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.


Animated Child Pornography - Allow It Or Ban It?

page: 8
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in


posted on Jun, 29 2008 @ 07:05 PM
reply to post by Anti-Tyrant

My point is there are people calling out for the death of someone putting pen to paper.
Meanwhile they seem un-concerned about people who are actually raping and killing children.
You do not see a problem with that?
Right now drawings are legal in the US, but rape and murder is not.
Don't you think it might be a good idea to enforce the laws we have now, before dreaming up new laws that can not be proven to do any good at all, and might have a net negative affect?
Also, we do not have enough man power to keep an eye on convicted sex offenders, but, somehow we have enough to check everyone's hard drive?

[edit on 29-6-2008 by jmdewey60]

posted on Jun, 29 2008 @ 07:08 PM
Wow.... this is a real puzzler.

If I was in my normal head I'd say "castrate them all and shove their D's up ther A's and sew it shut so they die of blocked or exploded colon."

But... I can't help but feel empathy for some of them. I don't think all of these perpetrators want to intentionally hurt these children... but I could be wrong. Maybe pedophilia is some demon who was born in a human body... but then again, you can't say that about homosexuals. I'm not lumping them in the same category because I don't want to offend anyone, but homosexuality has been considered just as sexually deviant in the past as child sexual abuse, sometimes even more-so... and we all know that homosexuals are not sinners or bad people anymore than straights.

So I often wonder just how to deal with the issue properly. I guess you'd really have to know a child molester and have an in depth conversation about just how they feel about their fetish in order to understand exactly why this happens.

To be honest with you, oogling over a hot 15 year old isn't the issue here. A lot of 15 year olds are sexually mature, and therefore they may be participating in the act (your 15 year old is probably participating) the jailbait thing is willful sex by both parties, and don't underestimate the intelligence of a 15 year old girl. They know exactly how to get what they want. Schoolgirl outfits are hot for that reason and that reason only. We can't touch a hot 16 year old chick, we stay away, so we get a hot 21 year old chick to dress up like a schoolgirl, and then it's like perfectly fine.... but that's a very sensetive subject... and really, there's enough hot of age girls, that morally you should know that a younger girl isn't prepared for the responsibility, and even if she's willing, the moral thing I feel is to leave the legal ago limit somewhere around 17 when a girl is actually mentally ready.

Having sex with pre-pubescent kids and babies... I have no clue where that horrid mutation came from... but I don't even know where to begin. Why did humanity get this mutation?

Do other animals in nature exhibit this twisted trait? I wouldn't think so. They go for who's ready and putting their scent out there...

and see that's what makes me seriously wonder, because babies aren't giving off any sexual pheromones, so how can there be a deep sexual attraction there?

Before we make a final judgement, I suggest maybe the consideration of some forces unseen could come into play here. Maybe there was some genetic side effect from the supposed hybridization of humans with reptilian DNA in the Adam and Eve story. Maybe some people are posessed by negative entities. Maybe their mind is being messed with. Maybe it's just that they were severely raped a s a kid and just never gained a good moral identity. There's so much more relatively rational possibilities, it doesn't even have to be esoteric in nature... but take it all in for a bigger picture.

Empathy is a great way to avoid unneeded aggression, and in this situation, it is really needed because it's such a sensitive subject, involving such a misunderstood group of people who never get a chance to speak. There's just so much that isn't understood about humanity and consciousness that I don't even think bloodthirsty killers' and serial rapists' words should be ignored... because we all have the exact same tendencies buried somewhere deep down inside us. It's a scary thing, one of those portions of the psyche we'd rather shun or avoid then try to understand.

It's a shame, but... there's not much else to say.

Maybe I sound cold when I say that even child rapists have a place in this world. I know too much about life to deny that fact, even though I don't like it. People can actually LEARN from horrible human travesties, ya know.

posted on Jun, 29 2008 @ 07:14 PM
reply to post by gekko

Blasted internet cut out as i hit the reply.

