Paedophile gets 6 yrs

[BeckyBoo]

This story is sickening it really is

HERE (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/tees/4026885.stm)

Now this is what was said in one breath
Peter Sabison, defending, said: "I cannot step back from the fact that the sexual fantasies that are highlighted in defence reports are very disturbing."But he seems to be sorry for what he has done. He co-operated with the police and the doctor, he made striking admissions, he has requested help, and he is anxious to obtain any treatment."

and this was also said
He wrote a signed confession to the school which police found at his home, reading "I don't feel guilty about what I did, why should I?"

and this is a parasite that is sorry for what he's done.....id hate to think what he would have written if he did feel guilty !!


So what do you make of this story ? do you think 6 yrs is enough ?

[Whowhere]

6 years and castration.

[BumbleBee]

Originally posted by BeckyBoo
So what do you make of this story ? do you think 6 yrs is enough ?

I was glad to read that they did a police check on him before he was given the job. It is nice to see lessons have been learnt from past mistakes in other parts of the country.

As for the sentence, I'm not sure. I hope he undergoes some serious counselling.

Like you said though, he did say he hadn't any regrets, but by co-operating with Police and seeking help he may have been acknowledging he needs help. Or as someone more cynical might suggest, he was attempting to lower his jail sentence.

People can get away with three years in prison for actually killing people in such instances as death by dangerous driving, so it could be argued his sentence is harsh.

[BeckyBoo]

Originally posted by BumbleBee
People can get away with three years in prison for actually killing people in such instances as death by dangerous driving, so it could be argued his sentence is harsh.

He assaulted 3 6yr old children, he fantasised about killing a child.......he has serious mental problems, I think he deserves more than 6 yrs, especially if he does what hes told in the nick cos it wont be 6 years will it.

Someone who commits sexual offences on children are the lowest of the low. They in my opinion have to be really sick bastards and they should serve a lot longer than he got....our children need protecting from people like him.

[BumbleBee]

Originally posted by BeckyBoo
He assaulted 3 6yr old children, he fantasised about killing a child.......he has serious mental problems, I think he deserves more than 6 yrs, especially if he does what hes told in the nick cos it wont be 6 years will it.

Someone who commits sexual offences on children are the lowest of the low. They in my opinion have to be really sick bastards and they should serve a lot longer than he got....our children need protecting from people like him.

I agree, it is sick. I am not condoning what he did. Just one point though, fantasising about killing isn't a crime in itself, and as such shouldn't be punished.

[BeckyBoo]

Originally posted by BumbleBee
I agree, it is sick. I am not condoning what he did. Just one point though, fantasising about killing isn't a crime in itself, and as such shouldn't be punished.

No he aint commited an offence, but if he has actually thought and had fantasies about it then that shows how sick he is.

Aye, i knew you werent condoning it.......ignore me you know I go off on one when kids have been sexually abused, i just cant help meself lol

[BumbleBee]

Originally posted by BeckyBoo
Aye, i knew you werent condoning it.......ignore me you know I go off on one when kids have been sexually abused, i just cant help meself lol

It is an emotive subject. I'm sure I'll get as worked up as you do when I have children of my own. For now though, since I can't actually equate it to anything (as in I can't imagine 'that could've been my little 'un) then I can't get as het up.

[wheresmyplacebo]

a man like with fantasises woulnt feel guilty about it, why would he?

however thats why i believe paedophilia should be treated as a mental and should be released t o public when theyre believe to be no harm to the public

[Makoto]

6 years of quite an easy life no doubt. Public stoning I say.

[Makoto]

Originally posted by BeckyBoo
He assaulted 3 6yr old children, he fantasised about killing a child.......he has serious mental problems, I think he deserves more than 6 yrs, especially if he does what hes told in the nick cos it wont be 6 years will it.

Someone who commits sexual offences on children are the lowest of the low. They in my opinion have to be really sick bastards and they should serve a lot longer than he got....our children need protecting from people like him.

And that's why I say we should be allowed a public sex offender register to see who our neighbours really are. It works in the States, why not here?

however thats why i believe paedophilia should be treated as a mental and should be released t o public when theyre believe to be no harm to the public

When you are an alcaholic & you stop drinking and become dry you will still always be an alcaholic and so there's always a danger of going back to the alcahol. A leopard never changes it's spots. I don't think paedophilia could really be truly cured.

[ben.s]

Originally posted by BeckyBoo
He assaulted 3 6yr old children, he fantasised about killing a child.......he has serious mental problems, I think he deserves more than 6 yrs, especially if he does what hes told in the nick cos it wont be 6 years will it.

Bull. Throwing him into a cell will only worsen the problems. He needs psychological help. It's an illness. They don't lock people up because they get depressed, do they? People with depression can be helped. Paedophiles can also be helped.

[Mushroom Boy]

a fantasy is only a fantasy. big deal, what is it, the thought police?

so he has to be tried and punished for the crime he committed. "sexual interference". what is that, what did he do? it doesn't say in the article, it doesn't say anywhere. you don't know what he did, so unless you have proof to the contrary that the judge's decision was correct you should shut up.

if it was any more serious than touching the girl where he shouldn't have it would have said so. do you not grasp that?

[nckdn]

I'm not a Christian, but one of the the things I most admire about Christianity is the opportunity it affords sinners to admit their sin, be forgiven and gain redemption. I try to live a 'good' life, but I screw up all the time and appreciate the second chances that really 'good' people have given me, but unfortunately many supposedly 'cured' and safe paedophiles have been released only to harm and kill children again. The pseudo-science of Psychiatry has caused too much suffering already. This is too great a risk to take.
I'd be inclined to have our system be as generous and caring to this man as we can afford to be. For me that means he should be held in a secure place where he cannot harm children, but he is allowed and encouraged to live a full and active life.

[MrG]

Originally posted by nckdn
..............For me that means he should be held in a secure place where he cannot harm children, but he is allowed and encouraged to live a full and active life.

so an old peoples home then?

[Reese_86]

:::shivers:::

i don't know if it's just me... but whenever i see pictures of people who have done bad (like particularly disgusting) things... even when it's just pictures.. i feel like i can see evil in the eyes.. and i get chills...


but i think 6 years is way too short...
i know quite a few people, myself included, who have been sexually abused.. and while most of us are over it.. i'm sure it's fucked us up in some ways...
and i'm sure he's affected those children in a negative way that will follow them for a long time.. whether it be conscious or not...
and he deserves more than 6 years for doing that...
just b/c he got CAUGHT this time.. doesn't mean he hasn't done it before...

edited b/c i missed out a word and i needed to clarify myself...

[Makoto]

Originally posted by Mushroom Boy
a fantasy is only a fantasy. big deal, what is it, the thought police?

so he has to be tried and punished for the crime he committed. "sexual interference". what is that, what did he do? it doesn't say in the article, it doesn't say anywhere. you don't know what he did, so unless you have proof to the contrary that the judge's decision was correct you should shut up.

if it was any more serious than touching the girl where he shouldn't have it would have said so. do you not grasp that?

