This is Disgusting

Philosophy Forums Society, Government, and Economics
1

Should the PNVD be allowed to exist?

  • No
  • Yes
  • I don’t care.
0 voters

news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060717/wl_ … hiles_dc_1

Dutch court rejects ban of pedophile party

By Emma Thomasson

AMSTERDAM (Reuters) - A Dutch court said on Monday a political party formed by pedophiles could not be banned as it had the same right to exist as any other party and was protected by democratic freedoms.

The Brotherly Love, Freedom and Diversity party (PNVD) was launched in May and campaigns for a cut in the age of consent from 16 to 12 and the legalisation of child pornography and sex with animals, provoking widespread outrage in the Netherlands.

The Solace group that campaigns against pedophiles sought a ban as it said the party infringed the rights of children and its ideas were a threat to social norms and values in a democratic state. But a court in
The Hague rejected the bid.

“The freedom of expression, the freedom of assembly and the freedom of association … should be seen as the foundations of the democratic rule of law and the PNVD is also entitled to these freedoms,” the court said in a statement.

The court said these freedoms were not unlimited, but limits to them could only apply to activities that undermined public order and judges could not take lightly a decision to ban a political party.

“It is up to the voter to give a judgment on the arguments of political parties,” Judge H. Hofhuis told the court. It is not Dutch practice to publish the first names of judges.

No Kidding, a group campaigning for children’s rights, said the right to freedom of expression was not absolute and called on the Dutch government to act against the PNVD.

“Dutch citizens must make their voices heard if we do not want to sacrifice our children to pedophile interests,” it said in a statement, adding it planned to petition parliament.

The PNVD says it wants to lift the taboo on pedophilia which it said had intensified since the 1996 Marc Dutroux child abuse scandal in neighboring Belgium.

“We expected to win. We are not doing anything criminal so why should you ban the PNVD?” the party’s chairman, Marthijn Uittenbogaard, was quoted as saying by Dutch news agency ANP.

The Netherlands, which already has liberal policies on soft drugs, prostitution and gay marriage, has been shocked by the new party. An opinion poll showed that 82 percent want the government to do something to stop the party.

The party wants to allow possession of child pornography and supports broadcasting pornography on daytime television, with only violent pornography limited to the late evening. It also wants youths aged 16 and up to be allowed to appear in pornographic films and prostitute themselves.

Partij voor Naastenliefde, Vrijheid & Diversiteit=The Party for Brotherly/Neighborly Love, Freedom and Diversity.

The PNVD ultimately aims to establish a universal treaty guaranteeing all animals basic rights.

[quote]
In addition, the party plans to heavily restrict animal testing and completely prohibit the consumption of meat and fish: they view the killing of animals for such purposes as murder. Industries currently depending on the sale of animal meat would receive provisional financial support from the government. Hunting and fishing for sport would also be banned.
[/quote]
And yet they want to be able to sex animals up.  Isn't that rape? How can you be sure that the animal has given consent.
[quote]
The PNVD seeks to have the legal age-of-consent lowered to 12, and, in the long run, completely eliminated. (Except in dependent or intrafamilial relationships.) They reason that only "coerced" or "dangerous" sexual activity should be punished. They also aim to equalize the legal age where one can perform in pornography with the legal age-of-consent. Prostitution would be legal at the age of 16. 

The PNVD also wants to legalize private use of child pornography and allow non-violent pornography to be screened on daytime television. They are against laws that would explicitly outlaw sexual contact between animals and humans (which is not illegal in the Netherlands now), and support laws criminalizing the "sexual maltreatment" of animals.
[/quote]


[en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PNVD](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PNVD)

Maybe I'm just not "open-minded enough" but this truly is disgusting.  Should they be allowed to exist in the Dutch political realm?  How would your views change if you lived in the Netherlands and had kids?
2

Hello F(r)iends,

In a couple of decades, people will be discussing the lack of understanding and compassion of the U.S. for these people who are born with an attraction to animals or young children.

How long will the U.S. holdout and discriminate against Pedophiles?

