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

repent, America!
see how far you've fallen away from the grace of God?
once you believed in the Bible as The Word of God. your constitution is even based on it.
you sent out missionaries to far-flung countries of the earth, bringing the Gospel of salvation in Christ Jesus.
now, look at you. you're even celebrating abominable things (gay month!)
repent!
(Rev 2:5) "Therefore remember from where you have fallen, and repent, and do the first works, or else I will come to you quickly and will remove your lampstand out of its place unless you repent."

It is illegal, immoral and unethical. (Religious overtones only: It's like putting the face of "G-d" on a mortal body). Call it art. I call it sick. I draw the line there, no exceptions. And you wonder why society worship idols/images. Subconsciously, the father already has something going on there --- using the image of his own daughter to illicit responses in others. Notice, too, the increase of sex recently as a factor in determining the trend of tolerance in our society --- a form of desensitization between correctness and wrongness. Oh, it's okay. It's our freedom to do whatever creepy things we deem "normal".

reply to post by Wrabbit2000

I wonder....anyone ever thought of looking at the Judge a little closer?

Actually I did.

Justice Franklin Elia Born July 8, 1950 in Tehran, Iran source

Thus endeth the investigation process.

Beyond that - many participants in this thread have brought up incidents of ‘naked’ baby pics - and the parents being prosecuted. Animated child porn - prosecuting the holders of this so called ‘art’.

In my opinion the judge needs to be disbarred. Yeah, like that will happen any time soon.

peace

Originally posted by SevenBeans
but it's silly to think that anyone who might be sexually attracted to her is some sort of disgusting deviant.

No it's not if they're over 21, if they are they're a pervert and a loser clear and simple, they'd know it, you'd know it, your daughter would know it, her school friends would know it, his mates would dwindle away because for sure as hell they'd know it, and his parents would feel a shame greater than any they'd ever known because they'd know it and think they were to blame for his f****d up head.

Originally posted by Thepreye

Originally posted by SevenBeans
but it's silly to think that anyone who might be sexually attracted to her is some sort of disgusting deviant.

No it's not if they're over 21, if they are they're a pervert and a loser clear and simple, they'd know it, you'd know it, your daughter would know it, her school friends would know it, his mates would dwindle away because for sure as hell they'd know it, and his parents would feel a shame greater than any they'd ever known because they'd know it and think they were to blame for his f****d up head.

edit on 11-6-2011 by Thepreye because: (no reason given)

Actually, it's perfectly normal to find many teenage girls sexually attractive. Anyone who thinks otherwise is either terribly naive, or lying to save face. Seriously, you think there's some kind of transformation that magically activates exactly on a girl's 16th (or 18th, depending how prudish your local mentality is) birthday, instantly transforming her from unattractive waif to sexy hot mama? What is the biological basis of this amazing, instantaneous transformation, which somehow happens exactly on every girl's special birthday? Please enlighten us!

The level of denial I'm seeing in this thread about the male nature is stunning.

Society doesn't allow underage sex. That makes sense for a society of humans who live 80 years. It wouldn't have made any sense for a society of cavemen who lived 20-25 years. We still have those old impulses. The impulses are a part of human nature. Just like some of you have the caveman impulse to hunt down a guy you never met to club him with bats. You want him punished for his thoughtcrime -- the irony is that you should then be punished for yours. Comprehend the truth about the male nature, and also the difference between thought and action, and then get back to me.

Originally posted by langyaw
repent, America!

see how far you've fallen away from the grace of God?
once you believed in the Bible as The Word of God. your constitution is even based on it.

If you actually read the Constitution you would know it isn't so.

Religion (not Christianity) makes one direct apparition in the Original Constitution. Article 6, at the end of the third clause:

[N]o religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

This statement is pretty straight-forward. It means that no public position can be required to be held by any one of any religious denomination. It's a safe guard for religious freedom. Likewise, it would be unconstitutional for a law to forbid a Jew or Muslim from holding any office in any governmental jurisdiction in the United States.

Or an atheist.

According to wikipedia, even among professional psychiatrists, the debate whether Hebephilia (generally ages 11-14) is a mental disorder is still ongoing:

en.wikipedia.org...

Thats a nice thing to do haha!

True, but don`t you have to be a legal born American to hold office, and what about blood lines, all the Presidents since gosh... early on, have all been related to each other. From what i`ve read Obama is a distant relative to that big obnoxious millitant guy no one likes sorry i cant remember his name, but he`s not a very nice man. And what about the others, they are all blood related and of jewish decent. I dont think anyone who isnt in the `family`of the Elites can even become President anymore. Thats really unfair and unconstitutional isn`t it.

Originally posted by Heliocentric

Originally posted by langyaw
repent, America!

see how far you've fallen away from the grace of God?
once you believed in the Bible as The Word of God. your constitution is even based on it.

If you actually read the Constitution you would know it isn't so.

Religion (not Christianity) makes one direct apparition in the Original Constitution. Article 6, at the end of the third clause:

[N]o religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

This statement is pretty straight-forward. It means that no public position can be required to be held by any one of any religious denomination. It's a safe guard for religious freedom. Likewise, it would be unconstitutional for a law to forbid a Jew or Muslim from holding any office in any governmental jurisdiction in the United States.

Or an atheist.

