Court: Dad can paste daughter's face on porn photo

page: 44
39
<< 41  42  43    45  46  47 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 02:55 PM
link   
reply to post by TKDRL
 


"the other stuff" so nonchalantly said... Our children are doomed! No matter what the outcome is here.. If you ever read the headline "Dad finds neighbor "had" picture of his daughter pasted on a pornographic image, is on the run after dissecting neighbors head" You'll know it is me




posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 02:56 PM
link   
reply to post by TKDRL
 


So the courts are always right?? Wait .. dont you feel the courts are always wrong? the govt is always wrong??? except when they agree with you.. lol... Hypocrisy runs rampid here on ATS....

I believe what the Govt. says....... when it fits my needs.



posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 02:57 PM
link   
reply to post by filosophia
 


He drugged her and tried to photo her nude or partially nude.. She told on him and the searches started.



posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 02:57 PM
link   
I think this subject touches on a related subject which I'd like to discuss, and that many people have already touched on. And that is, the age of consent.

In many cultures, children are considered to have "come of age" or "entered into adulthood" at 13. And in some countries around the world, this is even the legal standard. And really, if we objectively take a look at nature, any child that has gone through puberty is ready to become sexually active. And in back when I was in highschool, a number of male and female 13-year olds were having sex.

So I'm wondering if anyone knows the backstory to why we began to demonize people who are attracted to 13 - 17 year olds, and how we arrived at the magical number of 17-18 as the age of consent?

Please note, anyone who cites morality in their answer will be promptly, and rightly so, ignored by me.



posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 03:00 PM
link   
reply to post by ShaunHatfield
 


No I don't feel the courts are always wrong, only when they go against the constitution... This case they went with the constitution, you must have me mixed up with someone else. You will find me arguing the constitutional rights of even people I hate, like westborough, because even people I hate still have the same rights I do. Making a fantasy picture is covered by the constitution.



posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 03:00 PM
link   
I don't know if this has been mentioned, but this is the same country that made an animation house edit "My Neighbor Totoro" because it involved a bath scene in which the father bathes in a traditional Japanese soaking tub with is daughters. I've seen it. It's fairly innocuous (and I am a survivor of abuse) if you understand that this is normal social interaction.

My Neighbor Totoro


The bath scene is also demonstrative of archetypal Japanese life. “The bathtub is more like a small swimming pool than a tub” (38).[7] As seen in the movie, several people bathe together at once. It is considered rude to enter the tub without first washing, as shown by Satsuki before she enters the tub with her father and Mei. These bathtubs are heated usually by small, well-tended coal burners under the tub.


Nothing sexual happens, yet the producers (Disney this time) changed it because of the moral outrage. And this perv can photoshop his own daughter's face on pornographic pictures depicting sex acts? I don't understand the logic. I really don't.



posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 03:02 PM
link   
reply to post by tncryptogal
 


Well lets see..... Disney is a public company, and releases movies to the public. Photoshopper was doing this for his own use in the privacy of his home. Apples and oranges.



posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 03:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by ShaunHatfield
"the other stuff" so nonchalantly said... Our children are doomed! No matter what the outcome is here.. If you ever read the headline "Dad finds neighbor "had" picture of his daughter pasted on a pornographic image, is on the run after dissecting neighbors head" You'll know it is me


You need help brother.

If your daughter is reproductively mature some men are gonna be sexually attracted to her (and maybe even masturbate to an image of her, maybe even altered) get over it already, it's not the end of the world.



posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 03:04 PM
link   
reply to post by tncryptogal
 


There is no logic.. It is blindly following a document created by men that had a dream and an idea that was formulated a LONG LONG time ago.. They had NO idea what the future held.. I AM POSITIVE that our founding fathers would not have intentionally covered this act...

I would think as evolved humans (some of us) we would have enough wisdom to be able to make specific judgements on specific situations that in NO WAY could have been known during the creation of the constitution....



posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 03:05 PM
link   
reply to post by SevenBeans
 


It will be (the end of the world) for the sicko that decides to use my child as a sexual tool, you can bank on that!



posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 03:07 PM
link   
reply to post by MrSensible
 


When the age of consent was 13, or even 12 in some areas, people usually died by the time they were 35. So, in a way 13 was already middle-aged. Longer life spans allowed kids a longer period of childhood. It is more of a reflection of a lengthening life span, improved health care and improved civilization than morality.

That being said, the law is the law. A person who breaks it by initiating improper relationships with what the law, and by extension most of western society, should be punished to the fullest extent. At the very least this particular guy needs counseling or behavior modification therapy. I'd go with a shock collar.

As a parent, sometimes I really don't think 18 is old enough, especially the way we seem to be dumbing down our kids maturity wise as a society.

Also there are valid physical reasons to have the age of consent at 18. Have you ever researched what having a child does to a girl so young? Usually, they died or got so messed up downstairs they can't have children anymore. Girls are going through this in Africa. They have children at 11,12, 13 or 14 and the strain on their bodies is too much. They develop fistulas where their urine leaks constantly. Their much older husbands throw them out and marry another child.

See, didn't mention my morality once.



posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 03:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by ShaunHatfield
It will be (the end of the world) for the sicko that decides to use my child as a sexual tool, you can bank on that!


Maybe, but you'll end up in jail for the rest of your life and when your daughter finds out why you went on a murderous rampage she's gonna call you a numbnutz (and wish that you would have kept your head on straight instead of worrying about someones jack session pic... so that you could see her graduate, marry, raise her kids etc. etc.). Yeah, real favor you'd be doing her there tough guy.