-Thirst

3

only as long as we value children… but hell, they are nothing but missed chances for abortions anyway… aclu for nambla…

save a child, abort a democRAT

-Imp

4

I can only hope that you’re just saying that to make a point and that you don’t actually believe that bullshit.

5

Let us hope that there also remains some understanding for those with the equally innate and intransigent need to disembowel these poisonous pieces of shit.

6

see here is where i personally run into some internal conflict.

while i may disagree with there actions and beliefs i do not disagree with there right to form a political party.

And if they are engaging in acts that arnt deemed '“social acceptable or coformed to the normal standards of society” then they will not receive tremendous support. Thusly their proposed bills have a relativly low chance of being passed. Why shouldnt they have the right to form a political party.

But we should not be about to undermine the entire idealolgy of rights just becasue we disagree with there practices.

Now im not saying that i agree with them. And just between you and me i think sex with animals is mildly fucked up. (so are their view on animals) I am interested o nthe law regarding that by the way.

…then again…i am a proud member of NAMBLA :smiley:

7

Hello F(r)iends,

Disgruntled, no, that was no joke.

Tabula, people who have no compassion for these pedophiles will be called racists, warmongers, neo-neo-conservatives, they will be called cavemen full of hatred and bile, they will be called pseudo-religious propagators of prejudice and discrimination, they will be associated with the KKK, they will be compared to Hitler, they will be mocked for their lack of moral sensitivity, they will be deemed sheeple who only want to kill and murder out of fear and ignorance…

No, compassion my dear Tabster, is for people who can’t help being born that way…
Clearly man is not born a killer! :unamused:

-Thirst

Edit: Spelling Error

8

This is where it always begins on the part of the normal, live-and-let-live, “been around a bit” man on the street - a nervous laugh and the jokey trivialization of something repugnant. (Hah-Hah - it’s a joke - they can’t possibly mean it.)

But they do you see. They Do mean it.

Then step two - a scramble in the opposite direction of gut instinct (which is violent, animalistic - and therefore to the current credo of mankind… Wrong.) A bending over backward to be seen as… Fair.

Imagine I approach you on the street, you are walking with your 12, 11 year old daughter. I stop and tousel your kids’ hair.

“What a beautiful child.” I say.
“Thanks.” You say.
“You must be very proud.”
“Oh yes, she’s a treasure.”
“I’d sure like to put my cock in her mouth.”

Would you calmly reply: “While I cannot condone your lifestyle, I realize you have the inalienable right of free speech.”…?

9

i see what you’re saying…you do have to let it set iN

is nambla even real?

and two

"

whens is that ever acceptable tabula lol

but seriously,

just becasue they are asking for something that we are unwilling (and i’d say personally righly so) doesnt meant that we should not allow them to form a politcal party. and secondly with you’re example it is important to remeber that what there asking is still illegal. Now im not saying all legal thigns are moral and all illegal things are immoral. But there is nothing wrong with trying to peacefully change the “system”.

now im not justifying child pornography or sex with animals, im just saying let them have their party.

p.s i also understand that a. im rambling and b. their ideals on child pornography also contains many contradictions involving other laws regarding the age of consent.

10

Tab & Thirst, together again in the same thread! =D> Giants truly stride ILP again! :D/

11

I know, it’s good to see.

Let the Pedos have their party - banning them would only give cult credence to their views. In the natural course of events, Tab is right - they’ll probably end up killed in a gruesome fashion.

Nonetheless, the ‘free trains for smackheads’ policy got me briefly interested - at least they aren’t solely about promoting child/animal sex…

12

Here in the states I can’t recall which state exactly , there is a bill being pushed through to not allow sex offenders to live in that state. Has anyone heard of it? To me it sound like such a broad bill that no way it could survive.

I say do not ban any group, allow them to gather together allow them to speak. No matter how disgusting their beliefs are. It is their rights by any civil law as long as it is peaceful and legal.

besides: it is simply a smart strategy to do.