"Although to your credit you have managed to avoid putting your fantasies into practice until now, now that you have committed these offences it seems to me that it is necessary for this court to pass sentences which will protect the public for a very considerable time."

What does that tell you? If this bloke interfere's with kids then it's quite obvious what he has done.

[Welsh Jemz]

it just seems as though because he didn't kill a child, just molested it, he's being thanked and told that he's a good guy really.

people who do things like this need professional help, and a long spell away from the world.

[swank]

*gone*

[Blagsta]

Originally posted by Felix Da Housecat
When you are an alcaholic & you stop drinking and become dry you will still always be an alcaholic

Rubbish.

[Kentish]

Originally posted by Blagsta
Rubbish.
You disagree with AA?

[Kentish]

Originally posted by BumbleBee
I hope he undergoes some serious counselling.
Originally posted by BeckyBoo
that shows how sick he is
Originally posted by whersmyplacebo
i believe paedophilia should be treated as a mental [illness?]
Originally posted by ben.s
He needs psychological help. It's an illness.
Originally posted by welsh_mosher
people who do things like this need professional help
Originally posted by swank
pedophiles should...recieve "help" for their mental state
Can paedophiles be successfully treated for their compulsion to have sex with, or molest, young children?

There is no debate because if we can 'cure' paedophilia, we can 'cure' homosexuality and that's not PC in this day and age.

[Makoto]

Memory is tied to emotions right? We as humans remember most what gives us a good feeling and what doesn't. The feelings for an alcaholic towards a drink are strong they never forget what it was like to drink. Not only are they constantly reminded to drink, but their constantly reminded in strong emotional terms.

Why do you think that an alcoholic isn't allowed to drink? Not just because it's damaging effect but there's risk of drinking full time again. Once an alcoholic always an alcoholic.

[wheresmyplacebo]

i say treat it as a mental illness, thus allowing them to be sectioned indefinetly until they are no longer a threat to the public

[Fiend_85]

Originally posted by Felix Da Housecat
When you are an alcaholic & you stop drinking and become dry you will still always be an alcaholic and so there's always a danger of going back to the alcahol. A leopard never changes it's spots. I don't think paedophilia could really be truly cured.

but is paedophilia to do with our genetic make-up, like alcoholism is to do with an inherrant likelihood to become dependant/addicted to something, and you therefore never stop being alcoholic, or is paedophilia to do with the way we grew up, and can therefore be treated?

[BeckyBoo]

Originally posted by ben.s
Bull. Throwing him into a cell will only worsen the problems. He needs psychological help. It's an illness. They don't lock people up because they get depressed, do they? People with depression can be helped. Paedophiles can also be helped.

i dont give jack shit about the paedophile to be honest, I care about the children that COULD suffer in years to come........but yeah thats ok cos as long as the peado has been cured everything is fine and dandy eh.

[Fiend_85]

Originally posted by BeckyBoo
i dont give jack shit about the paedophile to be honest, I care about the children that COULD suffer in years to come........but yeah thats ok cos as long as the peado has been cured everything is fine and dandy eh.

If you deny them their humanity, however hard it may be for you to see it, you are just as bad as they are because that is what they do when they abuse a child.

[wheresmyplacebo]

Originally posted by BeckyBoo
i dont give jack shit about the paedophile to be honest, I care about the children that COULD suffer in years to come........but yeah thats ok cos as long as the peado has been cured everything is fine and dandy eh.

we cant just chuck people in jail it doesnt work, and its a waste of time and money, id rather of done soem good by making them realise how what they done was wrong, and that they have a mental issue that needs control, and as long as they can control it, they can function as a regular person in society

[BeckyBoo]

Hang on, go back and tell me where I said dont treat em ? As i said in my last post the paedo is not my main priority here.......its the children.

and 6 years is not a just sentence in my opinion. By the time he gets good behaviour knocked off how long does that mean he will serve ? Now lets just assume he has a mental disorder do you really think by the time he has been let out we can be assured he has been cured of his sexual fantasies and his fantasies about killing a child ? Some people will mental problems suffer for quite some years, im not sure that someone who has this type of fantasies can be cured in the time he has been given.

[Kentish]

Originally posted by BeckyBoo
and 6 years is not a just sentence in my opinion. By the time he gets good behaviour knocked off how long does that mean he will serve ? Now lets just assume he has a mental disorder do you really think by the time he has been let out we can be assured he has been cured of his sexual fantasies and his fantasies about killing a child ? Some people will mental problems suffer for quite some years, im not sure that someone who has this type of fantasies can be cured in the time he has been given.
How long would be long enough then?

[wheresmyplacebo]

Originally posted by BeckyBoo
Hang on, go back and tell me where I said dont treat em ? As i said in my last post the paedo is not my main priority here.......its the children.

and 6 years is not a just sentence in my opinion. By the time he gets good behaviour knocked off how long does that mean he will serve ? Now lets just assume he has a mental disorder do you really think by the time he has been let out we can be assured he has been cured of his sexual fantasies and his fantasies about killing a child ? Some people will mental problems suffer for quite some years, im not sure that someone who has this type of fantasies can be cured in the time he has been given.

with the severity of his crime 6yrs is a bit odd

[Kentish]

Originally posted by wheresmyplacebo
i say treat it as a mental illness, thus allowing them to be sectioned indefinetly until they are no longer a threat to the public
Is homosexuality a mental illness?

[Fiend_85]

Originally posted by Kentish
Is homosexuality a mental illness?

See my post above about whether Paedophilia is nature or nuture...

[Kentish]

Originally posted by Fiend_85
See my post above about whether Paedophilia is nature or nuture...
Quite.

And we aren't allowed the debate because of the strong homosexual lobby which has fought hard for its existence, so we're left with locking them [paedophiles] up and putting them on a register for life.

Is paedophilia a legitimate feeling?

[Kermit]

For all the wailing of "sicko", what exactly did the man do to the children?

The punishment should match the crime, not the fantasies of the man. Thinking about things is not a crime, no matter how unpalatable the thought. Unless he does the things he fantasises about he has committed no crime.

If he had raped the children, it would have said so. If he had hurt the children it would have said so. It doesn't say so, therefore one can presume that he didn't. Therefore one can safely presume that the punishment fits the crime.

Paedophiles are people too. You might not like to think that they are, but they are, and that fact should never be forgotten.

I don't like the way everyone goes "string 'em up!" when the very mention of children is mentioned. Revenge is not pleasant to look at, and revenge is not something that the JUSTICE system is there for.

[Fiend_85]

Originally posted by Kentish
Quite.

And we aren't allowed the debate because of the strong homosexual lobby which has fought hard for its existence, so we're left with locking them [paedophiles] up and putting them on a register for life.