Gay meant something very different in the 50`s which gay are you referring to
for all those older folks on ats who may not understand what youre referring to.

Definition of GAY àccording to websters dictionary.
1
a : happily excited : merry b : keenly alive and exuberant : having or inducing high spirits

they should have just castrated him on the spot.

Originally posted by Observer99
Actually, it's perfectly normal to find many teenage girls sexually attractive. Anyone who thinks otherwise is either terribly naive, or lying to save face. Seriously, you think there's some kind of transformation that magically activates exactly on a girl's 16th (or 18th, depending how prudish your local mentality is) birthday, instantly transforming her from unattractive waif to sexy hot mama? What is the biological basis of this amazing, instantaneous transformation, which somehow happens exactly on every girl's special birthday? Please enlighten us!

Exactly lol.

And vice-versa - there is also apparently a magical transformation when someone becomes 18 or 21 - suddenly the 15 year old they thought was hot a moment ago doesn't interest them at all anymore! Amazing.

Originally posted by stevooo
they should have just castrated him on the spot.

Oh dear.

And why not death penalty for adultery, homosexuality and loosing your virginity before marriage? It says so in the Bible. And why not cut off the hands of masturbators, and poke out the eyes of those who download internet porn?

Why not simply invite the Taliban and let them run the justice system?

reply to post by Observer99


Screwing and having children with young teens NEVER made sense. In places and tribes that do it, the death rate for the babies and the girls is tremendous. For females with grown bodies, without medical aide, our species still dies far more often in childbirth than ANY other species.

Their bodes are NOT ready for it at 14. This society you speak of that people were screwing 13-14 year old stayed as a primitive culture because they keep screwing little girls to death.

Originally posted by Aeons
Screwing and having children with young teens NEVER made sense. In places and tribes that do it, the death rate for the babies and the girls is tremendous.

Once again age isn't the relevant factor, reproductive maturity is.

Young but reproductively mature females were generally healthier and more likely to produce and raise healthy offspring than older women (remember, if average life expectancy is 30 or so you probably don't wanna start a family with a 29 year old).

Originally posted by Aeons
Their bodes are NOT ready for it at 14.

Some are some aren't. Generally speaking though offspring of young (but reproductively mature) females are more likely to be healthy than children from females in the later stages of their reproductive years.

Originally posted by SevenBeans

Generally speaking though offspring of young (but reproductively mature) females are more likely to be healthy than children from females in the later stages of their reproductive years.

From what I understand as long a a girl is still growing she hasn't yet reached reproductive maturity. The growing body of a child can be stressed by the demands of pregnancy.

I provided non-emergency medical transport for many pregnant teens. I took them to Dr. appointments etc. They are usually watched pretty closely. All the girls were considered high risk pregnancies. They told me it was because of their age.

I tend to agree with Aeons Just because it's physically possible for young girls to have babies doesn't make it ideal for the developing girl/baby.

Originally posted by boondock-saint
while it may have been un-ethical or
even un-moral, does not make it
illegal.

I believe they had the same court discussions
about anime which is artist renderings of children
performing sex acts. No children were used
for the so-called art work. Does it make it
illegal to think it or draw it? Where do you
draw the line with the thought police ???

Completely agree i might not like this story and what that dad did. But i'd rather live in a todays world.and not ,possibly, tomorrows world of the thought police.

Originally posted by Morningglory
From what I understand as long a a girl is still growing she hasn't yet reached reproductive maturity. The growing body of a child can be stressed by the demands of pregnancy.

Could be and many girls are done growing in their early to mid-teens (which is why in the sixth, seventh grades etc. etc. a girl is often the tallest in the class).

Originally posted by Morningglory
I tend to agree with Aeons Just because it's physically possible for young girls to have babies doesn't make it ideal for the developing girl/baby.

You need to understand it was a different world, "ideal" doesn't really exist when life expectancy is 30.

reply to post by SevenBeans


"Reproductively Mature?" Like the non-menstruating models mentioned earlier as an example.

You're harping this point thinking that it is the weak spot on people with normal human morality about this issue. It isn't. This is just people hoping that screaming over and over "but she's got boobies" will sow confusion.

Teenage girls are more likely to DIE from childbirth, to suffer from all sorts of pregnancy related medical issues such as HELPP and preeclampsia. Their babies are more likely to die in childbirth, as are the teenage girls giving birth. Their vaginal canal is more likely to sustain maiming damage.

None of this goes away because you like the look of young boobs.

Originally posted by SevenBeans
Could be and many girls are done growing in their early to mid-teens (which is why in the sixth, seventh grades etc. etc. a girl is often the tallest in the class.

Your example of "A" girl who is the tallest in the class shows growth rates differ considerably. Playing it safe and leaving pregnancy to full grown women is what's best for modern women.

You need to understand it was a different world, "ideal" doesn't really exist when life expectancy is 30.

Well if we're talking primitive times I wonder at what young age early man was done growing? It doesn't matter if you're a cave man or not pregnancy put demands on a woman's body. It's simply not healthy for growing girls.

My great-grandmother died in childbirth at 28 with her 5th child. This was around 1912. My great-grandfather lived until the ripe old age of 84. Modern women are living longer partly because of better medical care during pregnancy. I read somewhere pregnancy is the most dangerous time even for a fully mature woman. So many unforeseen things can happen.