I haven't seen any of the "art" that you speak of either, and i feel quite fortunate because of it.

It's all well and good asking for research into my approach, when your own has very little if anything to show for it.

I do however have a slight problem with the way the Government (i.e; our temporary administration) is dealing with the 'problem' though - i have an understanding that if you're going to do a job, you make sure you finish it.

Banning animated child pornography?

Why not ban *snip* Pornography in general if it has such a negative effect on certain individuals in society?

posted on Jun, 29 2008 @ 07:15 PM
reply to post by jmdewey60

I think we should spend more time being creative actually.

Even if it's a bad idea, at least we're exploring new possibilities.

posted on Jun, 29 2008 @ 07:15 PM
phoenix says: "So people should ban and execute producers of all violent movies showing people dying, children dying, people getting raped, evil, nuclear wars, etc etc etc??

Everybody has a form of entertainment, MOST people don't mind watching violence and murders for entertainment as long as it is not real, where do you draw the line and say people should die for this??"

****Entertainment? I do not & never have found any of this sort of thing entertaining. I gives me nightmares. It is enough to know that there are such things in the world without indulging in it. Yes, I know there are folks who view this as entertainment. Just goes to show you what a sick society we have.
And you want to add kiddie porn to it. Doesn't matter that it is a cartoon. It has the same effect. This is a sick twisted idea. Pedos should be publicly executed as fast as they are found. This would likely cause many of the remaining to suddenly develop total self control. How about giving that action a few decades to study results?

posted on Jun, 29 2008 @ 07:21 PM
reply to post by dunwichwitch

Your problem comes from not separating with someone under 18, and 2.rape.
Raping someone is an act of violence and indicates a sick mind.
A man might be inclined to rape a woman, but is old and weak and too pathetic for a real woman to get close to.
This is what this sicko in Florida was.
So, he kidnapped a girl who had no idea what was going to happen to her.
This is not normal and this guy should never have been let out of prison, to start with.
If you were an anthropologist and studied the most primitive cultures, you would find out that men and girls would wonder off together and have sex in private.
That would be considered normal and there was no religion or society to put a stigma on it and no one was scarred.
Now, on the other hand if a man went around raping girls, they would throw him out of the village, or kill him, depending on how pissed off they were.

[edit on 29-6-2008 by jmdewey60]

posted on Jun, 29 2008 @ 07:29 PM
reply to post by OhZone

In my opinion it's your repeated calls for executions that's really bad for society.

Like I said 99% of pedophiles/fantasies do NOT abuse any child because they know it's wrong. Executing innocent people will not stop the bad ones who will molest a child no matter what the law is. Cartoons or no cartoons, executions or not, bad people will continure to do bad things.

Executing innocent people will not stop them lol.

Off topic: So what's your favourite movies?? Just wondering, you've got me curious.

[edit on 29-6-2008 by _Phoenix_]

posted on Jun, 29 2008 @ 07:37 PM
What exactly is wrong with executing the miscreants?
They are a danger to our most vulnerable members. They are a danger to society. They interfere with our lives. Their lives are not precious. They are useless eaters. We do not need them. We do not need to be using our good money to support them in jail.

Would you want one living next door to you and your youg daughters.
Likely you have none, but imagine what it would be like if you did.

posted on Jun, 29 2008 @ 07:40 PM

Originally posted by OhZone
What exactly is wrong with executing the miscreants?
They are a danger to our most vulnerable members. They are a danger to society. They interfere with our lives. Their lives are not precious. They are useless eaters. We do not need them. We do not need to be using our good money to support them in jail.

Would you want one living next door to you and your youg daughters.
Likely you have none, but imagine what it would be like if you did.

