent has apparently not yet reached.

The acts of this School Principle are far less serious that the rampant active sex abuse of children by Catholic clergy, and the less frequent, but also egregious, sexual exploitation of parishioners by non-Catholic clergy.

In this particular case there appears to be no evidence that the legally tortured Principal did anything more than just look at electronic images. Unless such evidence has been repressed (and why would the media want to suppress such salacious material?) there did not seem to be any people harmed by what was
happening - until this self-righteous authoritarian started formal legal proceedings. It was =that= act that caused an avalanche of damage. It smashed friendships, broke up a marriage, deprived children of a father, caused irreparable damage to the mental well-being of everyone in that family, deprived a school of its Principle, and probably unnecessarily upset a lot of the kids at that school and their parents. If we look at the results, then this rigid FBI agent is the real criminal, He is the one causing all the harm.

In the higher stages of moral development people recognize that it is the consequences of actions that make them "moral" or "immoral". If the only thing harmed is the transgression of some asserted set of "absolute morals" on which there has never been anything close to a universal consensus, or the sensibilities of some cult-specific version of a supernatural being for which there is even less valid evidence, then we are looking at the operation of moral reasoning that is at the immature end of the normal moral maturational ladder.

rlwemm, Disqus 5 Comments [9/12/2017 10:38:34 AM]
Fundie Index: 5
Username:
Comment:



1 | bottom

Citizen Justin

People who download child porn do not necessarily act on it.

However the act of downloading it lends support, be it financial or 'moral', to the the industry which responds by creating more of it by abusing kids. Even if it doesn't... the kids who feature in whatever's been downloaded have had their privacy violated (among other things).

I don't go round screaming that every nonce should be killed, but there's no such thing as a victimless crime.

9/12/2017 11:12:29 AM

Sasha

The REAL victim of child porn is the child being sexually abused to make it. Prosecuting adults who watch child porn lowers the demand for child porn. Your school principal knew the risks and consequences when he downloaded such material, so he merits no sympathy whatsoever.

9/12/2017 11:41:45 AM

The Angry Dybbuk

If pedos can get by on fan-fic and "art," then so be it. Actual child porn has actual victims. Downloading it signals demand for more, and so more is made. This is why it's illegal and wrong. How hard is that to understand?

9/12/2017 2:03:53 PM

hydrolythe

"Inappropriate over-reaction to a storm in a teacup. The witch-hunt mentality probably arose as the result of a conservative American-style Christian upbringing that views all expression of sexuality as "evil", regardless of the consequences for the actors and any of their recipients. "

You can watch porn in the US (although admittedly drawn and softcore child pornography, animal-on-human pornography may be restricted by state and hardcore acts of the latter are pretty much banned). It's not as lax as say, Denmark and Czech Republic (where drawn chid porn is legal) or Hungary (where bestiality is allowed as long as the animal isn't hurt), but it's much laxer than Russia (where certain parts of the body may never be shown) or Saudi Arabia (where pornography as a whole is completely banned). Considering it's industry however, I'd say it has rather lax pornography laws. At least you get to see the genitalia. Admittedly, there are still many things in the US (such as the Adults Only rating in ESSRB video games and the NC-17 rating by the MPAA) that still do scream anti-sex however, so I am willing give you half a point for that one.

"People who download child porn are not necessarily the ones who act on it. It could have been a useful release for a guy with feelings he needed to contain in the real world. I am repulsed by people who indulge pornographic fantasies but it is their life, not mine. If they are doing no harm to others, or to themselves, then I have no right to use my repulsion to condemn or punish them. That is a moral maturational level that this Federal Agent has apparently not yet reached."

Sure, but it may traumatize the kid involved and make him want to commit suicide. If I had a choice of disallowing that some may not satisfy themselvess physically and mentally and giving people real mental trauma the choice is easily made.

"The acts of this School Principle are far less serious that the rampant active sex abuse of children by Catholic clergy, and the less frequent, but also egregious, sexual exploitation of parishioners by non-Catholic clergy. "

Just because an action is less bad than another action it doesn't make it good.

"In this particular case there appears to be no evidence that the legally tortured Principal did anything more than just look at electronic images. Unless such evidence has been repressed (and why would the media want to suppress such salacious material?) there did not seem to be any people harmed by what was
happening - until this self-righteous authoritarian started formal legal proceedings. It was =that= act that caused an avalanche of damage. It smashed friendships, broke up a marriage, deprived children of a father, caused irreparable damage to the mental well-being of everyone in that family, deprived a school of its Principle, and probably unnecessarily upset a lot of the kids at that school and their parents. If we look at the results, then this rigid FBI agent is the real criminal, He is the one causing all the harm. "

I'd agree somewhat, in the sense that if he really stumbled across it by accident or out of sheer curiosity and never really sought for it that this is unfair and he should get some money for the caused damages.

"In the higher stages of moral development people recognize that it is the consequences of actions that make them "moral" or "immoral". If the only thing harmed is the transgression of some asserted set of "absolute morals" on which there has never been anything close to a universal consensus, or the sensibilities of some cult-specific version of a supernatural being for which there is even less valid evidence, then we are looking at the operation of moral reasoning that is at the immature end of the normal moral maturational ladder. "

There is psychiatric consensus that sex is mentally traumatizing to children. If you start denying this you might as well throw out the entirety of economics.

@Citizen Justin

Apparantly most viewings are free of charge and are old VHS/DVD tapes that people constantly copy and distribute with discretion amongst themselves. Small industries may somewhat exist (the Yakuza in Japan has been cited for it), but a lot of it is also amateur production with no real discernible motive. So that argument may have been too simple.

9/12/2017 2:36:18 PM

Anon-e-moose

The 2009 Coroners & Justice Act.

Here in Britain it is illegal to possess so much as artwork of a paedophilic nature.

After what happened, re. Jimmy Savile, good luck with getting people here to come to your way of thinking, pal.

9/12/2017 4:30:17 PM

1 | top: comments page