Pedophilia Deserves Civil Rights, Says New York Times’ Op-ed

[SmedlyButler]

Just how FUCKED UP MENTALLY, can Liberals get...read about it in the N.Y. SLIMES!!!

Daily Caller ^

The nation’s tough anti-pedophilia laws are unfair to pedophiles, according to an op-ed published by The New York Times’ editors. “One can live with pedophilia and not act on it,” says Margo Kaplan, an entrepreneurial assistant law professor at Rutgers University, and a former lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union. Tragically, the roughly 1 percent of “people who are sexually attracted to children] must hide their disorder from everyone they know — or risk losing educational and job opportunities, and face the prospect of harassment and even violence,” she wrote.....

A story like this perfectly illustrates why the liberal brand is a hard sell. If she was advocating rights for people with just about any other mental disorder every liberal in the crowd and probably most conservatives would be in complete agreement. But pedophilia? That's way out there in taboo land. Providing a safe and nurturing environment for children is arguably the most important function of a society, providing the same for pedophiles (even "inactive" ones) is so far down the list it's invisible from where I sit. But hey, somebodies going to go there and I imagine, even though she didn't say "Everybody! I'm a liberal and this is what I think", I imagine she is a liberal. When it comes to rights it always seems to be one of us out there on that limb. (Except when it comes to walking around in a Burgher King armed with assault weapons of course, in that situation we advocate for the other diner's right to munch and not worry about the safety of their kids.)

So unfortunately liberals have to take the good with the bad and accept that every once in a while the brand is going to take a hit like this. It's why the number of people who self-identify as liberal always lags behind moderate and conservative.

According to Gallup;

Even the majority of Democrats are reluctant to self-identify as liberal;

Of course it's not as bleak for we liberals and we're not nearly as few in numbers as those graphs indicate. Study after study shows that “symbolic conservatives often are operational liberals.” This study here found;

"Results were consistent across the board: Participants rated themselves as more conservative than their positions on the issues would indicate.
In the first group, “liberal Democrats significantly overestimated their liberalism,” the researchers report. “However, moderate Democrats, Independents, and Republicans significantly underestimated their liberalism.”
These findings line up nicely with previous political science research, including a working paper we wrote about in 2011. It found that although about 40 percent of Americans identify themselves as conservatives (with 35 percent calling themselves moderates and 21 percent liberals, according to a 2012 Gallup survey), only about one-quarter of them are truly conservative on the issues."

So I don't think the OP will get many reply's from the board's resident liberal's supporting this ladies opinion, (not even from a dyed-in-the-wool liberal like myself) other than support for her right to have that opinion and advocate for that leprous group. It's her right to make herself a social pariah if she has the balls.

To end on a brighter note for liberals, if we look at ideological self-identification party wise things are looking fine for our side of the field.

Gallup, again.

And some of you who claim to be travelling the conservative path should check the sign post again, you may be travelling in the proper direction after all.

 

[Rikurzhen]

So I don't think the OP will get many reply's from the board's resident liberal's supporting this ladies opinion, (not even from a dyed-in-the-wool liberal like myself) other than support for her right to have that opinion and advocate for that leprous group. It's her right to make herself a social pariah if she has the balls.

As a conservative I'll step forward and defend most of what that professor has written. I have no problem with this:

Acknowledging that pedophiles have a mental disorder, and removing the obstacles to their coming forward and seeking help, is not only the right thing to do, but it would also advance efforts to protect children from harm.​

 

[AVG-JOE]

Because liberals never stop. They're like sharks and need to keep swimming. Liberals are on a perpetual mission of destroying society, it's just who they are and how they're wired.

You make it sound like 55% of the nation is certifiably psychopathic.

You do know that lines like "Liberals are on a perpetual mission of destroying society" are generalizations that simply aren't true, eh?

Just 'cause reactionary extremists like Rush and Hannity say things over and over on t.v. doesn't make them true.