Is paedophilia a legitimate feeling?

Interesting, assuming it's legitimate, is is legitimate because of nature, or nuture? Or is something on the basis of nuture not legitimate?

[wheresmyplacebo]

Originally posted by Fiend_85
See my post above about whether Paedophilia is nature or nuture...

like most things a mix of both probably, like depresion and schizophrienia erc

and most abusers were abused as a child, pattern i see, and most abusers are family members

frickin hate nature nurture arguments, normally a mix of both even if ones an indirect effect

like what do you call the varying exposure to hormones in the womb, nature or nurture cause thats regulated by both the environment of what mothers life is like, and the mothers and foetuses genetic instructions

[Fiend_85]

Originally posted by Kermit


Backing up mushroom boy I see Kermie... Though you're right.

[Kermit]

Originally posted by Felix Da Housecat
If this bloke interfere's with kids then it's quite obvious what he has done.

Yes, it is obvious. That is why he was convicted.

He didn't murder the girls though, did he, so his fantasies are irrelevant.

[Kentish]

Originally posted by Fiend_85
Interesting, assuming it's legitimate, is is legitimate because of nature, or nuture? Or is something on the basis of nuture not legitimate?
It matters not. I have heterosexual feelings, which most people in the country can understand. Others have homosexual feelings, which fewer, but a significant number of, people can understand. Some people have paedophlilic feelings, which even fewer people can understand. But just because they are a minority, does that make the feelings unacceptable?

As far as I can see, the only objection to paedophilia can be the lack of consent of the child, which is what makes it a crime. The feeling may be normal for some, I don't know.

If paedophilia is a result of nurture (which may well be impossible to prove) then improving child welfare [e.g. preventing abuse etc.] can be an aim for reducing future paedophilia, but if it is a nature thing then I don't see how the feeling itself can be condemned.

[big_man_with_a_]

paedos should be fisted in the ass with a 12" diameter red hot metal fist.

then killed.

[The Doc]

Originally posted by BeckyBoo
i dont give jack shit about the paedophile to be honest, I care about the children that COULD suffer in years to come........but yeah thats ok cos as long as the peado has been cured everything is fine and dandy eh.

He wouldn't be touching up little children if he no longer felt the urge to, would he? If he's not allowed to get near a child he can't kill it, can he? Sense please.

Killing, stoning, locking up for good. All seems a bit 19th century to me.

He is obviously in need of some serious counselling. Putting his windows through with a brick acheives what exactly?

The only people who need stoning are the idiots who think that publishing the names and addresses of accused sex offenders is a good idea.

[Fiend_85]

Originally posted by big_man_with_a_
paedos should be fisted in the ass with a 12" diameter red hot metal fist.

then killed.

no.

[BeckyBoo]

Originally posted by Kentish
How long would be long enough then?

If peados have a mental ilness kinda thing then you tell me how long someone can suffer with it ? How long's a piece of string ?

He wouldn't be touching up little children if he no longer felt the urge to, would he? If he's not allowed to get near a child he can't kill it, can he? Sense please.

What I meant is my concern is for the child, the child will grow up possibly having problems as they do get older. I was saying i dont have any feeling for this parasite its the child who I care about. Children dont forget stuff even at such a young age, my Daughter even remembers things from when she was about 3 yr old.......what them children had done to them aint gonna go away so for once will you lot stop feeling pity for fooking morons like him...........THINK about the child. God it soooo pisses me off that you lot only focus on the the parasite and you try to make me look stupid cos I care about the child.

[BeckyBoo]

Originally posted by Kermit


He didn't murder the girls though, did he, so his fantasies are irrelevant.

thats ok then innit.

[Kentish]

Originally posted by BeckyBoo
If peados have a mental ilness kinda thing then you tell me how long someone can suffer with it ? How long's a piece of string ?
Maybe the string is 6 years long? Why is 6 years not enough if you cannot say how long it will take for him to be cured?

[BeckyBoo]

Originally posted by Kentish
But just because they are a minority, does that make the feelings unacceptable?

As far as I can see, the only objection to paedophilia can be the lack of consent of the child, which is what makes it a crime.


I was gonna give you a hard time with what you have written there but I cant be arsed to be honest so instead i will say...............your talking out of your arse :rolleyes:

[BeckyBoo]

Originally posted by Kentish
Maybe the string is 6 years long? Why is 6 years not enough if you cannot say how long it will take for him to be cured?

Did you read my post earlier ? obviously not....cos if he behaves himself then how long will he serve ? You really need to wake up.

[Kentish]

Originally posted by BeckyBoo
Did you read my post earlier ? obviously not....cos if he behaves himself then how long will he serve ?
What's that got to do with anything? How long is long enough?

[morrocan roll]

six years means he wilkl be out in three ...not long enough.

[Kentish]

Originally posted by BeckyBoo
I was gonna give you a hard time with what you have written there but I cant be arsed to be honest so instead i will say...............your talking out of your arse :rolleyes:
Do expand on that. I'm interested.

[BeckyBoo]

Originally posted by morrocan roll
six years means he wilkl be out in three ...not long enough.

thank you Mr Roll.
This guy will do 3 years yet he sexually assaulted 3 children. Kntish can you tell me that after 3 years a peadophile could be totally over whatever he thought before he commited the offences and was charged ?

Kentish I asked the question which Mr Roll just answered for me, I didnt know exactly how long he would serve. so forget about 6 years now lets assume he does what hes told and in 3 years time he and people like him are to be let back into society. I dont think someone as sick as this is ready to be let loose back in soiciety after 3 years and I wouldnt trust them as far as I could throw them.

Now stop trying to make out this is not a serious offence because thats how you are coming across to me.

[Kentish]

I wasn't talking about this particular case. We'd moved on from that onto paedophilia: nature or nurture. If 3 years isn't enough, tell me what is.

And are you suggesting that someone can be cured of paedophlilia?

If so, can someone be cured of homosexuality?

[BeckyBoo]

As far as I can see, the only objection to paedophilia can be the lack of consent of the child, which is what makes it a crime.

A sick crime, its not like someone nicking a fooking loaf of bread. Shit you make out this is something which aint serious well it is serious.
As I said i aint gonna get into one with ya cos you aint reading my posts properly anyhow and failing to reply to things that I have questioned.

[BeckyBoo]

Originally posted by Kentish

If so, can someone be cured of homosexuality?

If you wanna debate that then start a new thread, this aint about homosexuality.

[Makoto]

I don't like the way everyone goes "string 'em up!" when the very mention of children is mentioned. Revenge is not pleasant to look at, and revenge is not something that the JUSTICE system is there for.

And a few years in a prison is enough for screwing up someones life? Rapists, murders, peados, etc. do not deserve the life they are blessed with.