I don't understand? You said execute pedophiles not child molesters, you do understand the difference?

posted on Jun, 29 2008 @ 07:41 PM
reply to post by jmdewey60

I’ve never heard of the movie ‘A Clockwork Orange’ and brought myself up to speed by reading the article via ye ole ‘wiki’ site. I think even the one time offenders should be locked up for life. There is no way of predicting if pedophiles might turn their fantasies from animated child pornography into reality of taking away innocence or lives. It’s the only option I could think up without ‘executing’ someone whose belief system is considered socially deviant.

posted on Jun, 29 2008 @ 08:45 PM
phoenix, aren't child molester pedophiles?

Off topic answering your question. My favorite movies - I really don't have any. favorites. I don't go to movies. I sometimes see them when they get on TV; that is sometimes because I don't watch much TV. I read. Currently reading "History; Fiction or Science?" Just finished "Irish Origins of Civilization." I have a web site that I spend time doing artwork for. I call it The-Oh-Zone it is sub-titled Exploring Anomalies.

posted on Jun, 29 2008 @ 09:03 PM
Haven't read all the posts but to answer the question, I would have to say NO.
I say no because allowing it means you/we are one step closer to accepting it.
What we tolerate today, we accept as the norm tomorrow.
Some things should be off limits, especially kids.
Child molestors are the scum of the earth and anyone with a pro pedo should be investigated and scrutinized.

posted on Jun, 29 2008 @ 10:00 PM
reply to post by pikypiky

Oh, that movie had to do with some government mind control experiments to stop people from being violent.
It used some sick type of aversion therapy.
I am not to clear as to what my point is, in my above post.
I will restate it, that we can can not have our natural tendencies removed.
We need to have a proper restraint on our inclinations, in order to live in civilized society.
There are a lot of things, like killing other people, in an off-hand way, that are not appropriate behavior.
Only having sex with others who are over 18, is a generally agreed-on rule that society wants to enforce.
That being said, does not take away the natural desire, in men, for young women.
We have desires for a lot of things that we daily restrain ourselves from.
So, we know better than to just indulge our every desire.
But, if you put every man to some sort of test, to see if they were turned on by young women, that would not be an indication of who would act out on those feelings.
My point is that most people are not on a road to Hell.
They are not getting progressively worse with every single thing that could be potentially influential.
Most people go through live with the same set of values and abilities to cope with urges, basically unchanged, from beginning to end.
People do not go from being normal to being a deviant for no other reason than a visual stimulus that they had not previously encountered.

posted on Jun, 29 2008 @ 10:06 PM
reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984

I wish we lived in a world that didn't have people like this in it.

Why are these people allowed to live after their caught?

If you look to nature, mothers of a species will kill you if you even get near their offspring, much less molest them.

I think that there is a lesson in that line of thinking.

posted on Jun, 29 2008 @ 10:13 PM
The problem with this is, so, how do you tell how old a cartoon character is?

The issue is the censure of thought. Not action, but thought and expression. What if I drew a picture of some water nymph, posed provatively, (being a siren perhaps in my artistic vision) on a rock at the sea shore. And she were nude, or partially nude and was oh, let's say drawn in a fashion that looked juvenile, not womanly? Perhaps I'm trying to make her look like a fairy.

Do I get to go to jail for child pornography?

I see this as a thought police sort of thing. And hentai aside, there's many other considerations, such as guessing at the artist's intent, guessing at the 'age' of a character drawn (so now all art must have a disclaimer? "I swear that in my mind, all these characters were at least 18 years old when I painted and drew them"?), and totally dismissing genuine artistic statements about innocence, sexuality and society.

So, Child Porn or not?

[edit on 29-6-2008 by Jadette]

posted on Jun, 29 2008 @ 10:39 PM
reply to post by Jadette

Right, and that was what the appellate Judges thought.
The pro-ban people basically wanted to exterminate all artistic expression by making everything illegal.
Common sense prevailed and the ban was voted down.
The one good thing that Clinton did, in my opinion, was to promote the judge who saw this for exactly what it was.
The examples you linked to would have all been criminal, if the court would have upheld the "animation" ban.

posted on Jun, 29 2008 @ 11:17 PM
I think it should be legal and here is why. These people are attracted to minors so eventually they will seek an outlet. Would you prefer they sought out real child pornography thereby encouraging more of it to be made or watch fake animated child porn to get rid of their urges?

