It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Legal Child Porn Loophole - Disgusting Manipulation of the Law!

page: 3
18
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 11 2011 @ 02:08 PM
link   
Playin the advocate here....

Physiology, or evolution if you will, says that (at least among humans) puberty defines the age where reproduction can occur. Granted, that age varies amongst individuals, but evolution designed it that way, and therefore if you believe evolution, this is arguably the point where the specimen becomes "adult". Whether the specimen has not been instructed with regards to the facts of life and instead was coddled throughout its life up to that point and thus unable to cope with the realities of sex and reproduction is a matter for debate. But it should be realized that appropriate behavior on the part of the parental units should have the offspring prepared for the inevitability. I see no reason for the contrary, other than parents who cannot, willfully or otherwise, prepare their offspring for this. Does intelligence (real or perceived) negate evolutionary acheivements?
Perhaps pedophilia is an evolutionary response to an artificiually induced stress- the voluntary rejection of reproduction and propagation of the species when, scientifically speaking, reproduction should be occuring?
We don't see puberty slowly tracking upwards in age, so it begins at 18, do we?
Considering the above, is pedophilia an un-natural behavior, worthy of penalizing indviduals simply for acting on their hormones, responding to the hormones and pheromones emitted by others? ... a natural response.

-----------------------

Now, having said that.
An adult is defined as one who has reached the age of majority in their 'jurisdiction'. Some places say 18, others 21, others 16 years attained. If it's illegal in one jurisdiction, does such make it illegal in others? Even considering the differences in cultures between areas, I'd say it shouldn't. Morality is an indoctrinated construct, usually done with the best of intentions but frequently without sympathetic nor empathetic considerations, but I digress.

The laws say a performer must be X years attained. Irrespective of the imagery portrayed, nothing is illegal if no crime is committed, in my opinion. This applies to the "snuff" industry as well; so long as all are of legal age, no one is actually injured and no one is killed during the filming, what crime was committed?

Perhaps, if these fetishes were provided for, there'd be a lower instance of actual crimes committed?
If you want to keep a pedophile away from kids, why not show them that there are legal adults that can provide for their fantasies?



posted on Apr, 11 2011 @ 02:18 PM
link   
I think after some thought on this, I agree to not come to any ultimate conclusion. And for those of you who don't know me, trust me I am no soccer mom! I am a male ex-singer in an industrial rock band that has done things that would make Caligula blush. My girlfriend is 15 years younger then me and I have two kids one who is female. Now, I work as an architect and question my views on art and the world constantly. I try to relate to all sides of a given issue before passing judgement but this one is just going to have to remain in the grey, for now, with me.

Is free speech totally free?
Is our right to bear arms without regulation?
Is our right to sexual preference an issue?
Prohibition?
Religion?
Expression?
Movement?
Association?
Gender?
Race?

Nobody is ever truly free, it is an impossible ideal created by fathead politicians for political agendas.



posted on Apr, 11 2011 @ 02:25 PM
link   
reply to post by esqONE
 



re you sure the porn you found on your boss' computer was actually child porn and not just young looking models? because that is some serious accusations you just made. and its a good thing you quit cause you probably were gonna get fired. lol.


There were pictures of 4 - 12 year old girls in a nudist colony during ballet lessons. That was one I looked at closely but there were hundreds more. I was not personally appalled at all by the photos, I have a 4 year old daughter who I bathe and change all the time, the human body is a natural beautiful thing. But the fact that he did other things accompanied by this made it all to obvious and he was arrested with possession of contraband - 25 years worth!



posted on Apr, 11 2011 @ 02:27 PM
link   
reply to post by JohnPhoenix
 


There is more to the law I just copied a portion.

I believe what you are talking about is in the next section of the law.
See my link to this.



posted on Apr, 11 2011 @ 02:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by JohnPhoenix

Originally posted by AnteBellum
But the US law states:


Under federal law (18 U.S.C. §2256), child pornography is defined as any visual depiction, including any photograph, film, video, picture, or computer or computer-generated image or picture, whether made or produced by electronic, mechanical, or other means, of sexually explicit conduct, where:

The production of the visual depiction involves the use of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; or

The visual depiction is a digital image, computer image, or computer-generated image that is, or is indistinguishable from, that of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; or

The visual depiction has been created, adapted, or modified to appear that an identifiable minor is engaging in sexually explicit conduct.