 

[flacaltenn]

Making excuses for that article doesn't fly. If the author was simply proposing that POTENTIAL pedophiles need access to treatment -- then the Title of the article should have been Pedophiles Deserve Access to Treatment. Not civil rights or immunity from the law..

Here's the title of the Op-Ed: "Pedophilia: A Disorder, Not a Crime." It's accurate, pedophilia is not a crime.

There are plenty of associated child abuse syndromes that PROCEED an actual act of pedophilia. Like the stereotyped guy in a trench coat flashing his junk.. All of THOSE practices are not pedophilia -- but are ALSO ILLEGAL. So before kids get "raped" as one poster puts it, these clowns have already done damage..

I'd rather see these people going to a physician or therapist and trying to address their issues rather than staying silent for fear of discovery. Do you favor them staying silent and hidden?

Secondly, to the bolded below, I would find it very helpful to society and to our understanding of the world if studies were better constructed and that means not restricting the sample population to those already in prison. All those studies tell us is what convicted child abusers do and think, nothing about those who live with the condition and are invisible to the law.

While treatment cannot eliminate a pedophile’s sexual interests, a combination of cognitive-behavioral therapy and medication can help him to manage urges and avoid committing crimes.

But the reason we don’t know enough about effective treatment is because research has usually been limited to those who have committed crimes.​

You shouldn't be asking me those questions because I have ZERO FAITH in the bulk of the Psych Industry. Don't like their pseudoscience, don't like them living under the excuse of Doctor/patient privilege. Because I don't believe that THEY should be solely judging risks to society. AND -- I don't think they should be dosing pedophiles with their "medications" WITHOUT law enforcement liasion..

IMO --- threats such as these, should be treated and tracked by a combo of medical and legal agencies. And when and if they are FIXED (sure - that will happen) all records of their "illness" should be purged from public record so that they are free as birds...

 

[Delta4Embassy]

As we often see in the US, we focus more of our attentions on symptoms than causes. As with legislation or treatment for pedophiles instead of what causes pedophilia. I hope we can change that methodology eventually and work more on prevention than treatment.

 

[flacaltenn]

So I don't think the OP will get many reply's from the board's resident liberal's supporting this ladies opinion, (not even from a dyed-in-the-wool liberal like myself) other than support for her right to have that opinion and advocate for that leprous group. It's her right to make herself a social pariah if she has the balls.

As a conservative I'll step forward and defend most of what that professor has written. I have no problem with this:

Acknowledging that pedophiles have a mental disorder, and removing the obstacles to their coming forward and seeking help, is not only the right thing to do, but it would also advance efforts to protect children from harm.​

What "impediments" are you imagining? I see none..

 

[Kondor3]

You know what's "fair" for pedophiles? A noose!

Can we bring back drawing and quartering in the public square, just for child abusers? The town can sell tickets.

 

[novasteve]

Liberal degenerates need their brains kicked out.

 

[novasteve]

As we often see in the US, we focus more of our attentions on symptoms than causes. As with legislation or treatment for pedophiles instead of what causes pedophilia. I hope we can change that methodology eventually and work more on prevention than treatment.

We don't need to understand degenerate child abusers, we need to put them down.

 

[flacaltenn]

From the OP article quoted..

Kaplan says civil rights law should be changed so that pedophiles are only stigmatized or denied jobs if law school graduates agree that they pose a “direct threat” to children.

Like I said.. Dont trust the pill-pushers to do this by themselves. And I certainly don't trust lawyers to do this. WHO DECIDES who is a threat should be some kind of new hybrid board. Much like the make-up of a parole board with adequate psych/legal/expert representation. Somebody we can sue or fire when the wrong decisions are made.

 

[Rikurzhen]

You shouldn't be asking me those questions because I have ZERO FAITH in the bulk of the Psych Industry. Don't like their pseudoscience, don't like them living under the excuse of Doctor/patient privilege. Because I don't believe that THEY should be solely judging risks to society. AND -- I don't think they should be dosing pedophiles with their "medications" WITHOUT law enforcement liasion..