If it was an older woman with a picure of your 15 year old son would you run right over and bash her head in too?

edit on 16-6-2011 by SevenBeans because: (no reason given)
edit on 16-6-2011 by SevenBeans because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 03:14 PM
link   
reply to post by TKDRL
 


What if he intended it for distribution? God forbid a tabloid get hold of the pics. Someone like Perez Hilton is bound to distribute them someday.

I just think the laws covering this sort of thing need to be universal. That's all.



posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 03:24 PM
link   
reply to post by tncryptogal
 


Hey thanks for the info, that's all very interesting stuff that I didn't know.

My own personal speculation is that it also has something to do with this idea that we "own" children. Did you get your information from anywhere in particular?

I always have a very hard time wrapping my head around this ill-conceived concept that having sex at a young age turns you into a sexual deviant. I was personally sexually abused as young child by my older cousin and, while I don't consider the abuse to have been that severe, it didn't really even come close to ruining the rest of my life.



posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 03:34 PM
link   
reply to post by ShaunHatfield
 


His keister is gona be stuffed to the gills with other peoples contraband, he'll be little more than a walking bag that takes the rap for others crimes, after a few in jail charges he's never getting out, lol.



posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 03:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Thepreye
His keister is gona be stuffed to the gills with other peoples contraband, he'll be little more than a walking bag that takes the rap for others crimes, after a few in jail charges he's never getting out, lol.


Yes let's all LOL at the torture, rape and framing of people in prison (many who are innocent of the initial charges)... how amusing.


edit on 16-6-2011 by SevenBeans because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 03:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by SevenBeans
how amusing.



Sure is in this case



posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 03:51 PM
link   
reply to post by MrSensible
 


I can't remember where I got the information. I believe it was in some college history class. My husband and I had a long discussion about the age of consent and why it changed. I found this article for you.

Age of Consent Article

England and the colonies must have been a haven for pedos way back when. I can see possibly the need to marry a 13 year old when you only lived to 30-35, but 2 or 7? Since this is a conspiracy forum, I'm going to go ahead and say TPTB seem to have always been exploiting children. Our MTV generation and Miley Cyrus isn't anything new.


The first recorded age-of-consent law dates back 800 years: In 1275, in England, as part of the rape law, a statute, Westminster 1, made it a misdemeanor to "ravish" a "maiden within age," whether with or without her consent. The phrase "within age" was interpreted by jurist Sir Edward Coke as meaning the age of marriage, which at the time was twelve years of age.

In the 12th century Gratian, the influential founder of Canon law in medieval Europe, accepted age of puberty for marriage to be between twelve and fourteen but acknowledged consent to be meaningful if the children were older than seven. There were authorities that said that consent could take place earlier. Marriage would then be valid as long as neither of the two parties annulled the marital agreement before reaching puberty, or if they had already consummated the marriage. It should be noted that Judges honored marriages based on mutual consent at ages younger than seven, in spite of what Gratian had said; there are recorded marriages of two and three year olds.

The American colonies followed the English tradition, and the law was more of a guide. For example, Mary Hathaway (Virginia, 1689) was only nine when she was married to William Williams. Sir Edward Coke (England, 17th century) made it clear that "the marriage of girls under twelve was normal, and the age at which a girl who was a wife was eligible for a dower from her husband's estate was nine even though her husband be only four years old."


When women started demanding more rights, the age went up.


Social (and the resulting legal) attitudes toward the appropriate age of consent have drifted upwards in modern times. For example, while ages from ten to thirteen were typically acceptable in western countries during the mid-19th century,the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century were marked by changing attitudes towards sexuality, childhood and adolescence, resulting in raising the ages of consent.


Age of Consent Reform

As far as what a birth can do to a young body:

The Addis Abba Fistula Hospital (Birthing Injuries)

Personally, I am a small woman. I gave birth to a 12 lb baby at age 26. My body still hasn't completely recovered. My abdominal muscles are still messed up. No amount of sit ups can seem to pull them back together. I can only imagine the horrible pain a small girl would have.



posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 03:58 PM
link   
reply to post by ShaunHatfield
 


Shaun, I understand where you're coming from and can sympathize. But you need to realize what an insanely irrational place it is.

I couldn't think of a better way to illustrate my point than by committing the same "crime" this guy allegedly committed. So I went to google and within .000000000413445534 seconds was able to find many pictures of young girls dressed "provocatively".

I think the image speaks for itself.






Doing this cemented in my own mind how moot and idiotic this point is. So, if you can't understand based on the illustration, I think we'll have to agree to disagree.



posted on Jun, 16 2011 @ 04:06 PM
link   
reply to post by tncryptogal
 


Hey thanks for the info!

You brought up another interesting point. Now you mentioned how it can be very damaging to women with small frames. However, it's always been widely believed that women with "big hips" were much more suitable for birthing and made better mates because of this. So I wonder, would the situation be different if all women had wide hips at their post-puberty point? Then, however, there is still the implication of mental issues arising. Though I know there have been studies done, I don't think I've ever seen anything truly conclusive that says you will be deeply mentally scarred from having sex/a baby at the age of 13.

Also, I wonder if, as people are living longer and longer, we will see the age of consent rise further? Who knows, by the time our children have children, the age of consent might be twenty three.


I think we can all agree that anyone who would have sex with a pre-pubescent child is a seriously sick individual in need of help. Two and Seven? It's just wrong on every level. Most children of that age can barely make the decision of what to have for lunch, letalone a complex decision like sex.
edit on 16-6-2011 by MrSensible because: (no reason given)





new topics
top topics
 
39
<< 41  42  43    45  46  47 >>

log in

join