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

page: 9
39
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 09:57 AM
link   
reply to post by gabby2011
 





Excuse me??? What right does he have to use someone elses face on another body to get sexual gratification ?? Anybody's face?


Yes, actually he does have the right. What right do you have to dictate which faces on another body a free individual may masturbate to, and which dont? (what a sentence, btw
)




posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 09:58 AM
link   
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


I can understand that fathers may be attracted to their daughters , and your post makes good sense. Having the maturity to understand that it is only attraction, and the self discipline to not act on it..is key.

Posting a pic of your daughter on a nudes face , doesn't show any maturity whatsoever.



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 10:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by Maslo
reply to post by gabby2011
 





Excuse me??? What right does he have to use someone elses face on another body to get sexual gratification ?? Anybody's face?


Yes, actually he does have the right. What right do you have to dictate which faces on another body a free individual may masturbate to, and which dont? (what a sentence, btw
)


ok..I guess it is a right..and hopefully you won't mind if some creep uses your child's school picture, puts it on another body in a bikini, blows it up real big, and puts it in the staff bathroom , so all the creeps can jerk off to it.
Or your wife, or your girlfriends face picture.

Cause after all it is their right...so don't you dare complain now..k?
edit on 9-6-2011 by gabby2011 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 10:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by gabby2011

Originally posted by Maslo
reply to post by gabby2011
 





Excuse me??? What right does he have to use someone elses face on another body to get sexual gratification ?? Anybody's face?


Yes, actually he does have the right. What right do you have to dictate which faces on another body a free individual may masturbate to, and which dont? (what a sentence, btw
)


ok..I guess it is a right..and hopefully you won't mind if some creep uses your child's school picture, puts it on another body in a bikini, blows it up real big, and puts it in the staff bathroom , so all the creeps can jerk off to it.
Or your wife, or your girlfriends face picture.

Cause after all it is their right...so don't you dare complain now..k?
edit on 9-6-2011 by gabby2011 because: (no reason given)


who said one can't complain? thats called a straw man.

the point is it isnt illegal under child porn laws.



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 10:06 AM
link   
What confuses me is, this ruling is in fact the "correct" ruling...there is no victim. no victim, no crime (no, thought or artistic expression is not a victim, its just thought manifested).

No, the guy is not "acceptable" in his behavior, but this is clearly not a legal matter...its a psychological issue, and yes, he needs to get ahold of it.

in saying that, there was rulings of hentai and such in various states calling it illegal. This is actually even less of a "crime" than what went on here...as none of it is even real..all animations, drawings, 3d renderings, etc...yet that was prosecuted.

Its a dangerous thing when you start to legislate morality and imagination...very very dangerous...I would rather live in a society of pervs than a society of morality police...the pervs can be stopped with a bit of a talk, the moral police back up their authoritarianism with state sanctioned imprisonment and murder for thinking(expressing on paper or other mediums) in incorrect terms.

"terrorist" talk is being targetted also, and drugs..however, both are already becoming more wider in their definition...never allow government to censor your own fantasies and mind, no matter how repulsed you are by your neighbors fantasys...don't do it...its that clear.

Years ago, sex offenders = child molestors...the terms were interchangable as thats what they were.
Now, a sex offender is a flasher, a peeping tom, a video watcher, a date rapist, a video "voyeur", having intercourse in a public place with your own bloody wife. Now a sex predator is the new synonom for child molestor or rapist...however, its only a matter of time before that starts getting tainted to mean more. Point is, once legal allows for the destruction of liberty and constitutional rights of anyone, no matter how disliked by society, it -rapidly- grows to encompass FAR more than the original intent. Our legal system is a profitable venture..very profitable, and if you allow thoughts, be it through books, photoshops, drawings, etc..to become illegal, well, then you are just waving a big flag begging for mind police in a very short form.



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 10:06 AM
link   
Im sure you and atleast 2 other crazy people here have now been qualified for the PSYCHOTIC Award of all time, and No one wants you near their Child because well, it's pretty damn obvious ain't it.#### Now lets see 30 yrs ago you would have been Tossed into the slammer for openly stating its ok to wank off to your kids photo, and here we are 30 yrs later, and its suddenly ok now because??? Hello what part of hell did you crawl out of anyways? Your the Guy our Mothers warned us about aren't you? Come on stop jerking around and be real here, you would actually do absolutely nothing if someone like say a close friend wanked off to his daughters face after pasting it onto a prostitues body then getting her high and enticing yes his OWN FREAKING KID into hell knows what? OK YOU'RE TOTALLY MESSED UP along with the others here who are condoning this CRAP.