IMO --- threats such as these, should be treated and tracked by a combo of medical and legal agencies. And when and if they are FIXED (sure - that will happen) all records of their "illness" should be purged from public record so that they are free as birds...

You remember Rumsfeld talking about known unknowns and the like, well that applies here. All we know now are the convicted child molesters who have been caught. That's it. We can add to this group the known unknowns, the child molesters who have not been caught, then the unknown knowns, the pedophiles who don't molest children. We have no clue about those who are attracted to children but don't act on their impulses. Can they be attracted to adult women and sex with adult women while still having a fixation on children? We don't know. Do they express their sexuality only in the form of fantasy and find contentment? We don't know. How large of a group are the pedophiles who control themselves versus the pedophiles who can't control themselves and so become child molesters? We don't know that either. How learnable are the behavior controls that pedophiles who don't act and can they be used on pedophiles who are child molesters? We don't know that either.

We don't know about a lot because it's an act of idiocy for a pedophile who recognizes his attractions and also recognizes the immorality of acting on the impulses to come forward and seek talk-therapy to unburden himself. As the op-ed makes clear, he's given no civil rights protections afforded to other mentally ill people. He can be fired from his job due to his status unlike a depressed or anxious person.

As I stated upthread, I disagree with anti-discrimination law, I think people should be free to choose their own associations for any reason, but so long as we have to have these anti-freedom laws I think they should be applied fairly and uniformly.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Marriage Minimum Ages (Males Females where ages differ):

Sudan Puberty With requirement for willing consent of both parties.[35]

Brunei None [42]

Saudi Arabia None

Yemen None In practice, "Yemeni law allows girls of any age to wed, but it forbids sex with them until the indefinite time they are 'suitable for sexual intercourse'."[76] Following the widely publicised divorce of a 10 year-old girl in 2008, and a 6 year old married, there have been public and parliamentary efforts to raise the age to 17 or 18.[77][78][79]

Bolivia 16 14

Colombia 14 If married under 18 and without parents' consent, the minor can lose from half to all their inheritance rights. However, the marriage will still be valid.[citation needed]

Paraguay 16 14 Article 39, clause "b", of the Paraguayan Civil Code reads: “The legal incapacity of minors will cease: ...(b) for gentlemen of 16 and for women of 14 years completed, through marriage, with the limitations established in this Code”.

Catholic Church 16 14 Diriment impediment (can. 1083 § 1).[112] Conferences of Bishops can adopt a higher age for liceity[113] (§ 2). Marriage against the worldly power's directive need permission by the ordinary for liceity (can. 1071 § 1 no. 2), which in case of sensible and equal laws regarding marriage age is regularly not granted. The permission by the ordinary is also required in case of a marriage of a minor child (i.e. under 18 years old) when his parents are unaware of his marriage or if his parents reasonably oppose his marriage (can. 1071 § 1 no. 6).

Marriageable age - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia


Shows the double-standard in play where 'minor' sexuality is at issue. For many places, if you're married everything's "fine." If not, suddenly that's wrong, immoral, sinful, or illegal.

Here in Missouri you can marry at 15 (with parental consent,) but to have sex absent marriage you must be 17. And there's a provision for allowing even younger ages to marry if with a judge's permission.

How often does the media cover a sex crime involving a 15-17 year old minor while some states allow 15 year-olds to marry (and then have sex legally with their any aged spouse?)

Problem isn't just pedophila.

 

[Rikurzhen]

From the OP article quoted..

Kaplan says civil rights law should be changed so that pedophiles are only stigmatized or denied jobs if law school graduates agree that they pose a “direct threat” to children.

Like I said.. Dont trust the pill-pushers to do this by themselves. And I certainly don't trust lawyers to do this. WHO DECIDES who is a threat should be some kind of new hybrid board. Much like the make-up of a parole board with adequate psych/legal/expert representation. Somebody we can sue or fire when the wrong decisions are made.

