Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

NAMBLA, Pedophiles and "Conspiracies of Silence" -- We're Not in Kansas Anymore.

page: 2
3
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
six

posted on Nov, 16 2007 @ 01:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Kingdrakethe3rd
 


Nope I understood what you said. You made it quite clear. I think it is discusting. I have seen it with teens. Just as bad then. Why shouldnt the law be involved? They need protection from scum who prey upon them. Before 17 the biggest decision most of these kids make is what to wear every day, and you think that they are mature enough to handle sex???
Really??? Is that what you think??? You, sir, have obviously never seen the results of what you think is alright. Adults do deserve jail and much more for doing mothing more than preying on teens. At what age do you think a teen is old enough to make this decision?




posted on Nov, 16 2007 @ 02:06 PM
link   
reply to post by six
 


Cool it guys.

You don't want the wrath of the mighty warn stick coming down on ya.


Thanks for all the contribution!



Jasn



posted on Nov, 16 2007 @ 03:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Kingdrakethe3rd
 



NAMBLA deals with children, not teens, "Man Boy Love" as it seems. (I believe. Thats a lot of rhyming)

You say teens understand what they are doing and it should be their choice to enter a mutual relationship with an adult. I can respect your opinion, but I do not agree with it.

Teens are not as mature as you are painting them to be, and sex is more than just penetration and procreation. There is an emotional and mental bond when entering a sexual relationship with someone, and being someone who was recently in their teens, my peers and myself were not mature enough to understand such a bond.

A 13 year old dating a 30 year old is wrong, the 30 year old is exploiting a volitile time of emontions and hormones in order to get what he or she wants.

Jans, I've participated in threads like this before and my position doesnt change. Organizations like NAMBLA should not be allowed to operate.

I think you summed up the reasons why they continue to operate un-harrassed by government officials. The only thing that would get these losers off the streets would be a grass roots political movement.



posted on Nov, 16 2007 @ 03:46 PM
link   
I don't see a 30 year old exploiting a 13 year old sexually being any worse than a 30 year old exploiting a 30 year old sexually. The law obviously does since it sends someone to jail for the former, but not the latter.

I think that 13 year olds are capable of making sexual decisions, and there really are no right or wrong reasons to start a relationship with someone else. It's a personal choice. Some guys(and girls) seek out relationships strictly for the physical side, and there's nothing wrong with that.



posted on Nov, 16 2007 @ 03:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Kingdrakethe3rd
 





I guess you didn't understand what I said, since it seems to me you're talking about children, not teens. Teens making the decision to have sex with adults is not child abuse. They are choosing to have sex, and they understand the decision that they're making. They should be allowed to make that choice, and adults should not go to jail for a mutual relationship.


I believe this is very wrong. Even if a teen comes on to their hot teacher....that teacher should act as a responsible adult and STOP it from going any further.

Adults should NOT be having sexual relationships with children (this includes teens). And [again], im not talking about a 19yr old guy with a 16yr old girl.

Most teens are not capable of making proper decisions like this in their life. Sure they know right from wrong, but many can easily be manipulated by adults into doing things they might not normally do.

Most kids/teens are vullernable to adults...and adults should not be taking advantage. Children (that includes teens) need to be protected from adults who pray on children. The only way to do that it seems, is to have laws against it.


Im curious. How old are you?


Also, in regards to this topic. NAMBLA preys on LITTLE kids and pre-teens. These are not men looking for 16/17 yr old boys and girls to hook up with.

[edit on 16-11-2007 by greeneyedleo]



posted on Nov, 16 2007 @ 04:03 PM
link   
You dont see something wrong with a fully developed male sexually exploiting a partially developed 13 years old? The 13 year old hasnt fully matured physically, emotionally, mentally, or sexually and you dont see anything wrong with that?

I completely disagree with you believing a 13 year old is mature enough to make sexual decisions.