Not all people attracted to minors go out and rape children but I believe that if they are starved from this stuff it will only cause them to do something stupid. It's why men in jail rape other men, they have no other outlet for their sexual frustration.

Saying that people should be locked away for the rest of their lives just for looking at child porn is ridiculous to say the least. You are more of a barbarian than they are for suggesting such a thing. I am sure most of these people would want nothing more than to be normal and not have this attraction towards kids.

I think we are best served finding ways to help these people deal with their problem and try to understand what makes them find children sexually attractive. If we do that then one day we could find a way to suppress it and allow these people to live free of their burden. Nothing is ever solved by being a bigger douchebag.

[edit on 29-6-2008 by DraconianKing]

posted on Jun, 29 2008 @ 11:17 PM
reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984

Whilst it grosses me out to think about, I considered two things in my decision.

#1, no children are harmed in this type of porn; Physically, emotionally, or otherwise.
#2, my position on censorship.

In the original statement, this type of porn in of itself does not cause direct harm to any children,. Someone doing something behind closed doors than doesn't involve impeding on someone else's rights (ie a child having the right not to be abused or photographed) means that the person should have the right to do it. This statement however is contingent upon no existing child pornagraphy is used to make the animated stuff. IF and only if a child is used to make it, even if it is a photo of a naked child should it be illegal. For instance, if someone makes these animations based on existing porn (or a real child) than it should still not be legal. But if it is purely from their imagination it really can't be censored.

It is easy to imagine that someone who watches this may then want real stuff, (child porn), and then from that want a real child, however this is a slippery slope and doesn't really follow. We can't be too careful with our children but we can't infringe on others rights to protect them. It is sort of like attacking a country than MAY but is just as likely not to attack you. Pre-emptive striking never ends well. You can not punish someone who hasn't yet impeded on anothers rights.

If I knew someone was looking at this crap, I would not allow them around my child, but this is a far cry from locking them up. Especially when someone without child porn is just as likely to cross that line. Not all child molestors have computers. Which means they don't all have child porn. I would also imagine that some people who have child porn do not molest children. One does not equal another. Therefore, in my opinion, it would be wrong to throw someone in jail for it. However they throw people in jail for less ie, smoking pot, so it wouldn't be totally surprising to me if it was illegal, and I definitly wouldn't fight or argue for it to become legal even though I do believe it is a violation of your rights.

posted on Jun, 29 2008 @ 11:25 PM
Originally posted by _Phoenix_

[Like I said 99% of pedophiles/fantasies do NOT abuse any child because they know it's wrong.]

May i ask where you got those figures from? I seriously doubt that only 1% of pedophiles molest children.

I read a report that said pedophiles are responsible for the molestation of 88% of the children that are molested. The report also stated that pedophiles that fantasized about having sex with children had three times as many victims as the pedophiles that didn't fantasize about it. That would lead me to believe that any form of child pornography (animated or not) would lead to more children being victimized.

The report was an excerpt from a book written by a doctor, i will post the link. I'm sure there are more reports out there, but that's all i could find right now.

[edit on 30/6/08 by chise61]

posted on Jun, 29 2008 @ 11:35 PM
reply to post by DraconianKing

I think kids look sexually attractive as a defense mechanism that has evolved longer than there has been Homo Sapien.
When an adult looks at this other smaller being, they have to decide if it is something to eat, or something to have sex with.
Humans should be smart enough to realize they might have to wait a while before they are rewarded with sex (or possibly never).
The human race survived because we looked at half the population as future potential sex partners.
Now, that we have evolved to a higher life form, the long ingrained instincts do not immediately evaporate.
People who do not straighten out and go with the program, and hurt others, for sick pleasure need to be dealt with.
But, someone who enjoys a little thought, with themselves, occasionally, about genetically encoded memories, is not hurting anyone.

new topics

top topics

<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in