So that we don't talk past each other, can we agree that a child abuser is a person who has abused a child and that one can be a pedophile, attracted to children, without also being a child abuser?

Now read the quote in your comment. It applies to non child abusers, not child abuser.

Also, why not go right to the source of the Op-Ed instead of relying on the Daily Caller to analyze it for us. Here's the Op-Ed.

 

[flacaltenn]

As we often see in the US, we focus more of our attentions on symptoms than causes. As with legislation or treatment for pedophiles instead of what causes pedophilia. I hope we can change that methodology eventually and work more on prevention than treatment.

We don't need to understand degenerate child abusers, we need to put them down.

Be careful with that wish. In our mismanaged society, the definition of child abuse could be allowing kids to drink a Coke. There ARE some folks who think THAT should be a capitol crime already.. Same folks who believe that an employer ought to be LEGALLY REQUIRED to hire an openly declared child abuser..

 

[DriftingSand]

You know what's "fair" for pedophiles? A noose!

Can we bring back drawing and quartering in the public square, just for child abusers? The town can sell tickets.

A noose is cleaner, quicker, cheaper, and more humane while performing an important function.

 

[Rikurzhen]

Because liberals never stop. They're like sharks and need to keep swimming. Liberals are on a perpetual mission of destroying society, it's just who they are and how they're wired.

You make it sound like 55% of the nation is certifiably psychopathic.

You do know that lines like "Liberals are on a perpetual mission of destroying society" are generalizations that simply aren't true, eh?

Just 'cause reactionary extremists like Rush and Hannity say things over and over on t.v. doesn't make them true.

More like 20% or so.

 

[DriftingSand]

As we often see in the US, we focus more of our attentions on symptoms than causes. As with legislation or treatment for pedophiles instead of what causes pedophilia. I hope we can change that methodology eventually and work more on prevention than treatment.

We don't need to understand degenerate child abusers, we need to put them down.

Be careful with that wish. In our mismanaged society, the definition of child abuse could be allowing kids to drink a Coke. There ARE some folks who think THAT should be a capitol crime already.. Same folks who believe that an employer ought to be LEGALLY REQUIRED to hire an openly declared child abuser..

True. And the uber-Liberals believe that a swat on the butt is "abuse" as well.

 

[Kondor3]

You know what's "fair" for pedophiles? A noose!

Can we bring back drawing and quartering in the public square, just for child abusers? The town can sell tickets.

A noose is cleaner, quicker, cheaper, and more humane while performing an important function.

That makes the assumption that sexual child abusers deserve humane treatment...

 

[Rikurzhen]

As we often see in the US, we focus more of our attentions on symptoms than causes. As with legislation or treatment for pedophiles instead of what causes pedophilia. I hope we can change that methodology eventually and work more on prevention than treatment.

We don't need to understand degenerate child abusers, we need to put them down.

Be careful with that wish. In our mismanaged society, the definition of child abuse could be allowing kids to drink a Coke. There ARE some folks who think THAT should be a capitol crime already.. Same folks who believe that an employer ought to be LEGALLY REQUIRED to hire an openly declared child abuser..

I like that strategy because it might be enough to break the camel's back and bring down all the civil rights legislation. If I don't want to hire a homosexual or a Muslim and am required to by law, then why shouldn't other people have to hire pedophiles? Why does their personal preferences take precedence over my personal preference? If they object to forced hiring, then strip it from all groups and let everyone exercise their human right to free association.

 

[Rikurzhen]

You know what's "fair" for pedophiles? A noose!

Can we bring back drawing and quartering in the public square, just for child abusers? The town can sell tickets.

A noose is cleaner, quicker, cheaper, and more humane while performing an important function.

That makes the assumption that sexual child abusers deserve humane treatment...

Who do you think constitutes the majority of customers of underage prostitutes? It's married men.