So according to this, as someone asked above pictures of real naked children Are 100% Legal as long as they are not depicted in a sexual manner, "sexually explicit conduct". - So naked kids in a nudest colony or as an art form for photography is 100 % legal according to the above it seems to me.
edit on 11-4-2011 by JohnPhoenix because: edit


Sally Mann comes to mind first. You can google her work if you're not afraid of the feds being interested in you looking at art that has naked children in them.



posted on Apr, 11 2011 @ 02:53 PM
link   
reply to post by AnteBellum
 


The debate is really at the bones of the matter, rather than legal 'loopholes', which this isn't btw...if they really were filming kids, and not the 'adult kids', but had found a snake like path through the current laws that allow them to produce and flog it to the public, that would be a loophole in the law..this isn't.

The hot topic these days regarding simulated (drawn, animated, CGI, etc.) child porn, is more centred on the question;

'Would the consumption of simulated (as per above), child porn satisfy or exacerbate the sexual drive or urges of paedophiles?'

And also, Would it encourage paedophilia in general?

My opinion is this: These types of men and women will always find ways both fine and foul to get closer to kids with a view to molest them...always.

If very realistic CGI / animated porn can satisfy their sexual drive, rather than a real, living breathing and very damageable child..yes, of course.

The children that might have become the target of one of these people, would be saved the pain they would otherwise have had imposed upon them.

It wouldn't put an end to 'actual' child abuse, but it might reduce it.

The danger is whether or not it would spur them on for 'the real thing'.

In an ideal world, this subject simply wouldn't exist, but it's not ideal..in my book, if we can provide an outlet for these people, an outlet that would result in greatly reduced instances of harm, physically, mentally and emotionally of a great many suffering children around the world, i say it's a good thing.

It may disgust..it may send shivers down your spine, but this is the real world..not an idealistic version of what we imagine it should be...we should act as such, with intelligence, not emotion.



posted on Apr, 11 2011 @ 03:02 PM
link   
reply to post by AnteBellum
 


Easy Solution - Stop Supporting Porn!

If there is no money to be made then these films will not be made.

Even if you don't support sicko stuff - even the "mainstream" stuff should be shunned - and don't think those free sites aren't ad revenue supported.

If you truly can't help yourself then just torrent the stuff - that way you actually run them out of business despite consuming their product.

What is wrong with you Humans???

(also - stop supporting facebook /walmart/ main stream political parties / MSM news / anything out to actively EXPLOIT you or others Purely for Power and Profit)

Come on sheeple - wake up already!!!



posted on Apr, 11 2011 @ 03:03 PM
link   
reply to post by abecedarian
 



Perhaps, if these fetishes were provided for, there'd be a lower instance of actual crimes committed?
If you want to keep a pedophile away from kids, why not show them that there are legal adults that can provide for their fantasies?


I agree with you but prostitution is illegal also, in most states.

Which I disagree with completely! (Prostitution being illegal)



posted on Apr, 11 2011 @ 03:13 PM
link   
There is too much smut, both in image and inuendo on TV, and even on kids channels, like nickelodeon. You ever watch those shows? And music videos. I believe in personal freedom, and I like porn and as an adult, believe it's my right to view and listen to what I want in the privacy of my home, but the images and stories show exteme sexualizing of young girls on TV shows, and videos. This is more important an issue, because your kids are watching this, and probably not watching Barely Legal 3. And the internet is NOT a toy, you have to monitor your kids online.



posted on Apr, 11 2011 @ 06:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by AnteBellum
reply to post by abecedarian
 



Perhaps, if these fetishes were provided for, there'd be a lower instance of actual crimes committed?
If you want to keep a pedophile away from kids, why not show them that there are legal adults that can provide for their fantasies?


I agree with you but prostitution is illegal also, in most states.