You got one thing right, there is nothing wrong with starting a sexual relationship just for the sex. But only if both parties involved are fully developed and matured, and only if they both understand its purly physical.



posted on Nov, 16 2007 @ 04:05 PM
link   
InSpiteOf: Can you please just step right out of my head


We keep posting the same comments



posted on Nov, 16 2007 @ 04:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Kingdrakethe3rd
 


Kingdrakethe3rd: How old are you and how much experience do you have being around teenagers. Im not talking about being a teenager and being amongst your peers.

But as an adult (if you are one) how much experience do you have being around teenagers - such as a youth leader, teacher, parent, etc?

Because adults who have spent time with teenagers in a leader type roll, would NEVER make the claims you are making. Nor would any professional (counselor, etc).

[edit on 16-11-2007 by greeneyedleo]



posted on Nov, 16 2007 @ 04:11 PM
link   
reply to post by SimiusDei
 


But would you closely scrutinize or monitor such groups as the NRA for their views on guns if your view was the opposite? What about the MPP (The Marijuana Policy Project)? You can not focus on simply one group and keep them under a microscope unless you are prepared to do so to all of them. If you do choose to do it on such a broad scale, any lawyer with half the sense of a billy goat can argue the groups right to privacy. Now the Constitution does not discuss right to privacy, however the Bill Of Rights reflects the concerns from the framers of the constitution for protecting specific aspects of privacy. In this case I would go with the privacy of beliefs which would relate to the first amendment. Very close monitoring could also be argued by the right to privacy of the person and/or possessions from unreasonable search under the fourth amendment.

I guess what I am saying is it opens up so many doors that can be so easily argued. It is best to simply let them be and say what they want, just keep busting people who act. IF you can catch them.

I would also like to touch on something else you mentioned that I feel is worth taking a look at. In your opening post you mention the show on MSNBC that sets up pedophiles with the use of decoys and then arrest them when they show up to the house. This show is called "To Catch a Predator". In another pst you say that pedophilia and rape and crimes of opportunity. The show on MSNBC has it's faults. It has been alleged that the decoys have been turned down by "suspected" pedophiles only to have the decoy over the course of weeks and in some cases months continue to make contact and literally throw themselves at the "suspects". So in the case of this show... lets say the decoy is 14 and continues to throw herself at a 28 year old... if he finally caves in, how wrong is he to agree to a consensual act? Not that I agree with it, but it is a solid argument. Kids today know more about sex then I did at that age. Several yes back I had an 8 year old tell me to "Suck it" while pointing at his crotch. Just a year or so ago I had a 10 year old who told me what "tossing salad" was. These are all things I would have never known or said when I was at that age. Times have changed and sexuality is right at the forefront of our society.



posted on Nov, 16 2007 @ 04:13 PM
link   
reply to post by greeneyedleo
 


Nah im pretty comfortable here, got a couchm mini fridge, LCD TV set up. Im not going anywhere


In all seriousness, the reason we keep posting the same comments is because society has progressed to a point where we understand children are vulnerable to a host of issues, sexuality being the most confusing, and as such, need to be protected.



posted on Nov, 16 2007 @ 04:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by section8citizen
reply to post by SimiusDei
 


But would you closely scrutinize or monitor such groups as the NRA for their views on guns if your view was the opposite? What about the MPP (The Marijuana Policy Project)?


Such groups dont advocate the exploitation of vulnerable members of society. I understand the slope you are describing, but in this instance, I believe the protection of children outweighs the protection of NAMBLA's privacy.



posted on Nov, 16 2007 @ 04:25 PM
link   
reply to post by section8citizen
 





But would you closely scrutinize or monitor such groups as the NRA for their views on guns if your view was the opposite? What about the MPP (The Marijuana Policy Project)? You can not focus on simply one group and keep them under a microscope unless you are prepared to do so to all of them.


I would not support that....and they are not the same as THIS group.

We are talking about a group of adult men - like yourself - who wants to have sex with little kids - innocent little kids who need to be protected from harm.

