It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Pedophiles Launch Own Political Party In The Netherlands

page: 6
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in


posted on Jun, 2 2006 @ 04:58 PM
I'm quite surprised that they would consider starting a political party. I don't like the idea of making such things legal.

Where do the parents of the 12-16 year olds come in? Is the child allowed to consent to something his/her parents would disagree with? If parents disagree, but the kid consents,.... what happens?? I can see it now; Homeless children recruited for this sort of thing, for the exchange of money,.. and calling it consesual. There's enough legal trouble with "consesual" adult activities, and now they want to bring in the kids??

Kids are extremely impressionable. It is much easier to talk a kid into doing something they normally wouldn't do, than it is to convince an adult. And why do adults need kids for this activity? Aren't there enough consenting adults out there?? I could be wrong,... but aren't all kids under the age of 18 not held fully responsible for crimes like murder (at least in the U.S.)? Wouldn't this imply that they are not yet old enough to make critical decisions? Why would sex be any different?

If kids were forming this movement (I realize they're too young to start political parties
),.. I'd understand it a little better. I'm sure there are PLENTY of young boys (or even girls!) who wanted a certain teacher,... and had they gotten her (or him), would have bragged about it.

If kids were allowed to make this decision, would they also be allowed to drink alcohol and smoke starting at 12 years of age?? Why would alcohol and smoking be more of a decision than sex? Sex can have some very serious consequences. We're talking anything from pregnancy to STDs.

The whole thing is just ridiculous. This is nothing more than a bunch of sex-crazed adults trying to satisfy their sick desires. Pure selfishness! Its not like they're falling in love with the 12 year old,..... its not like they wish to be with them forever,..... they just want to do the deed, and move on. Educating the children??? Give me a break! They have plenty of time to learn on their own. THey don't need some 30 year old "teaching" them. Just look at the world population,.... how many of yesterday's children needed the help of adults to procreate?

Sure there's plenty of 16 year olds (and younger) having sex with each other out there (plenty of teenage moms and dads),.... but to be honest with you, aside from bad consequences,... there's a lot less wrong with that than a 30 year old and a 12 year old being together. What IS the attraction to these very young kids??

This sort of reminds me of what was going on during the Roman times,... when men had young boy "companions". It was a widely accepted idea then,.... but it will not fly in today's society,..... not with me anyway. 16 is shaky,... 17 is almost acceptable,... but anything below that is purely unacceptable.
I can't believe they had the guts to come out publically.

As for animals,..... quite unacceptable. There's no way for an animal to consent to anything of this nature. It is rape, and can't be considered anything else,... pure and simple.

posted on Jun, 2 2006 @ 08:34 PM
The 12-16 age of consent thing is strange to me, since as far as I am aware the Dutch system was unusual in that the age of consent was essentially 12 already, depending on the circumstances. I don't know if it's changed since, but Dutch system used to be that under 12, all sexual contact was prosecutable. Between 12 and 16, sexual activity was only prosecutable if the parents or the kid in question wished to press charges. Over 16 all consensual sex was legal. I think this system makes more sense than a hard and fast age of consent actually, because it leaves room for parental and individual discretion, though I might make the ages more like 13 & 18 respectively.

It's also kind of odd that pedophiles" would want an age of consent of 12, or an age of consent at all for that matter. The term "pedophile" specifically refers to people who are sexually interested in children who haven't yet reached sexual maturity, which usually happens right around 12, give or take a year or two. People with a sexual predilection for teens are apparently called "ephebophiles".

While I'm not too keen on real child molesters, it's more of a grey area IMHO where teens are concerned. The other day I ran across an interesting statistic - the average age in the US where people have their first sexual intercourse is 14.8. Which means there are a hell of a lot of sex offenders running around out there. There seems to be a bit of cognitive dissonance here, between the age where people are supposed to be having sex and the age at which they actually do. After all, only about a century ago, 13 was considered "marriagable age" - it's actually only a recent historical phenomenon that adolescents are considered "children". In most older cultures, the age where people are considered adults is 13 - hence it's the age for Bar Mitzvah's in Judaism, Confirmation for Catholics occurs between 14 & 16 I believe, but used to be younger... hell if I recall correctly Romeo and Juliet were 14 & 13 respectively. So the idea of what's an an acceptable age has changed a lot over time.