Originally posted by Maslo
reply to post by gabby2011
 





Excuse me??? What right does he have to use someone elses face on another body to get sexual gratification ?? Anybody's face?


Yes, actually he does have the right. What right do you have to dictate which faces on another body a free individual may masturbate to, and which dont? (what a sentence, btw
)



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 10:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by gabby2011
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


I can understand that fathers may be attracted to their daughters , and your post makes good sense. Having the maturity to understand that it is only attraction, and the self discipline to not act on it..is key.

Posting a pic of your daughter on a nudes face , doesn't show any maturity whatsoever.



Oh, I fully agree
its a unhealthy outlet and will only encourage a next step. the guy needs to see a therapist as I said as he is taking a step down a wrong path overall
Even if he never actually acts on his desires, ya...fine..however, it won't help his mental state overall...and will actually make him believe he is a freak somehow for even considering it..which is a bad thing..once you figure your a monster, then you allow yourself to do monsterous things.

I think actually he has gotten a perfect punishment for the crime...attention brought to it, it will force him to do one of two things...either reflect on what he is doing and control it, or take bigger steps and cross the line eventually..however, he is now on the radar, so such actions will get him picked up real quick.



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 10:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by incrediblelousminds

Originally posted by gabby2011

Originally posted by Maslo
reply to post by gabby2011
 





Excuse me??? What right does he have to use someone elses face on another body to get sexual gratification ?? Anybody's face?


Yes, actually he does have the right. What right do you have to dictate which faces on another body a free individual may masturbate to, and which dont? (what a sentence, btw
)


ok..I guess it is a right..and hopefully you won't mind if some creep uses your child's school picture, puts it on another body in a bikini, blows it up real big, and puts it in the staff bathroom , so all the creeps can jerk off to it.
Or your wife, or your girlfriends face picture.

Cause after all it is their right...so don't you dare complain now..k?
edit on 9-6-2011 by gabby2011 because: (no reason given)


who said one can't complain? thats called a straw man.

the point is it isnt illegal under child porn laws.


Well maybe it should be, the people running the damn country have messed everyone up this is only the beginning, if anyone condones this even an inch its gonna take off a mile a minute and no child will be safe, welcome to Islam land wake up or bend over.
edit on 9-6-2011 by awareness10 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 10:11 AM
link   
What the??! This is an outrage!

Not to mention sick in the first degree!

Where's my puke-smiley????



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 10:11 AM
link   
reply to post by incrediblelousminds
 


Well..neither is the scenario I mentioned..maybe putting it in a public place would be..but not much you could do if your daughters face is put on a naked body of someone else..and some creep jerks off to it every night in his own room.

Nope..you couldn't do anything about it..cause after all..its not a crime.
edit on 9-6-2011 by gabby2011 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 10:13 AM
link   
reply to post by awareness10
 





Well maybe it should be, the people running the damn country have messed everyone up this is only the beginning, if anyone condones this even an inch its gonna take off a mile a minute and no child will be safe, welcome to Islam land wake up or bend over.


I fear you may be very correct with these words....I think it could get much worse.



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 10:19 AM
link   
Everyone still misses the fact that he's not the girls father except as a DNA donor - he wasnt in her life - he doesn't view her as his offspring - which brings up a whole myriad of issues.

They're also missing the fact that we don't have any idea what his intentions were for that picture. Only Boondocks brought up maturbation. He very well may have been trying to capitalize on the perversion that already exists. Possibly crimes, but still, back on topic.

And why isn't anyone questioning the daughter? What if the whole "burst out crying" was a lie? What if mom somehow came across the picture, and the girl was just trying to cover her butt? The article is very clear that she wanted the drugs... that means the girl probably has mental issues to begin with. But I guess because she's a minor, no one will bother to look at that aspect.

From personal experience, I know full well that not only are 13 year old girls spiteful, vindictive, and seek out older men - but I know they're also stupid enough to post it on facebook and get their victims arrested with absolutely no consequences to them or their parents.

Men should be careful.



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 10:20 AM
link   
reply to post by Suspiria
 


Ya if you're stuck in the dark ages like boondock (who thinks the Bible was written by god and not men)

Guy has some twisted thoughts, but then again religion is full of pedophillic child sexuality so of course their the same. This guy is condemning fantasy, pure Christian thought police. Sigh...



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 10:22 AM
link   
reply to post by boondock-saint
 


You have such poor judgement.. it's impressive.

