| Guilty By Thought ?
Posted: 7/3/2009 10:33:05 PM |
thinking that a 15 year old is mature enough to have sex with adult people is wrong plus it would as well be illegal
The poster you quoted did not suggest that an adult having sex with a 15 year-old was 'right'........he merely stated that some 15 year-olds appeared more mature than some women he has encountered.
Besides, how many 15 year-olds have wished to have sex with those of a similar age? Going by the comments of my classmates back in the mid-seventies, I suspect the number could be quite high.
And as for the numbers of adults that some of us wanted...... | |
|
| Guilty By Thought ?
Posted: 7/4/2009 2:38:12 AM | Dont worry- It wont be long before thought crime is passed through as law under our noses without us noticing.
The gradual erosion of civil liberties, under the guise of the protction of government law - and the constant daily threat of danger ( swine flu / war/ terror) to remind us why we need them.
Control the prols with tv sex and football  | |
|
| Guilty By Thought ?
Posted: 7/4/2009 2:56:06 AM | 'Unatural sexual thoughts about children are in my opinion just WRONG!!'
How are the thoughts unnatural?
Were they planted there by aliens???
The thoughts are perfectly natural for some people, others will never once think about sex with a younger person I'm sure. But it is NOT unnatural.
See a thing for what it is.
In our society, we have decided that sex is a taboo.
Because sex is considered a taboo it can be damaging if approached improperly, and improperly will vary from person to person.
Because it can cause damage, it has been decided by consensus to protect our young in law so that they can reach maturity relatively unpressured by sexual approach from more developed or manipulative adults.
Nothing wrong with any of that. But just go look at the apes, I've yet to see David Attenborough comment on the older ape asking to see the proof of age of the younger one before giving it 'ape style'
So stop the knee jerk rubbish and THINK for a change. It is not by any definition unnatural. It is in fact UNDESIREABLE in our society. | |
|
| Guilty By Thought ?
Posted: 7/4/2009 3:05:06 AM | What i would like to say is that thoughts and urges are a very, very different thing.
A thought can pop up. When abuse cases are spoken of people say things like "the thought of that makes me feel sick", the thought must have therefore been in the head and repulsed the person. The thought still popped up though.
An urge to do this is very different.
It makes sense to me but i don't know how well it transfered onto here. Hope it made sense. | |
|
| Guilty By Thought ?
Posted: 7/4/2009 3:22:38 AM | There is a test they use at a criminal research facility where they show video or images of animals mating to a man who is considered to have some potential for or perhaps is known to have a tendancy to committ sexually motivated crime. While he watches these images his reaction (measured by attaching sensors to his penis) is measured.
I once observed someone who had been in prison for a very long time for an offence that was not sexually motivated refusing the test quite strongly on the basis that as he had not seen a naked woman in the flesh or had any sexual activity with any person in over 20 years, a glimpse of a buttock in a shower gel commercial could make him experience some arousal.
He therefore said he would not take the test as he felt that any suggestion of sexual activity, between anything or anybody had the potential to make him think (consciously or othewise) of sexual activity which he had been missing out on for many years. The test would then conclude that he was some kind of sexual deviant as he had twitched a bit while two squirrels were nut rubbing.
Refusing the test meant that he had no hope of parole ever and he was happy to remain in prison forever rather than be labelled a sexual deviant because for a glimmer of a second two animals mating turned him on in some small way.
Should we conclude that he was into bestialism from this admission?
(By the way, he killed what he thought was a bloke in a bar fight over who'd had their name up for the pool table next - lad happened to be considered a minor by law and therefore the child killer label was applied) | |
|
Travan
|
Joined: 11/23/2008
Msg: 80 | |
| Guilty By Thought ?
Posted: 7/4/2009 3:26:39 AM | Well said craka.
No I think from that we c an conclude that there are far too many stupid people and an awful lot of less-than-intelligent people on this earth, some of them in positions of power which is very scary. | |
|
| Guilty By Thought ?
Posted: 7/4/2009 3:38:05 AM | Human beings have the capacity to think.
Thought may range from the most pure to the most vile.
It is our ability to decide which path to take (whether it will be for good or bad) that will be judged.
(judged by ourselves (conscience) whilst reflecting on our lives / by others / and for those who believe, by God).
For those who believe in God, they will believe we have been given free-will and the ability to determine our own lives as individuals.
We can therefore not be guilty by thought, but merely our response to such thought. | |
|
| Guilty By Thought ?
Posted: 7/15/2009 4:40:27 PM | No we are NOT any "guiltier" of being an actual murderer for having the desire, then we are of being a florist because we happen to adore flowers. Of course we have ALL had if not murderous thoughts.......torture fantasies [ I want them hung by their tits or balls or both] of deserving people.... such as paedophiles.
HOWEVER, we do live in a society that has done enough research to determine the likelihood of actions based on someones psychological profile. I get it that it is not an exact science and has flaws......but we keep getting smarter and smarter about this. "Innocent until proven guilty"...waiting for the person who hasn't gotten "caught" yet to damage a child, to "strike" or "strike again"..... too many times has ended up with dead or "wish they were dead," children.
I think it is our job to find as many punishable offenses, they HAVE committed, prosecute for that and exaggerate those offenses....do whatever we can legally, to restrict them. We HAVE TO KEEP them in jail, when we have them there and not have policies that make it so easy for them to get out, early, or at all. We need to start REALLY studying the records of judges and find ways to make them accountable when they keep a person in prison longer for smoking weed than a person who has molested a child. I lived in a city, once, where we voted for judges......I took my vote VERY seriously.
Most improtantly, we need to NOT turn away and figure that is none of our business, when observing questionable behavior of a potenetial paedophile. Our society needs to stop protecting someone just because they are related or came "out of their vagina." We need to stop thinking of that as "loyalty" to family and being an admirable trait.
Evil is evil........ it takes on a whole new meaning when done to a child. I agree with someone on here who says it is one thing to want to murder someone....it is UN-NATURAL to want to molest a child. I don't know about you....but the idea of having sex with a child...even an older one....I just can't fathom it. I possess a VERY playful, creative mind. I am slow to judge anothers' "turn-on" because I have no idea how it developed or haven't tried it. BUT ......WITH A CHILD or even a captured animal, ........even MY wild, crazy imagination does not go there!!!!! It is almost like there is a "block" in my brain that shuts out even an inkling of a thought of molesting a child.
SO, in conclusion, because I believe I am not special for having that "block"...I am the norm......the ones that do........ YEP, they ARE guilty and we should restrict them any way we can.
Thanks for letting me having my say and I will listen to any criticism of my way of thinking. | |
|
| Guilty By Thought ?
Posted: 7/15/2009 8:02:07 PM | 1984
Any chance you had this in mind when you posted Mac?
There is just no hope is there! | |
|
Home
login 