Big difference then adults wanting to own guns or smoke pot in their home.



posted on Nov, 16 2007 @ 04:28 PM
link   
reply to post by InSpiteOf
 


Nope. Don't see anything wrong with it. Their bodies are mature enough to reproduce. As long as it's consensual, I couldn't care less.



posted on Nov, 16 2007 @ 04:33 PM
link   
reply to post by section8citizen
 





lets say the decoy is 14 and continues to throw herself at a 28 year old... if he finally caves in, how wrong is he to agree to a consensual act? Not that I agree with it, but it is a solid argument. Kids today know more about sex then I did at that age. Several yes back I had an 8 year old tell me to "Suck it" while pointing at his crotch. Just a year or so ago I had a 10 year old who told me what "tossing salad" was. These are all things I would have never known or said when I was at that age. Times have changed and sexuality is right at the forefront of our society.



First off, the ADULT never should have been chatting it up with a child online. Completely inappropriate. The minute anything "risque" came up, the ADULT should have logged off.

Second, if the CHILD persisted, the ADULT should have blocked the child and ignored the child. Problem solved.

Third, if the ADULT wasnt adult enough to resist, then he has a problem. And these are the losers getting caught on that show.

Fourth, it doesnt matter how much a child does the pursuing. It is the ADULT's responsibility to STOP.

Fifth, as for kids knowing more now? I dont believe that is true. They are just more open about it thanks to Hollywood and the likes of Britney Spears.


Im a chic and am over 30
however, I dont look like it. I get hit on by tenage boys sometimes. I have 2 choices to make. Give in and hand over my email addy and flirt with them. Or ignore them. Very easy choice to make.



posted on Nov, 16 2007 @ 04:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Kingdrakethe3rd
 


I was wondering if you wouldnt mind answering my questions above. It might help me understand where you are coming from. Im having a very hard time doing that



posted on Nov, 16 2007 @ 04:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kingdrakethe3rd
reply to post by InSpiteOf
 


Nope. Don't see anything wrong with it. Their bodies are mature enough to reproduce. As long as it's consensual, I couldn't care less.


That makes no sense. There are some little girls who start their periods at 10 - capable of reproducing.

So with you logic...............you believe that 10yr old is old enough to have sex with ADULT MEN?!?!?!?!?!?!?!



posted on Nov, 16 2007 @ 05:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Kingdrakethe3rd
 


Wow...

I guess all I have left to say along these lines is this:

Sex is more than just reproduction, its an emotional connection with your partner. Sure you can enguage in a relationship purly for the physical, but on some level, a bond is formed.

Your views seem very archaic, I only hope one day when you have kids of your own, a predator does not pick up your 11 year old daughter and enguage them in a sexual relationship.



posted on Nov, 16 2007 @ 06:12 PM
link   
reply to post by InSpiteOf
 


Indeed.

I can't help but wonder if kingdrake is just TRYING to get people riled up.

I certainly hope he doesn't really feel this way. But, if he does.....to each his own I suppose.

Jasn


EDIT TO ADD: Green eyes, I'm putting you in charge of my threads while I'm away reading reading reading.



posted on Nov, 16 2007 @ 06:39 PM
link   
Wow. There were quite a few more people in the thread about the Teacher and the 13 yr old kid who were advocating it and saying the kid was old enough to decide. Where are all those people now?

NAMBLA is one of most disgusting scum of the earth groups I've ever heard of. Honestly, I think anyone who is involved in this group should be sent to an island to live alone forever, even if there is no proof they've ever "acted upon" their disgusting desires.



posted on Nov, 16 2007 @ 09:20 PM
link   
Terms & Conditions Of Use

2e.) Illegal Activity: Discussion of illegal activities; specifically mind-altering drugs, computer hacking, criminal hate, sexual relations with minors, and stock scams are strictly forbidden.

 
 


Just some food for thought guys. A discussion on this subject can exist, but tread carefully.

Your cooperation is appreciated.










 
3
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join