Not that I think lowering thee age of consent to 12 is a great idea either - too many creeps would have a free for all. Here in New Jersey the age of consent is 16 - a little more realistic than 18 I think. On the other hand the idea of treating an 16 year + 1 month old as a "sex offender" for fooling around with a 15 year + 11 month old is more than a little silly, and so does the idea of treating kids who get caught "playing doctor" as sex offenders - which has actually happened here in the states.

As for this party - I wouldn't worry about them too much. Somehow I doubt they're going to sweep the Dutch parliamentary elections anytime soon.

[edit on 6/2/06 by xmotex]

posted on Jun, 2 2006 @ 09:31 PM
This is more than enough to make my stomach churn. Being a mother of 3, it enrages me that some sick #@$#'s are willing to organize such a thing. I hope this is squashed before it can be replicated anywhere else.

posted on Jun, 2 2006 @ 09:55 PM
These Dutch sickos would happen to be accosciates of NAMBLA, now would they?

The Dutch aint the only people who have pedophiles trying to become legit.

NAMBLA has been around for quite some time. They are equally sick and perverted.

The fact that such vermin continue to breathe valuable oxygen and take up valuable food and space makes me want to vomit.

Im pretty damn tolerant of just about anything. Drugs. prostitution. Kinky sexual acts. Homsexual relationships. Porn.

But there is a deep unyielding line I draw when it comes to kids, from children to teens. That line can never be crossed.

So if we legalize pedophilia, whats next? legalizing rape? Murder? Assault? Robbery?

posted on Jun, 3 2006 @ 03:12 PM

Originally posted by HardToGet
Children of the age of twelve should be allowed by law to engage in sexual activities (the current law is set at 16 years of age).

People need to spend a long moment to look at this.

Because the age of consent in Japan ranges from 13 to 17, depending on jurisdiction, enjo kōsai clients often cannot be charged with statutory rape.

I can do this world over. Many parts of Europe, Asia and the America's has age limits in the low-teens. Take for example, Algeria. It has no strict laws on the Age of Consent. Austria is 14. Bosnia-Herzegovina is 14. Bulgaria is 14. Denmark is 15. France is 15. I can go on and on, through-out the World but it doesn't help the situation.

The problem everyone [seems] to have is that they are looking at it through their own eyes. If we've been told, all of our lives 16 is the age, 18 is the age, 21 is the age, etc, we begin to believe it. The real issue is not at what age they can have sex, nor why these moral laws are in place. The real issue here, is why such young children feel as though they have to have sex. Why such pressure is being put on them. Why the media is making sexual clothing for children under 10. Why the media is using sex as a way to seperate those - the haves and have nots. Why everything seems to be based around people loosing their virginity as early as possible.

This is just a shame that we're focusing on the symptom again and not the disease as so many people seem to do.

posted on Jun, 3 2006 @ 03:23 PM

posted by xmotex
I don't know if it's changed since, but Dutch system used to be that under 12, all sexual contact was prosecutable. Between 12 and 16, sexual activity was only prosecutable if the parents or the kid in question wished to press charges. Over 16 all consensual sex was legal.

I believe that is similar to the law here in the UK, although the age is 14 not 12 and the child must be the one to initiate charges, the parents cannot do it..

posted on Jun, 3 2006 @ 03:27 PM
just to clarify the age of consent in the uk is 16 not 14.

i still think these people need to be strung up, someone said to focus on the disease but im sorry if your kid got raped by one of these men what would you be saying then?

posted on Jun, 3 2006 @ 04:21 PM

The real issue here, is why such young children feel as though they have to have sex.


I don't know about anyone else, but by the time I was about 13 or 14, sex was pretty much the only thing on my mind. It stayed that way until I was into my mid 20's.

The focus seems to be on males here, but lately with all these stories coming out about these 14 year old guys getting it on with their hot blond 26 year old teachers... does anyone really think these kids are "victims"? When I was 14 I know what I would have called them - lucky little $#@%#@'s.

i still think these people need to be strung up, someone said to focus on the disease but im sorry if your kid got raped by one of these men what would you be saying then?

