Tuesday, December 11, 2012

This Is A MUST Read By Everyone: The Coming Legalization Of Child Pornography And Pedophilia!

Just the other night, I had my usual weekly conversation with my great fellow writer, Whitewraithe, who does the blog: Pragmatic Witness, at www.pragmaticwitness.com.   She knows that my work load over the last few days has been extremely exhausting.   So, as a favor to me, she offered to put up several articles in this blog. However, she encountered several problems with Blogger, and was unable to post up one article in particular that was imperative for everyone to see....

I have that important article right here for everyone to see for themselves.  It is entitled: "The Coming Legalization Of Child Pornography And Pedophilia", and I ask all of my own readers to take the time to read this article in its entirety.  I have my own thoughts and comments to follow:


The Coming Legalization of Child Porn and Pedophilia

 
 
Child porn and pedophilia to be legal soon, by Pandora Pushkin (Not satire)
In which Pandora Pushkin discusses the latest push to legalize pedophilia and make it a trendy new “alternative lifestyle”.


 










ALICE IN WONDERLAND

ALICE:  Help! I’ve just been raped by Jimmy Savile disguised as the Mad Hatter!
MAD QUEEN:  Too many complaints—off with her head!

If Jimmy Savile had lived a few more years—say ten at the most—he could have found himself living in a world in which pedophilia was legal. Instead of being vilified for his creepy sexual activities, Jimmy could have found himself a national hero.


Resorting to the same tactics used by gay rights activists, pedophiles have begun to seek a similar legal status, arguing that their sexual desire for children is just a natural “sexual orientation”. If homosexuals like going to bed with their own sex and that’s okay, why is it so wrong if a 70-year-old man wants to go to bed with a 7-year-old girl?

“If a guy offers the kid candy and she consents to sex, what’s the big deal?” it’s now being asked. It’s not like he’s forcing her, is it? Shouldn’t the child have a choice to say Yes or No?

Critics of the homosexual lifestyle have long claimed that once it became acceptable to identify homosexuality as simply an “alternative lifestyle” or sexual orientation, logically nothing would be off limits. Gay advocates have taken offense at such a position, insisting this would never happen.

Well, it’s happened.

Pedophiles are using exactly the same brand of logic as homosexuals once used to get their preferred form of sex legalized. Sodomy is just an alternative lifestyle. Gay sex is cool. Sure, we all know that. Like the world is round, gay sex is cool. Nothing wrong with gay sex. Gays are made like that. They can’t help it.

It follows from this argument that if a guy in his seventies fancies a 7-year-old girl, or boy, there’s nothing wrong with that, either. Heck, that’s how he’s made! It’s his sexual orientation. And what harm is he doing if the 7-year-old girl (or boy) doesn’t mind being specially nice to him for a little extra pocket money?

Calling him a “dirty old man” is sooo wrong! It shouldn’t be allowed. That’s hate speech, like calling someone a “kike” or “nigger”.

Come to think of it, what’s so wrong if this same guy is into corpses, like Jimmy Savile is reported to have been? Corpses can’t say “No”. So there’s no question about getting cadaveral consent.

Let’s consider necrophilia for a moment. This is not off-topic. It’s highly relevant.

I guess it’s possible to argue that sex with corpses can also be pretty cool and awesome. Like it’s just an alternative lifestyle. I mean, if you happen to be born with a natural sexual orientation for sex with the dead, maybe society should be a bit more tolerant and not start making moral judgments.

Maybe necrophiliacs ought to put in for protected minority status, just like pedophiles and homosexuals…?

I guess one way to settle this vexed question about necrophilia, if it’s right or wrong, is to ask yourself: if YOU were a corpse, how would you like someone to make use of your dead body for sexual purposes? It can easily be argued that most people are not going to mind, for no other reason than this: they’re going to be dead! How can you mind if you’re dead? When you’re dead, what do you care? If you don’t mind being burned to ashes or put six feet under, why should you mind being used as a sex object that gives pleasure to a necrophiliac?

Thus the smooth casuist will be able to argue.