[Kentish]

Originally posted by BeckyBoo
A sick crime, its not like someone nicking a fooking loaf of bread. Shit you make out this is something which aint serious well it is serious.
As I said i aint gonna get into one with ya cos you aint reading my posts properly anyhow and failing to reply to things that I have questioned.
Eh? I think you're the one deliberately or otherwise misreading my posts and quoting them out of context.

What you quoted there was in the context of whether paedophilic thoughts are legitimate - can a person be sexually attracted to a child? I said that what makes it wrong is that to carry out those fantasies they have to abuse children - i.e. have sex without consent.

I'm not pandering to paedophiles or defending their actions, but I am suggesting that paedophiles do have feelings just the same as heterosexuals and homosexuals do. I don't see how you can prevent people from having those thoughts, or punish them for the same.

ETA: syntax

[Kentish]

Originally posted by BeckyBoo
If you wanna debate that then start a new thread, this aint about homosexuality.
It's the same principle. Can a person's sexuality be altered? If it can then the gay rights movement is weakened. If it cannot then maybe paedophiles ought to be treated differently.

[bluestatesman]

Maybe he'll get the help he needs. I think he should also have to pay for at least some of the help his victims need. Funny, the teen that transported and delivered to extremists the explosives used in the Madrid bombings got 6 years too. That sentence seemed like nothing...

[BeckyBoo]

Originally posted by Kentish
I'm not pandering to paedophiles or defending their actions, but I am suggesting that paedophiles do have feelings just the same as heterosexuals and homosexuals do. I don't see how you can prevent people from having those thoughts, or punish them for the same.


The case I started this thread about was someone who HAS been convicted of turning these thoughts into actual actions, so lets not discuss those who might and those who might not, lets discuss those who have actually done it.

[Kentish]

Originally posted by BeckyBoo
The case I started this thread about was someone who HAS been convicted of turning these thoughts into actual actions, so lets not discuss those who might and those who might not, lets discuss those who have actually done it.
We've discussed him, and the debate has moved on to the fundamentals of paedophilia and sexual attraction. I'd be interested in what you think.

[morrocan roll]

being gay is not wrecking an inocent childs life.
i know a woman who is now in her late forties and over the last ten or fifteen years she has final crumpled in on herself for what happened to her as a child ...being abused by a peado.
if your sexual urges and fanyasies are carried on in a healthy manner then there is no problem.
abusing children is a whole different ball game ...you are damaging the child and the adult that child grows into.
if this guy just went round battering children with a hammer ...he would get more than six years but ...the peados do far far worse damage. it has to be seen and treated as a very serious crime carrying very serious punishment.
stealing a few quid can get you a lot longer ...that has to be wrong.
in my opinion this guy should have been sentenced to at least at ten years ...if on release he then commits the same kind of crime he should be given life but ...if he is willing to be chemicaly castrated to put an end to the damage he is causing ...let him out very early on.

[Kentish]

That's not what I was saying rolly. Let's be absolutely clear.

Firstly, I'm asking whether paedophilia can be cured.

If it cannot, then we must surely accept that they have sexual feelings towards children no matter how repulsive they are to us.

Those feelings in themselves are not harmful. They become harmful when they are carried out because they take the form of abuse of a vulnerable and defenceless child. And as you point out, quite correctly, child abuse can have devastating effects for the child and family.

I am not defending his right to abuse children. I am not even defending his right to have these fantasies. I'm asking questions about the basis of paedophilia, but it seems no one wants to face up to the reality that some people are sexually attracted to children.

[BeckyBoo]

Originally posted by Kentish
We've discussed him, and the debate has moved on to the fundamentals of paedophilia and sexual attraction. I'd be interested in what you think.


Have we....I dont see us getting very far, do you ?

right you answer this direct question please with an answer and not changing the debate. Do you think 6 years was a just sentence for this guy for the crime he did bearing in mind he will be out in 3 years as Rolly told us ? Do you think that in 3 years he is gonna be free from these thoughts that he had before he was caught ?

[Kentish]

Originally posted by BeckyBoo
right you answer this direct question please with an answer and not changing the debate. Do you think 6 years was a just sentence for this guy for the crime he did bearing in mind he will be out in 3 years as Rolly told us ? Do you think that in 3 years he is gonna be free from these thoughts that he had before he was caught ?
No I don't. I think he will always have those feelings no matter how long he is in prison. I know of no treatment for paedophilia. Correct me if I am wrong. Now answer my questions.

[BeckyBoo]

Originally posted by Kentish
but it seems no one wants to face up to the reality that some people are sexually attracted to children.

would that be moi ?

[morrocan roll]

Originally posted by Kentish
That's not what I was saying rolly. Let's be absolutely clear.

Firstly, I'm asking whether paedophilia can be cured.

If it cannot, then we must surely accept that they have sexual feelings towards children no matter how repulsive they are to us.

Those feelings in themselves are not harmful. They become harmful when they are carried out because they take the form of abuse of a vulnerable and defenceless child. And as you point out, quite correctly, child abuse can have devastating effects for the child and family.

I am not defending his right to abuse children. I am not even defending his right to have these fantasies. I'm asking questions about the basis of paedophilia, but it seems no one wants to face up to the reality that some people are sexually attracted to children. some people are attracted to a life of crime ...there are laws to deal with it.
the urges to have sex with children can be stopped by chemical castration.
doesn't matter wether there is some kind of normality in these desires ...it does matter when our children are hurt in any manner whasoever.
no one realy gives a flying fuck about a person who hurts a child in any manner ...sexual or otherwise.
it should be made clear our society will not tolerate it.
if these people are willing to be castrated then let them walk free ...they can lead a life of hard work fun laughter and struggle like the rrest of us then.

[BeckyBoo]

Originally posted by Kentish
No I don't. I think he will always have those feelings no matter how long he is in prison.

Right so give the bastard 20 years then....there you are you have my answer.

[Kentish]

Originally posted by BeckyBoo
would that be moi ?
You and everyone else. No one is offering an opinion.

[Kentish]

Originally posted by BeckyBoo
Right so give the bastard 20 years then....there you are you have my answer.
Fine, and the other points?

[BeckyBoo]

Originally posted by Kentish
Fine, and the other points?

I aint scrolling back 2 pages :lol:

When people like him are released I think they should be tagged indeffinately. At the end of the day just because they act good in nick it doesnt mean they are reformed.

[Iknowyourmum]

My complaint would be that people doing in most peoples opinion lesser crimes can be punished more harshly,

Having class A's for sale you can get more time

But then thats already been said

But so's most comments

On this thread

and on the board

[Kentish]

Originally posted by morrocan roll
some people are attracted to a life of crime ...there are laws to deal with it.
the urges to have sex with children can be stopped by chemical castration.
doesn't matter wether there is some kind of normality in these desires ...it does matter when our children are hurt in any manner whasoever.
no one realy gives a flying fuck about a person who hurts a child in any manner ...sexual or otherwise.
it should be made clear our society will not tolerate it.
if these people are willing to be castrated then let them walk free ...they can lead a life of hard work fun laughter and struggle like the rrest of us then.
You're just stating the obvious now. I'm not defending paedophiles. But a paedophile is only "hurts a child" when (s)he has access to one. If we cannot rid society of paedophiles, we can at least prevent them from carrying out their sexual urges. I'm not sure about chemical castration - seems to be eugenics or something ethically dubious.