Well rape is rape, and should be prosecuted aggressively regardless of whether the victim is 16 or 61. The issue is question is at what age should people be legally able to have consenting sex.

As far as true pedophiles go, I think a little more effort ought to go into into getting these people psychiatric help before they manage to victimize any kids. From what I've read a majority of them ended up that way because they were molested as kids themselves. If you find yourself all hot for eight year olds, you ought to go see a competent shrink before you screw up some kid's life IMHO. Maybe it can't be cured, I don't know, but there must be some people who have these urges and still have the sense not to act on them.

[edit on 6/3/06 by xmotex]

posted on Jun, 3 2006 @ 04:27 PM
alot of weird stuff starts in holland, just remember that crappy program called big brother started there too.

posted on Jun, 3 2006 @ 05:54 PM

Originally posted by The Grenadine

Originally posted by Tamahu
May Allah's Sword of Justice chop these devils heads.

Tamaho, don't even go there... know that some of the members on this site are Muslim, and your flippant (and insensitive comment) may be deemed offending, but aside from that, will reflect poorly on you.


You don't think most Muslims would back me up on that?

C'mon, this is paedophiles we're talking about.

Many crimes might be forgiven, even murder; but such crimes against the Holy Spirit are sure to land such devils in the Nine Infernal Spheres of the Second Death.

Compassion and tolerance aren't always the same thing.

Luckily for said wrong doers, Allah is All Merciful, and didn't make Hell a permanent place.

posted on Jun, 3 2006 @ 07:22 PM
Ronishia, you made a [what I like to call] a classic ATS mistake. Rape and pedophillia are two seperate things. If an 18 year old and a 15 year old have consentual sex, the 18 year old can still be prosecuted. Rape involves a process of force. These two issues should not be discussed along side each other in this instance. If these children are forced to have sex, I'd be the first one to say lynch them. However, if they both agree...I find it very hard to say who is wrong. Especailly with how children dress these days. Speaking as someone who worked in a club when I was 18, it's so hard to know who is and who isn't 16.

xmotex, began to hit it on the head when he raised the issue of hormones. If the body tells me: I'm ready for sex. Whose right is it to say I am not? The Government? So now they know what is better for me than my own body? Again you have the issue that their is no universal age of consent, so whose do be pick? Should it be 21? 16? 13? You ask 1000 different people all around the world and nobody will give one set answer.

The problem here is moral legislation. The Government is telling people what their body is telling them. When they're in conflict things are not easy. Children do get confused and do want to enjoy themselves. While we tell them sex is fun, yet they can't do it - it will cause conflict. Furthermore, they see how stupid the law is. Take for example the U.K.
16: Smoke, make babies.
17: Learn to drive
18: Watch porn and drink alcohol.

Now think about it for a long moment. At 16, I can have sex, have children, yet I can't drive or even watch other people have sex. These kids are not idiots so they see this as stupid. If they feel mature enough, we can't judge them. We do not what is best for everyone!

posted on Jun, 3 2006 @ 09:31 PM

Originally posted by ronishia
just to clarify the age of consent in the uk is 16 not 14.

i still think these people need to be strung up, someone said to focus on the disease but im sorry if your kid got raped by one of these men what would you be saying then?

Just to clarify, the legal age of consent is 16...however, as I said above, if a 14 year old girl has sex, then unless she wishes to press charges herself, then nothing can be done about it and vice versa with a 14+ male.

Whilst the statutory age of consent is 16, the de facto age of consent, in the way the law can work, is 14. Under the age of 14 and the parents can make a complaint to the police, but over it and all they can do is stop the pocket money....

[edit on 3/6/06 by stumason]

posted on Jun, 5 2006 @ 12:23 AM

Originally posted by Karsus

It seems that pedophilia might not be directly harmful to all children, except in how society later reacts. The pleasure they experienced being portrayed to them as something to be guilty over. Also, it seems that in some cases the adults are approached by the children

... I'm suddenly having a recollection of this really attractive teacher i had, back when i was 13-14-ish

The Factory of Guilt Public Relations Centre is on the job. Although I think that they are trying to find a way to get "factory" and "guilt" out of their name. You always need good public relations. Appeal to their needs and expectations and you can manipulate those feelings in order to gain advantages.