I foresee certain problems of course with legalized necrophilia, but I am sure these can be overcome easily enough with advertizing campaigns on TV assuring the public that sex with corpses is just fine and dandy — just like killing innocent people in Iraq and Afghanistan and Palestine is fine and dandy, if you can con people into thinking these people are very wicked.

I mean, if torture is okay — and torture IS perfectly legal in America and Israel — there’s absolutely no reason why necrophilia (or pedophilia with dead children) shouldn’t be legal too, is there?

I can understand that the relatives of the corpse might get a bit upset. That’s to be expected. Relatives can be like that. Uncooperative. But the responsible necrophiliac is never going to misbehave with  a corpse, is he?  If he’s got any self-respect, he’s going to check it out with the deceased’s relatives first. To ask if they mind. To get their compassionate consent.


“I’m dead and in the cooler
But I wanna come back
As a serial killer
Or a necrophiliac.”
— Anon, Kinky Graffiti


Psychiatrists are now beginning to advocate redefining pedophilia in the same way homosexuality was redefined several years ago.

In 1973 the American Psychiatric Association declassified homosexuality from its list of mental disorders. A group of psychiatrists recently held a symposium proposing a new definition of pedophilia in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Health Disorders of the APA.

They decided that pedophiles were to be called “minor-attracted people” from now on. “Pedophile” was thought to be too harsh a word. It had negative connotations. So a clear attempt is now being made to “prettify” pedophilia and make it not only socially acceptable but a harmless and trendy “alternative lifestyle.”
Just like homosexuality.

The idea is this: if people can be brainwashed into thinking homosexuality is nice and normal, why can’t they be brainwashed into thinking pedophilia is nice and normal too?

In ten years time, it is hoped, the public will be ready for the legalization of pedophilia. In the meantime, they need to be softened up. The stigma attached to pedophilia needs to be removed. Not only this, but the same stigma will need to be subtly transferred to those who oppose pedophilia and feel pedophilia is morally wrong and repugnant. These child protectors will need to be portrayed as desperately out-of-touch cranks, as reactionary crackpots hostile to the child’s right to free sexual expression.

Will a new word of abuse and contempt, like “homophobe” and “anti-Semite”, have to be invented for the nasty people who disapprove of pedophilia? I don’t think so. There’s already a word that will do beautifully:

PEDOPHOBE.

Loosely translated, this means “child hater”. By extension, it  also means “pedophile hater”. The word can be applied to anyone who opposes pedophilia and thinks it is disgusting.

The word “pedophobe”, in other words, will soon be applied as a term of abuse to anyone who opposes pedophilia. If you don’t like pedophila, you will soon find yourself labeled a “pedophobe” — an object of disgust and contempt which will put you into the same category as a “homophobe” or “anti-Semite”.

As far back as 1998,  the APA issued a report claiming that “the negative potential of adult sex with children was ‘overstated’ and that the vast majority of both men and women reported no negative sexual effects from childhood sexual abuse experiences.”

Only earlier this year two psychologists in Canada declared that pedophilia was a sexual orientation just like homosexuality. So there was nothing to worry about. It ought to be accepted.

Mr Van Gijseghem, psychologist and retired professor of the University of Montreal, told members of Parliament, “Pedophiles are not simply people who commit a small offense from time to time but rather are grappling with what is equivalent to a sexual orientation just like another individual may be grappling with homosexuality.”

Dr. Quinsey, professor emeritus of psychology at Queen’s University in Kingston, Ontario, agreed with Van Gijseghem.  Quinsey said that pedophiles have a definite sexual preference for children. “There is no evidence that this sort of preference can be changed through treatment or through anything else,” he said. (See here)

In July, 2010, Harvard Health Publications chipped in and gave pedophilia another boost. “Pedophilia is a sexual orientation and is unlikely to change,” they said. Harvard is now 25 percent Jewish, and the most influential part too, so one can expect a trendy contempt for Christian values to emanate from this ivory tower. Indeed, it was only last week that a sex bondage club, catering for student sadists and masochists, was set up at this august university. (See here and here)

Linda Harvey, of Mission America, said the push for pedophiles to have equal rights will become more and more common as LGBT [Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender] groups continue to assert themselves. “It’s all part of a plan to introduce sex to children at younger and younger ages.” (See here)

It’s only a matter of time before Harvard university and its Ivy League imitators begin to set up student clubs for pedophiles and child porn enthusiasts, provided they can first give the whole enterprise a veneer of academic respectability—which of course they will be able to do, given all that Jewish talent at their disposal.