13

question: is it wise to allow groups who wish nothing but the harm of others to gather, communicate, flouish, scheme and plan their attacks?

would we tolerate terrorists gathering and coordinating their attacks and allowing them the means to actually carry them to fruition?

why then do we allow those who would terrorize children to gather and arm themselves?

oh the child molestors aren’t terrorists… great. your child first.

-Imp

14

This is kind of a thorny issue. In America, we actually do allow such groups to exist. Sort of - and here I agree with Kris.

Groups like neonazis - they are not banned as a party, but the feds tend to go after them for whatever they can get them on - these groups tend to commit crimes. It has occured to me that allowing this group of pedophiles to exists keeps them “visible” - and it is difficult to believe that they are not breaking current law. But I doubt that this is the reasoning of this court.

I think this court is saying “make some laws” - that the legislature can and should do something.

I wholly reject Thirst’s argument, however, as it is based on a Christian notion - a notion about the character and essence of these people. Who cares what “they are really and sincerely” like? Man is born a killer, by the way. But it is not for society to accomodate mass murderers just because mass murderers can’t help themselves. We can feel all the compassion we want for them as they are being executed, or jailed for life. Compassion is just a feeling. Death is not just a feeling.

I also see your point. Imp. Maybe it is, and maybe it isn’t. Wise, I mean. I think it depends upon the group. Communists in this country have always been ineffective as a party. But they have had influence on sociology and the Left. That is, indeed, influence. But they are not known for having sex with kids. Some things are so harmful and so immediately so that the rules can be excepted.

15

To allow it a party is to allow it a voice. To allow it a voice is to put one foot on the path to acclimatization. There is no case for paedophillia. There is no mitigation for being a paedophile.

If thine eye offend thee, pluck it out.

How does the ‘Pity me, I was born the way I am’ defence go…? As far as I can remember -

  1. When you act, you do what you do because of the way you are.
  2. You cannot be responsible for the way you are.
  3. You cannot be responsible for what you do.

But of course - this is bullshit. It assumes a single instance of ‘choice’, and that what we are is set in stone.

Say I was born with a deformity of face or form - a canker, a hunch, a cleft palate… Perhaps something less visible - a stutter, a lisp, dislexia.

Say there is elective surgery available to ‘correct’ my congenital ‘wrong’. Therapy to normalize my whimsical tripping of tongue. Would I not choose to take it…? Why should I not…? I have been bestowed with a form that rests uncomfortably with the perfection of the ‘inner’ me. The fleshy outer avatar does not do justice to the shining form within.

My deformity offends me - so by proxy of another’s knife I carve it out.

By choice. I change the way I am, better to become what I would be.

And what then, is a genetic prediliction for sexual congress with a child but a deformity. Would you wish it upon yourself…? Wish it for your child…?

Of course not - if it could be caught like a virus you would fall over yourself in your haste to find a cure.

And yet these paedophiles - self acknowledged paedophiles do not seek to ‘right’ this genetic wrong that has been done to them. They choose not to.

Choose.

Instead they seek the means to persue their deformity of spirit. They are monsters all the more montrous because they choose to be monsters. And as such - deserve no pity.

16

Just wait, soon liberal will be calling me a Pedophobe, to which I will respond that I have no fear of feet whatsoever! :smiley:

17

exactly

I would calmly put my .45 upside your head and give you an impromptu lobotomy

-Imp

18

Ha! I’m starting to like you :sunglasses:

19

Worlds of difference between what those capable of understanding do to each other as opposed to what those capable of understanding do to those who cannot.

I don’t really see how there is any debate here.

Oh, wait. That’s right. There is because the right wants to try children as adults. If you ask me, that’d be the best vehicle for getting pedophila legalized. “See, the children can make informed decisions.”

20

guess again. it is the left wing extremist fuckwads in the aclu who advocate for child molestors. democRATS for child RAPE.

there is a huge difference between the autonomous actions of a child (for which they may be held responsible) and the actions of an adult rapist and a child.

but your hatred for the “evil” right blinds you to that difference

-Imp