[Skive]

Originally posted by BeckyBoo
Right so give the bastard 20 years then....there you are you have my answer.

Even if he's never going to abuse again? Who are you, the thought police?

[Kentish]

Originally posted by BeckyBoo
I aint scrolling back 2 pages :lol:

When people like him are released I think they should be tagged indeffinately. At the end of the day just because they act good in nick it doesnt mean they are reformed.
:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

What's the point in this if you "aint scrolling back"? :rolleyes:

[BeckyBoo]

Kentish I have had a similar debate before and in that debate I have said to someone "when you have your own children you views might change".
This subject really winds me up as you might have realised and its because some people here kinda make light of this kind of offence, I just cant help myself.
Children are more important to me and how it will affect them when they are older, then you see people like him getting 6 years for this crime but he gets out in 3 years if he behaves himself....that really pisses me off. Then when he is released how do we know he is reformed and he will NEVER do it again ? we dont do we, so NO child in his vicinity is safe.....thats my view anyhow.

[Iknowyourmum]

What about treatment cant that be effective,

My mum was a social worker used to be in child protection, she's occasionaly told me about these things in her work,

She seems to think that treatment can be effective keeping them from abusing and with regular check ups, I think chemical or other castration can maybe push the abuse in to different areas,

Out of interest aparently in the middle ages a lot of tortures were castratos, im not sure if this is true but it would make sence if it was.

[morrocan roll]

Originally posted by Kentish
I'm not sure about chemical castration - seems to be eugenics or something ethically dubious. it may well be extreme but i'm not suggesting forcing it on someone.
hurting children ...especialy in a sexual manner can not be tolerated.
if you had done it and been to prison ...then on your release you damage another child or children ...you go to jail for life or accept that this behaviour is wrong ...nuts dissolved ...walk free.
that way ...your not being punished ...your being given choices.
if you want to keep those urges ...keep them in a jail where there are no children.

[Kentish]

Originally posted by BeckyBoo
Kentish I have had a similar debate before and in that debate I have said to someone "when you have your own children you views might change".
Don't patronise me. It's not much of a debating technique.
we dont do we, so NO child in his vicinity is safe.....thats my view anyhow.
No one is disagreeing with that.

You've totally missed the point of the entire debate.

[BeckyBoo]

Originally posted by Skive
Even if he's never going to abuse again? Who are you, the thought police?

i could be the Mother of the child he abused .You could be the Dad, Brother, Uncle.......children dont forget stuff....you need to remember that.

Kentish......Im not gonna argue with you if thats all you can do :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[BeckyBoo]

Originally posted by Kentish
Don't patronise me. It's not much of a debating technique.


Not patronising, my view darling wether you like it or not. When people have a family their views can change dramatically, just like my whole view on many things have. Not just sexual crimes but lots of things in general.

[Kentish]

Originally posted by morrocan roll
it may well be extreme but i'm not suggesting forcing it on someone.
hurting children ...especialy in a sexual manner can not be tolerated.
if you had done it and been to prison ...then on your release you damage another child or children ...you go to jail for life or accept that this behaviour is wrong ...nuts dissolved ...walk free.
that way ...your not being punished ...your being given choices.
if you want to keep those urges ...keep them in a jail where there are no children.
So paedophilia cannot be cured (except by chemical means)?

[Kentish]

Originally posted by BeckyBoo
Kentish......Im not gonna argue with you if thats all you can do :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
I reserve this for special occasions: :banghead:

Do you not understand the points or are you just ignoring them?

[Kentish]

Originally posted by BeckyBoo
Not patronising, my view darling wether you like it or not. When people have a family their views can change dramatically, just like my whole view on many things have. Not just sexual crimes but lots of things in general.
What were your views of sexual crimes before you had children? Were sexual crimes more acceptable before you became a mother? I don't follow the logic.

[Globe]

Originally posted by the doc horatio

He is obviously in need of some serious counselling.

Brings images - with the collateral "success" of A Clockwork Orange. :rolleyes:

All of the psychologist whom I have spoken with are of the belief that pedophilia is a condition which can NEVER be "cured"... It might be constrained, whether by containment, physical or chemical restraints, but... it will NEVER be "cured"...

What will happen, however? The victims of abusers tend to become abusers, themselves. :(

[Iknowyourmum]

Originally posted by Globe
Brings images - with the collateral "success" of A Clockwork Orange. :rolleyes:

All of the psychologist whom I have spoken with are of the belief that pedophilia is a condition which can NEVER be "cured"... It might be constrained, whether by containment, physical or chemical restraints, but... it will NEVER be "cured"...

What will happen, however? The victims of abusers tend to become abusers, themselves. :(

Not cured as such as in the same way cancer is cured, but they can learn to live with it and not abuse to try and form adult relationships, in much the same way an alchoholic is never cured they just learn to live with out drinking,

They should either get treatment or not be let out I think, and castration could well make them still abuse but in a different way.

[morrocan roll]

Originally posted by Kentish
So paedophilia cannot be cured (except by chemical means)? i'm not sure but i would think not.
like you said yourself ...there seems to be people around who have these sexual urges.
from documentaries on the box i have seen ...these people do indeed see it as normal ...as normal as you see your sexuality.
so i would err on the side of no it cannot be cured but it shouldn't ever be tolerated.

[Kentish]

Originally posted by morrocan roll
i'm not sure but i would think not.
like you said yourself ...there seems to be people around who have these sexual urges.
from documentaries on the box i have seen ...these people do indeed see it as normal ...as normal as you see your sexuality.
so i would err on the side of no it cannot be cured but it shouldn't ever be tolerated.
And here we go full circle again...it cannot be cured...so it's a legitimate feeling that some people have...which in itself cannot be a crime...until they carry out their fantasies...so locking them up won't help...keeping them away from children may do.

[BeckyBoo]

Originally posted by Kentish
What were your views of sexual crimes before you had children? Were sexual crimes more acceptable before you became a mother? I don't follow the logic.

No they were not acceptable, dont get me wrong. But now I have much more strong views about crimes which involve children. There might be other factors im not sure, im talking bout stuff thats happened but dont wanna go into.

[BeckyBoo]

Originally posted by Kentish
I reserve this for special occasions: :banghead:

Do you not understand the points or are you just ignoring them?

your asking stupid questions to be honest. How the fook are we supposed to know
So paedophilia cannot be cured (except by chemical means)? , thats just one thing I have just found. We aint frigging doctors and also doctors do get it wrong sometimes as well.
Sheesh, your hard work.