A person having, as you put it, carnal knowledge, and thinking about underage girls (though you completely disregarded the fact that this girl is also his daughter) but he is bringing it into the real world and it shows he is willing to take steps towards actualizing his fantasy. Fantasizing wasan't enoughm he moved on to making images, the next step is highly likely to involve the girl.

No crime, however it seems like she could be removed and him considered an unfit parent.



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 10:26 AM
link   
I dont care, An Adult is an Adult and a Child is a Child. There is a freaking difference, you can use their snotty teenage behaviour all you like which is a cop-out anyways for doing the unthinkable to them. The fact still remains a child is still a child and an adult is still an adult, there is a BIG Difference. The problem is that people push so much crap on the younger generation now that they treat them like mini me's and then expect them to know the diff. like an adult would. Wont happen, their brains arent even developed properly until they're like 20 or 21 so what makes you think blaming the kid over the adult is OK? Sorry bud it's not right its just lame and any adult who blames a kid for his own sexual misconduct is an A1 LOSER who deserves to have his nads removed.


Originally posted by Forevever
Everyone still misses the fact that he's not the girls father except as a DNA donor - he wasnt in her life - he doesn't view her as his offspring - which brings up a whole myriad of issues.

They're also missing the fact that we don't have any idea what his intentions were for that picture. Only Boondocks brought up maturbation. He very well may have been trying to capitalize on the perversion that already exists. Possibly crimes, but still, back on topic.

And why isn't anyone questioning the daughter? What if the whole "burst out crying" was a lie? What if mom somehow came across the picture, and the girl was just trying to cover her butt? The article is very clear that she wanted the drugs... that means the girl probably has mental issues to begin with. But I guess because she's a minor, no one will bother to look at that aspect.

From personal experience, I know full well that not only are 13 year old girls spiteful, vindictive, and seek out older men - but I know they're also stupid enough to post it on facebook and get their victims arrested with absolutely no consequences to them or their parents.

Men should be careful.
edit on 9-6-2011 by awareness10 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 10:35 AM
link   
reply to post by awareness10
 


I dont care, An Adult is an Adult and a Child is a Child. There is a freaking difference, you can use their snotty teenage behaviour all you like which is a cop-out anyways for doing the unthinkable to them. The fact still remains a child is still a child and an adult is still an adult, there is a BIG Difference.


You just basically gave license to all females under the age of 16 to do whatever they want without consequences.

AS A FEMALE, this is outright BS. When I was 12 I looked 25 on purpose - though I did not seek out older men because I wasn't attracted to them - if I had, I would've had no problems getting one, trust. And if I lied and said I was 20, they would've believed, now who's at fault?



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 10:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by awareness10

Originally posted by incrediblelousminds


the point is it isnt illegal under child porn laws.


Well maybe it should be,


maybe it should be. but the point is, the court didnt rule on what 'maybe should be a law'. they made a ruling based on existing law.

expecting the court to change the law instead of interpreting it is backwards.
edit on 9-6-2011 by incrediblelousminds because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 10:39 AM
link   
reply to post by awareness10
 


I actually agree
An adult is in charge...its up to them to say no, to avoid crossing the line...
Even if the kid in question is all but a porn star, the adult must...be an adult and simply decline. wait till the legal age of consent if your overcome with desire for the person, until then, control...use it.

Now, this is different if you say, meet someone in a bar, do the deed, and then find out after she had a fake id. thats a tricky one considering even that will get you the SO title (no, you don't even have to have knowledge anymore). best to just deny as there is no actual problem.

But come now.."chopping nads off" for fantasys you disagree with? hmm...I admit, I have a bunch of fantasys me and my ex used to play...from the schoolgirl thing, to priest/nun and everything in between. although I can't say I was fixated on any senario but rather just the fun of senario building...by your judgement, my stuff would have been chopped because I had a "impure" thought and action legally.

fantasy is fantasy. putting miley cyrus's face on jenna jameson's body is just for the pervy lulz...I guess "lighten up" may be the comment required here...



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 10:39 AM
link   
It is an unconstitutional law. Based off the Child Protect Act of 2003.

en.wikipedia.org...

The actions might not be ethical, or moral, but they should not be illegal as it is the free expression of speech, art, and there was no victim or harm. As hard as it is to believe.



posted on Jun, 9 2011 @ 10:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Forevever
And if I lied and said I was 20, they would've believed, now who's at fault?


Dont you know that guys are expected to ask for ID and swipe it though counterfeit detectors before any and all encounters with anyone?

And once appropriate age has been verified any and all interaction must be chaperoned by no less than 4 independent individuals.

Even then if anything at all happens it's the guys fault.





 
39
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join