 
THE SEXUALIZATION OF CHILDREN BY THE JEW-CONTROLLED MEDIA

Children like this are being deliberately groomed for pedophilia. Toxic hormones are being surreptitiously introduced into junk foods, soft drinks, and the water supply so as to produce early puberty and sexual precocity on an epidemic scale.

Milton Diamond, a University of Hawaii professor and director of the Pacific Center for Sex and Society, stated that child pornography could be beneficial to society because, “Potential sex offenders use child pornography as a substitute for sex against children.”

I am not surprised that a man with a name like “Milton Diamond” should put in a good word for child pornography. We know what ethnic group benefits most from the promotion of pornography. And Milton Diamond obviously belongs to this elite group of cultural Marxists who would like to see the entire world take up compulsive masturbation as a hobby.

Dr Diamond is a distinguished lecturer for the Institute for the Advanced Study of Human Sexuality in San Francisco. The same institute lists, on its website, a list of “basic sexual rights” that include “the right to engage in sexual acts or activities of any kind whatsoever, providing they do not involve nonconsensual acts, violence, constraint, coercion or fraud.” Another thing they praise is “the freedom of any sexual thought, fantasy or desire.” The Institute also states, significantly, that “no one should be disadvantaged because of  age.”

Dr Diamond makes it crystal clear what kind of brave new world he would like to see us all living in.  It is reassuring to know that no one will be left behind —  that “no one should be disadvantaged because of age.”

Dr Diamond sees the protection now extended to toddlers as a “disadvantage”. Why are these adorable little creatures, full of life’s promise, being denied the pleasures of sexual intercourse with wise old coots ten times their senior?

Just think what a 7-year-old child could learn from entering into intimate relations with a 70-year-old senior citizen! To deprive the child of the benefits of his superior wisdom is positively cruel! 

Penis size will of course have to be taken into account, and men with exceptionally large penises will obviously have to be disqualified from intercourse with toddlers. Or maybe they can be encouraged to use vaseline and special lubricants which will help to anaesthetize the three sexual orifices likely to be utilized.

In any case, it’s early days. Not to worry. The experts will work it all out. Leave it to the boffins.

Here’s more good news for you if you happen to be a pedophile: Dr Diamond says he would like to legalize child porn so that you can enjoy the innocent pleasure of masturbating over children. Isn’t that kind of him? He thinks this will stop you raping and killing children.

Gosh, why didn’t someone think of this before? For more information on this fascinating topic, click on:
Legalizing Child Pornography reduces child sex abuse crimes (Scientific study by Dr. Milton Diamond, U. Hawaii)

Sex offender laws protecting children have been challenged in several states including California, Georgia and Iowa. Sex offenders claim that the laws prohibiting them from living near schools or parks, for example, are unfair because it penalizes them for life.

 
“Why’s that pedo flashing at me from behind that tree? Hmm, I guess flashing at kids is pretty cool… an awesome alternative lifestyle.”

Let’s face it, friends: perversion is cool. I mean, anything can be perceived as cool — even eating shit. If you’re born a perv, you need respect and understanding from the community. You need special facilities laid on for you so that you can indulge your perversion as a human right.

Child porn is just a stepping stone toward even greater liberties. Child brothels, regulated by the state, will obviously be the next step on the Noble Eightfold Path. Even cannibalism and murder, provided you get the written consent of your victim, ought not to be ruled out.

As they say in New Zion or USreal, every option should be kept on the table.

This is the way the word ends…not with a bang but a whimper…as one pushes beyond the borderlines of the banal in the ultimate quest for mystical union with the divine — or diabolical.

 
 PEDOPHILE VICTIM

Beautiful 6-year-old Jersey Bridgeman, from Arkansas, was found raped and murdered last week a few doors from her mother’s home. She is here seen wearing LIPSTICK. Why has this child been so needlessly sexualized and made to look more like an adult? If her mother hadn’t bought her that lipstick, would she still be alive today? (See here)



Is this little girl “asking” for it?