[morrocan roll]

Originally posted by Kentish
And here we go full circle again...it cannot be cured...so it's a legitimate feeling that some people have...which in itself cannot be a crime...until they carry out their fantasies...so locking them up won't help...keeping them away from children may do. it may well be legitamate but i would call it perversion.
if it is legitamate ...it doesn't mean we have to tolerate it.
no one is suggesting cutting someones nuts off for thinking about it.
but ...as far as i'm aware no society has ever tolerated child abuse.
if your actualy born that way ...then tough shit. society can not work with people behaving like that.
some people seem to have no compassion and feel no guilt whatsoever when they batter an old lady senseless.
why they feel no compassion ...no remorse ...is a problem for the prison shrink ...not the high street one.

[BeckyBoo]

Originally posted by Kentish
I reserve this for special occasions: :banghead:

Do you not understand the points or are you just ignoring them?

Im probably only seeing what i wanna see :(

[Skive]

Originally posted by BeckyBoo
i could be the Mother of the child he abused .You could be the Dad, Brother, Uncle........

But I'm not. :confused:
And you seem to be implying that the opinions of those without kids arn't as valid as valid as those with kids?

I'm sure there are many out there who have fantasies involving children, yet will never touch a kid indecently in their whole lifetime.
Becky, if somone admited to being sexually atrracted to children would you want them banged up, even before they'd committed any offence, or are you into punishing people for things they havn't yet done?

[Kentish]

Originally posted by morrocan roll
it may well be legitamate but i would call it perversion.
if it is legitamate ...it doesn't mean we have to tolerate it.
no one is suggesting cutting someones nuts off for thinking about it.
but ...as far as i'm aware no society has ever tolerated child abuse.
if your actualy born that way ...then tough shit. society can not work with people behaving like that.
And that was why I brought in homosexuality. 100 years ago, homosexuals were viewed in the same way as paedophiles are today. The difference is consent, but the point is the same. Society viewed homosexuality as a dreadful crime, but now it is an acceptable lifestyle choice.

So we can either ignore paedophilia and lock people up when we catch them abusing children, or we can accept it is a given and make strict guidelines for those working with children to avoid the problem occurring.

[morrocan roll]

Originally posted by Kentish
And that was why I brought in homosexuality. 100 years ago, homosexuals were viewed in the same way as paedophiles are today. The difference is consent, but the point is the same. Society viewed homosexuality as a dreadful crime, but now it is an acceptable lifestyle choice.

So we can either ignore paedophilia and lock people up when we catch them abusing children, or we can accept it is a given and make strict guidelines for those working with children to avoid the problem occurring. i'm not quite sure about your thinking here.
modern enlightened society now sees no problem with consenting adults ...are you suggesting that one day we will become enlightened enough to accept sex with 4 yr olds?
i don't think you are.
but you are suggesting we see it more as normal which to my mind is dangerous ground indeed.
if one day it can be 'treated' ...fine. for now it seems it cannot so ...we protect our children by giving out a clear message by way of very harsh sentences.
or ...the offer to take away urges that led someone to harming an innocent child.
when nicking a few quid carries a bigger sentence than harming another person ...especialy a child ...things are going wrong.

[BeckyBoo]

Originally posted by Skive

And you seem to be implying that the opinions of those without kids arn't as valid as valid as those with kids?

I'm sure there are many out there who have fantasies involving children, yet will never touch a kid indecently in their whole lifetime.


didnt say that, I said views can change. I cant explain it, but im not just digging at anyone here, im being really serious when you have you own kids your views not just on his topic but many others can change.
I would want someone treated if they admitted to being sexually attracted to kids.....course I would. Id probably want them tagged so police could always trace them and Id wanna make sure that they were not allowed near schools, youthys etc etc.....probably wouldnt happen, but hey thats my view. If someone has admitted to the police or a doctor that they have a sexual attraction to kids and nothings done and they then go onto sexually abuse a child then they should be done as well for letting them out in the community knowing they were a risk to children.

[Kentish]

Originally posted by morrocan roll
i'm not quite sure about your thinking here.
modern enlightened society now sees no problem with consenting adults ...are you suggesting that one day we will become enlightened enough to accept sex with 4 yr olds?
i don't think you are.
but you are suggesting we see it more as normal which to my mind is dangerous ground indeed.
Certainly not.

I've already said the difference is consent. You could never get consent from a child so I'm not suggesting society will one day find paedophilia acceptable.

Call it enlightened, but society accepts that people have homosexual thoughts now, whereas 100 years ago it was utterly dispicable. If our society accepts that paedophiles will always exist then maybe we could have a decent policy and debate on preventing abuse. Perhaps society doesn't want to face up to that fact. It's not a pleasant thought.
if one day it can be 'treated' ...fine. for now it seems it cannot so ...we protect our children by giving out a clear message by way of very harsh sentences.
or ...the offer to take away urges that led someone to harming an innocent child.
when nicking a few quid carries a bigger sentence than harming another person ...especialy a child ...things are going wrong.
To be honest, I rarely have an opinion on prison sentences, partly because I'm not convinced prison works in its current form. But I'd agree that sentences for paedophiles need to give a clear message to society that child abuse is unacceptable.

[morrocan roll]

Originally posted by Kentish
But I'd agree that sentences for paedophiles need to give a clear message to society that child abuse is unacceptable. six years was not enough then considering he'll more than likely be out in three.

[Kentish]

Originally posted by morrocan roll
six years was not enough then considering he'll more than likely be out in three.
OK, I'm neither agreeing nor disagreeing. 3 years doesn't seem long - agreed - but he's on the register and won't have as easy access to children so it's not as if he'll be straight back into his old job with children around.

[BeckyBoo]

Originally posted by Kentish
3 years doesn't seem long - agreed -

Halleluyah :lol:

[Kentish]

Originally posted by BeckyBoo
Halleluyah :lol:
That wasn't a change of opinion but, hey, as long as you're happy...

[BeckyBoo]

Originally posted by Kentish
That wasn't a change of opinion but, hey, as long as you're happy...

oh god, get real.

Shit cant you chill.........just a bit.

[Kentish]

:cool:

[Reese_86]

Originally posted by Skive
Even if he's never going to abuse again? Who are you, the thought police?

yeah.. he fantasizes about those things and what not..

and people can have sick fantasies.. whatever..

but he acted upon it.. maybe he didn't rape and kill the child.. but he still molested her..

i don't care what he did.. molestation is molestation.. and it does affect the person for the rest of his/her life...

and how do you know that this is the first time that he did it?? there's a good chance that it isn't.. and how do you know he's not going to do it when he gets out??

TONS of people go back to jail for repeating the same offense they were in there for the first time...