Which I disagree with completely! (Prostitution being illegal)


So, you agree?



posted on Apr, 11 2011 @ 07:13 PM
link   
The pedophilia urge won't just disappear. It's something that's always going to be there. If somebody has found a way to let them find an outlet for that urge that doesn't involve children, then I'm for it. As sick as I think it is, reality is never going to be pretty.



posted on Apr, 11 2011 @ 07:16 PM
link   
reply to post by abecedarian
 


I see the bad and good on both parts of the argument. I can't reach a conclusion at this point with the cyber child porn impersonation fantasy role playing diversion. . . films.

But if prostitution were legalized everywhere and there were very young looking 18 year olds for these people to fort fill there fantasies with, I wouldn't have an issue with it.
Women should be able to do whatever they want with there bodies, including selling it!
As long as it was regulated with doctor checkups and the like.



posted on Apr, 11 2011 @ 07:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by AnteBellum
But I defend violent video games and am an advocate for even more realism in the future, does this make me a hypocrite?


You kind of had me up until here. I am not sure how new this really is. They have been using petite flat chested girls to play lil girls in porn since at least the '70s. The problem with porn is that by its nature is exposes certain characteristics that generally destroy the illusion.

Anyway, you made me think. If I had a teenage son and had to choose between him seeing a girl that looks his age, naked

or

more realistically violent video games to kill people in
Hmmm. Like I said, she just looks his age but is legal. Hmmmmm. Would I want my kids seeing young looking naked people or more realistic headshots? Almost a crossover there. I guess I am really confused by the attitudes on ATS that always push violence over sex or nudity in almost any and every case no matter the actual circumstances. Short flat chested girls vs more realistic killing. Tough call.



posted on Apr, 11 2011 @ 07:31 PM
link   
Why would you care how a person looks, if they are over the legal age to participate in such films? Have your usual routes of nagging and complaining proved fruitless? This is a rather bland topic...

While you clamor over such trivial things, actual children all over the world are sexually abused... grotesquely. The worst is done right here in the good ol' USA, funded by CIA. It's called MK Ultra.

"Thanks For The Memories" by Bryce Taylor(victim) goes into depth on the sexual abuse, beginning at only a few weeks of age. This is something every President since the 50's has participated in. I highly recommend that book. There are so many horrendous things happening behind the scenes on this planet... you have absolutely no idea.

By the way, people enjoy child porn because the subjects energy is pure. I'm sure brides have been taken all over the world at young ages before some silly law was put into effect. Get over it.


edit on 11-4-2011 by Mayura because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 11 2011 @ 07:34 PM
link   
reply to post by AnteBellum
 


WTH? This has been going on for AGES!
Remember this?



posted on Apr, 11 2011 @ 07:46 PM
link   
reply to post by ldyserenity
 


How could anybody forget!




posted on Apr, 11 2011 @ 07:51 PM
link   
reply to post by AnteBellum
 


OMG LOL!

Well it's true I can remember watching porns in the eighties a lot of times they dressed up in cheerleader outfits and catholic schoolgirl outfits, you know we all watched those things as early teens because it was 'naughty'.



posted on Apr, 11 2011 @ 07:52 PM
link   
There should be no age discrimination and if they are 18 than it is not kiddie porn. And also i might add you want to go after some sick people go after those people who dress there preeteen childern up as supermodels in those beauty beauty pageant..
Oh yes i do agree with you they are pushing the boundary but just because you look young shouldn't mean you don't get the job either.

check this out
www.theexpressionist.com...
edit on 11-4-2011 by enament because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 11 2011 @ 07:53 PM
link   
How can 18 year olds look like PRE TEEN girls? is that even possible?

If they look younger than 18 they still probably look like a teen right? so where's the pedophilia and where's the child abuse?

Isn't this discrimination against young looking people?

I'm confused
edit on 11-4-2011 by _Phoenix_ because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 11 2011 @ 07:56 PM
link   
reply to post by AnteBellum
 


Not sure if it has been mentioned yet, I sure hope someone was smart enough to point it out.... Pedophiles would not be interested... Pedophiles are attracted to kids, AKA before puberty....







 
18
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join