Is she being groomed for pedophilia?

If you have time to watch this 10-minute video
about the sexualization of young children,

click HERE.


NTS Notes:  I hope that everyone is as disgusted by this as I am.  As a father, I cannot understand how we, as a "civilized" society will ever allow this to happen... But believe it or not, it is happening!

Please take this article, and pass it around to everyone that you know.   We MUST put a halt to this disgusting push for such sickness by these criminals immediately.  Do what you sense is necessary to protect our children from such criminals.

Tell your local government representatives that we will NOT accept such a horrible thing to happen to our children.   Child pornography and pedophilia are abominations on civilization and all of mankind and must be ended immediately.

More to come

NTS


4 comments:

Anonymous said...

First, the fact that somebody opposes pedophilia doesn't make them a pedophobe.

I'm reminded of 2003, when the Supreme gaggle of corporate quack lawyers decided that state laws against sodomy were illegal. Here's how one of my favorite internet writers, Joseph Sobran (RIP), described the decision of these legal dingleberries:

"In the sodomy case, Kennedy and O’Connor proved themselves virtuosos of the non sequitur. They agreed that sodomy laws “discriminate” against homosexuals as a “class” or “group.” Kennedy, ever the metaphysician, added that such laws “demean their existence.”

"But of course the law in question said nothing about classes or groups; it merely forbade specific sexual acts. You might as well say that laws against theft “discriminate” against burglars as a class (or should we say “demean the existence of the larcenous community”?). By Kennedy’s logic, laws forbidding the sodomizing of children discriminate against pedophiles as a class. Where do you draw the line?

"You can’t. Kennedy’s and O’Connor’s style of thinking makes it impossible to draw any lines except arbitrary ones. They are engaged in what might be called jurisprudence sans frontieres. It’s not the rule of law; it’s empty verbal improvisation."

Anonymous said...

The rape and murder of little girls has been going on for generations--to just ordinary little girls from ordinary families. There have been so many really sad stories of this happening just in the USA from 50 years ago to just recently. However, now there has been much more of a trend of young mothers so trying to mimic Hollywood sexually dressing females that they are dressing their little girls the same way as themselves. For females to be sexually provocative seems to have been generally accepted as normal in American society in more recent times-- so much so that it is totally shocking to anyone who has had any kind of teaching about modesty. And that is what all males are now confronted with all the time, everywhere. Self restraint by either sex seems to be a by-gone character trait. And as has been noted that is exactly what the Jewish media/entertainment controllers have intended through the years. Home, church, school generally used to be in one accord about moral/character values. There have always been persons who have been driven by sexual and violent urges, but now that demon has been let loose out of Pandora's box and it is running wild and being constantly fed to keep it thriving. At one time, the person in the pulpit would address this issue with firm condemnation, but not now. Even Christians do not seem to see how awful society has become. Mainly because they have become mind altered to be just like the society they should be disgusted with.

Mind altering is on-going in various ways. I believe there are so many Americans that are not capable of thinking for themselves and don't know it is being done for them. It is so necessary to analyze one's own beliefs and constantly be on guard as to whether one is actually doing one's own thinking. Even as simple as noting whether a spontaneous craving is from self or has been put there from an outside source.

It is so much more necessary for parents to watch over their children all the time. No one can be labeled paranoid any more, because little girls (and little boys) can be at risk any time and anywhere--as has been the case. That has become the reality.

Anonymous said...

Sick MF's

moonyart said...

This just doesn't make sense to compare pedophiles with homossexuals. The difference is clear and you know it: a child can't consent on having sex and we can't let them have sex because they are just kids.
In the moment you want to have sexual acts with a person who cannot consent or disagree, it turns into a rape or something.
I am a transexual activist in my country and the main argument for the religious people is that legalizing same sex marriage is to legalize pedophilia, and we know they are massively wrong.
+ the problem starts with our own media and education (or the lack of) my country, where 13 year old kids learn to be adults really early, because of movies and soap operas.
Sorry for my bad english, I'm from Brazil. Please reply.