I asked a few guys about this phenomenon. All of them agreed that they would have wanted a "Debra Lafave" of their own. Just a thought...

Originally posted by Karsus

Hmmm..... i think that the solution to be the problem may lie in our local brain-washing centers (aka schools

Unfortunately there are many other "brain-washing centers" beside the schools. There are too many to list here beside the FGPRC.

Originally posted by Karsus

(assuming of course, that the adults tasked with judging redundant variations of instincts and emotions, actually make the right calls and don't manage to suppress instincts useful for our survival

We have to watch for that. Good call, Karsus.

posted on Jun, 5 2006 @ 11:04 AM
every country has it's crackpot open pedophiles.

the united states has the north american man boy love association (not be confused with the north american marlon brando look-alikes)

everyone has the right to voice their opinions, but they don't have the right to victimize children, no matter how badly they want to.

just laugh them off

posted on Jun, 5 2006 @ 03:38 PM
Rape has generally been found to be harmful psychologically for the victims.

Where force is not involved, it seems that the effects of sexual relationships for children/adolescents aren't necessarily harmful.

IMO that makes the whole situation confusing. If a child comes out of such a relationship with a better opinion of him/herself, what exactly are we punishing the adult for?

Having sexual desires that nauseate us, with the nausea possibly caused by our own cultural training(considering that past humans did not share our views)

... Ignoring the relationship between a child and an adult, and keeping it to adolescents. I expect that at the least their self-confidence gets a boost from being in such a relationship(or so says my experience anyway

I'll admit that personally, i have trouble even trying to imagine myself in a relationship with a child. But from a more scientific PoV, i'm not sure i can explain what's wrong with it.

As far as maturity is concerned though...
There is a reason that around 50% of 18 year olds who marry(serious life decision that definitely affects more than just you), get divorced, whereas the percentage is around 15% for people who get married in their mid-20s.

Being 18 doesn't make you mature. And if you had to set a sensible age for people making serious decisions(for the overly cuddled children of our times, unlike people of the past), it may end up being 21 or more.

Here's an idea... let maturity be judged by age, IQ, and EQ

[edit on 5-6-2006 by Karsus]

posted on Jun, 5 2006 @ 11:42 PM

Originally posted by Karsus

Here's an idea... let maturity be judged by age, IQ, and EQ

[edit on 5-6-2006 by Karsus]

I was previously unaware of the research into the topic of EI. I love how these forums spark new flames of thought.

[edit on 5-6-2006 by pazlenchantinrocks]

posted on Jul, 30 2006 @ 07:48 AM

Uitgegeven: 30 juli 2006 12:36

AMSTERDAM - Een wervingsactie van de Partij Naastenliefde, Vrijheid en Diversiteit (PNVD) heeft zaterdag in winkelcentrum Hoog Catharijne in Utrecht één handtekening opgeleverd. Twee andere mensen overwegen de pedofielenpartij te steunen, zegt voorzitter Marthijn Uittenbogaard zondag. Drie leden van de partij zijn volgens hem met ongeveer honderd mensen in gesprek geweest.

De PNVD hoopt in alle negentien kiesdistricten minimaal dertig handtekeningen op te halen. De 570 handtekeningen zijn een vereiste om in het hele land te mogen deelnemen aan de Tweede-Kamerverkiezingen op 22 november.

Source (Dutch)


AMSTERDAM - A party ralley by the PNVD (The party for pedofiles in the Netherlands) to raise support this Saturday in Utrecht has yielded a single signature. Two other persons are contemplating supporting the PNVD, chairman Marthijn Uittenbogaard has said on Sunday. Three members of the party have stopped and talked to about one hundred individuals according to the chairman.

The PNVD hopes to get at least thirty signatures in all of the nineteen electoral districts. The 570 signatures are a pre-requisite to be allowed to participate nation wide in the coming general election on November 22.

new topics

<< 3  4  5   >>

log in