6 years of jail (which will probably be shortened like roll said) is not equivalent to the years of damage that he has caused those children

[Blagsta]

Originally posted by Kentish
You disagree with AA?

Yes.

[Blagsta]

Originally posted by Felix Da Housecat
Memory is tied to emotions right? We as humans remember most what gives us a good feeling and what doesn't. The feelings for an alcaholic towards a drink are strong they never forget what it was like to drink. Not only are they constantly reminded to drink, but their constantly reminded in strong emotional terms.

Why do you think that an alcoholic isn't allowed to drink? Not just because it's damaging effect but there's risk of drinking full time again. Once an alcoholic always an alcoholic.

Again, rubbish. Depends on the person, depends on lots of things. Some people can learn to drink in moderation.

[Blagsta]

Originally posted by Kentish
Quite.

And we aren't allowed the debate because of the strong homosexual lobby which has fought hard for its existence, so we're left with locking them [paedophiles] up and putting them on a register for life.

Is paedophilia a legitimate feeling?

If you can't see the difference between paedophilia and homosexuality, then you truly are an idiot.

[Blagsta]

Originally posted by Kentish
It matters not. I have heterosexual feelings, which most people in the country can understand. Others have homosexual feelings, which fewer, but a significant number of, people can understand. Some people have paedophlilic feelings, which even fewer people can understand. But just because they are a minority, does that make the feelings unacceptable?

As far as I can see, the only objection to paedophilia can be the lack of consent of the child, which is what makes it a crime. The feeling may be normal for some, I don't know.

If paedophilia is a result of nurture (which may well be impossible to prove) then improving child welfare [e.g. preventing abuse etc.] can be an aim for reducing future paedophilia, but if it is a nature thing then I don't see how the feeling itself can be condemned.

I see what you're getting at, but peadophilia can not lead to a healthy sexual relationship. So it can be defined as an illness I guess.

[Kentish]

Originally posted by Blagsta
If you can't see the difference between paedophilia and homosexuality, then you truly are an idiot.
That's not what I said is it. I was saying that if paedophilia is 'treatable' then one could argue that homosexual is 'treatable'. And heterosexuality for that matter, if you want to be PC. The point being that it would undermine the homosexual lobby, hence it is never debated, and we don't know if you can 'cure' someone of paedophilic desire.
Originally posted by Blagsta
I see what you're getting at, but peadophilia can not lead to a healthy sexual relationship. So it can be defined as an illness I guess
But only "healthy" in your eyes. The obvious problem is the lack of consent, but does that automatically make it an illness?

[morrocan roll]

Originally posted by Kentish

The obvious problem is the lack of consent, your thinking is getting a little worrying.
for a luckybag and a sticky bun i may well be able to get consent from a five year old ...what on earth are you trying to say?

[Kentish]

Originally posted by morrocan roll
your thinking is getting a little worrying.
for a luckybag and a sticky bun i may well be able to get consent from a five year old ...what on earth are you trying to say?
No no no no no no.

I don't think you could ever get consent from a child to have sex/be molested so I think paedophiles could never be allowed to act out their fantasies.

However, if we are to accept that some people (very few, but some) have sexual feelings towards children then we need to sort out whether they need treatment or locking up or something else.

[morrocan roll]

Originally posted by Kentish
we need to sort out whether they need treatment or locking up or something else. isn't this what BBOO was saying?

[Blagsta]

Originally posted by Kentish
That's not what I said is it. I was saying that if paedophilia is 'treatable' then one could argue that homosexual is 'treatable'. And heterosexuality for that matter, if you want to be PC. The point being that it would undermine the homosexual lobby, hence it is never debated, and we don't know if you can 'cure' someone of paedophilic desire.

Errr...no. As I said - a homosexual has a very good chance of having a consenting, loving and equal relationship. A peadophile doesn't.

Originally posted by Kentish
But only "healthy" in your eyes.

Is homosexuality not healthy in your eyes?

Originally posted by Kentish
The obvious problem is the lack of consent, but does that automatically make it an illness?

Well seeing as there is no scope for a consenting, loving and equal relationship, I'd say its an aberration of some sort, yes.

[Kentish]

Originally posted by morrocan roll
isn't this what BBOO was saying?
Kind of. Boo was saying that 6 years (or 3 years) wasn't enough and was then just re-iterating how awful paedophiles are. I never found out what she thought about paedophilia itself and what society can do about it apart from locking up those who have committed such crimes. I was more interested in preventing the crime in the first place, but maybe I wasn't making that clear enough.

[Kentish]

Originally posted by Blagsta
Errr...no. As I said - a homosexual has a very good chance of having a consenting, loving and equal relationship. A peadophile doesn't.
That's what I said. I don't disagree, but that wasn't my point.
Is homosexuality not healthy in your eyes?
I have never said that and I don't think that, no.
Well seeing as there is no scope for a consenting, loving and equal relationship, I'd say its an aberration of some sort, yes.
Probably. So what should we do about people who have these thoughts and feelings?

[Indrid Cold]

...Am I the only one here who understands what Kentish meant? :confused: Or does everyone else understand it too and pretend they don't?

[Blagsta]

Originally posted by Kentish
That's what I said. I don't disagree, but that wasn't my point.

What is your point?

Originally posted by Kentish
I have never said that and I don't think that, no.

Glad to hear it.

Originally posted by Kentish
Probably. So what should we do about people who have these thoughts and feelings?

I don't know. Keep them away from children and attempt therapeutic intervention I guess.

[Kentish]

Originally posted by Zalbor
...Am I the only one here who understands what Kentish meant? :confused: Or does everyone else understand it too and pretend they don't?
Thanks Zalbor, I'm glad someone did. :)

[Indrid Cold]

Originally posted by Kentish
Thanks Zalbor, I'm glad someone did. :)
No problem. Some people seem to have trouble understanding that one can think on ideas (s)he disagrees with.

[Kentish]

Originally posted by Blagsta
What is your point?
That if paedophilia can be cured then any other sexuality can be altered. Which weakens the argument for being gay from birth, for example.
I don't know. Keep them away from children and attempt therapeutic intervention I guess.
All that fuss and you end up just agreeing with what's already been said. You must love to argue.

[Blagsta]

Originally posted by Kentish
That if paedophilia can be cured then any other sexuality can be altered. Which weakens the argument for being gay from birth, for example.

I believe you are making what is called a "category error". Paedophilia is not (IMO at least) a sexuality. It is a distortion of sexuality, probably caused by some deep emotional trauma in infancy, childhood or adolescence.

Originally posted by Kentish
You must love to argue.

Yep. :D

[Kentish]

Originally posted by Blagsta
I believe you are making what is called a "category error". Paedophilia is not (IMO at least) a sexuality. It is a distortion of sexuality, probably caused by some deep emotional trauma in infancy, childhood or adolescence.
That's fair, but my point was whether sexual desires can be altered or not.

[Aladdin]

Originally posted by Kentish
That's fair, but my point was whether sexual desires can be altered or not. Probably not.

But then again, having sexual desires towards children is not illegal, however wrong we might think it is on principle. It's acting on such desires that must be prevented.

In any case paedophilia is an unnatural condition that cannot and should not be put in the same bag as other sexual desires and preferences, such as homosexuality and heterosexuality. I find comments suggesting that "if paedophilia can be altered, so can homosexuality" extremely distasteful, nasty and completely pointless and gratuitous to be honest.

[BeckyBoo]

Originally posted by Kentish
That's not what I said is it. I was saying that if paedophilia is 'treatable' then one could argue that homosexual is 'treatable'. And heterosexuality for that matter, if you want to be PC. The point being that it would undermine the homosexual lobby, hence it is never debated, and we don't know if you can 'cure' someone of paedophilic desire.

But only "healthy" in your eyes. The obvious problem is the lack of consent, but does that automatically make it an illness?

so are you trying to say homosexuality is wrong :confused:
Please explain why you are bringing this and heterosexuality into a debate which is about peadophilia, ive totally lost the plot, because the latter is a sick, disgusting thing whereas the other 2 are natural things in my opinion.

and whats this about lack of consent......your talking out your arse again. Why the hell would anyone consent for an adult to sexually abuse a child in any way. I really dont understand what you are saying here.(Edited to add ive had strong painkillers, so thats my excuse)

[Kentish]

Originally posted by BeckyBoo
so are you trying to say homosexuality is wrong
If you read, that's not what I said. I'm not saying anything is right or wrong, I'm asking whether sexual feelings can be altered.
and whats this about lack of consent......your talking out your arse again. Why the hell would anyone consent for an adult to sexually abuse a child in any way.
They wouldn't. Therefore paedophilia is wrong. That was my point.

[BeckyBoo]

Originally posted by Kentish
Therefore paedophilia is wrong. That was my point.

ah right, ok......i got the wrong end of the stick :blush:

[Fiend_85]

Originally posted by Aladdin
In any case paedophilia is an unnatural condition that cannot and should not be put in the same bag as other sexual desires and preferences, such as homosexuality and heterosexuality. I find comments suggesting that "if paedophilia can be altered, so can homosexuality" extremely distasteful, nasty and completely pointless and gratuitous to be honest.

Why is paedophilia less natural than homosexuality?

[Aladdin]

Because it is not natural for adults to seek sexual relations with children.

[lukesh]

jesus christ should of been given at least 100 years!

[lukesh]

Originally posted by Fiend_85
Why is paedophilia less natural than homosexuality? a lot of people who i know say if you accept homosexuality you will accept paedophlia too.

how can you possibley compare?

child abusers and then later killing them is murder and clearly wrong

being gay aint

[girl with sharp teeth]

.

[Aladdin]

With regard to the natural kingdom thing, play mating is not the same as having penetrative sex.

In any case the body of a child has not adequately developed yet to have sexual relations. Nor is the child mentally prepared for it, or fully understands or consents to the act.

Those are the main differences between paedophilia and sex between consenting adults.

Incidentally, if we are to compare them all heterosexuality cannot be left out.

[girl with sharp teeth]

.

[Aladdin]

Well yes the actual feelings of the adult is a different thing of course... the whole "right and wrong" issue, who gets to decide what's right and wrong and all that...

I guess you'll have to take my word as the ultimate deciding truth... ;)

That's why I'd rather talk about, and act upon adults trying to have sex with children.

[Fiend_85]

Originally posted by lukesh
a lot of people who i know say if you accept homosexuality you will accept paedophlia too.

how can you possibley compare?

child abusers and then later killing them is murder and clearly wrong

being gay aint

It's only recently that homosexuality has been accepted as not wrong, how can you say that it won't be the same for paedophillia. It is also not to be assumed that every paedophile a) acts on the impulse and b) becomes a murderer.

They are the same in the way they both strike from the 'norm' and that if one (homosexuality) is genetic and in-built from birth, then so is paedophilia.

[Aladdin]

Main differences remain: homosexual relationships are between two consenting adults who are making an informed decision out of freewill. That could never apply to paedophilia.

That is why no one has the right to say the former is 'wrong', but there is every right to describe the latter as wrong.

[Fiend_85]

Originally posted by Aladdin
Main differences remain: homosexual relationships are between two consenting adults who are making an informed decision out of freewill. That could never apply to paedophilia.

That is why no one has the right to say the former is 'wrong', but there is every right to describe the latter as wrong.

A relationship perhaps, but the feelings?

[Skive]

If there's nothing wrong with homosexual feelings I can't see how anyone can argue that sexual feelings towards children are wrong.

I can't understand either TBH.

[Aladdin]

Originally posted by Skive
If there's nothing wrong with homosexual feelings I can't see how anyone can argue that sexual feelings towards children are wrong.

I can't understand either TBH. Just as millions of gay people can't understand heterosexual feelings.

So according to your logic if there is nothing wrong with hererosexual feelings no one can argue that sexual feelings towards children are wrong either can they?

[Blagsta]

Originally posted by girl with sharp teeth
But that's the point Aladdin. Is it more unnatural for adults to seek sexual relations with children than in a homosexual relationship? If so, why?

I've said why. For the hard of reading, here it is again - homosexuals have a good chance of having a loving consenting equal relationship. Paedophiles don't.

[Blagsta]

Originally posted by Fiend_85
They are the same in the way they both strike from the 'norm' and that if one (homosexuality) is genetic and in-built from birth, then so is paedophilia.

What rubbish. There is no way that you can say because x is caused by y then z must be as well. It's total nonsense.

[Blagsta]

Originally posted by Skive
If there's nothing wrong with homosexual feelings I can't see how anyone can argue that sexual feelings towards children are wrong.

Yes, but you're not that bright are you?

[BeckyBoo]

Originally posted by Skive
If there's nothing wrong with homosexual feelings I can't see how anyone can argue that sexual feelings towards children are wrong.


your off your rocker...............I cant beleive some of the crap coming out in this thread.

I give up :banghead:

[BeckyBoo]

Rather than start a new thread i thought some of you might be interested in This (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/bristol/4036277.stm)

Well, well, well............here we go again.

[Skive]

Originally posted by Aladdin
Just as millions of gay people can't understand heterosexual feelings.

That's right

Originally posted by Aladdin
So according to your logic if there is nothing wrong with hererosexual feelings no one can argue that sexual feelings towards children are wrong either can they?

I can't understand homosexuality just as I can't understand being attracted to little kids. I'm no more attracted to other men that I am little kids. That is because I'm a hetrosexual attracetd to women over the age of consent.

I do however accept that homosexual relationships can be healthy where as acts between an adult and a child can never be.
I was talking about feelings not relationships.