I have tried to find some evidence of the lowering age of consent too, but the only information I found was that Bob Brown pushes for equalising the ages of consent for heterosexual and homosexual sexual acts.

There is nothing wrong with removing discrimination, is there?

Celivia, who were you addressing the question at?

"There is nothing wrong with removing discrimination, is there? "

If it was who I think it was I think his post history would suggest that he might have major issues with removing discrimination. This is the guy who wants to be able to stop homosexuals from moving in next door.

He's also someone who wrote the following

"Its as plain as dogs balls on a grasshopper that a man over 50 with existing wives and who marries again to a 9 or 15 or 18 yrs old, is going to be more sexually interested in HER than in the 'old wrinklies'." http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=109#2085

I've got a nine year old son and have seen the girls in his class. While I've not quite made the 50 mark I can't see that those few years are going to alter my taste enough to give girls that young any sexual appeal let alone a hands down victory over a woman my own age. If anything the lower age of appeal is rising as I get older.

And he calls Bob Brown deviant - go figure.

R0bert

Well it's good to see some sensible posts in the thread. However, I think my point about Boaz's egregious discursive tactics in this forum has been reinforced.

Together with the bigoted opinions he posts here concerning everything from sexuality to immigration, he regularly posts bald-faced lies - as in this case. It's interesting to compare the content of his rants with those of his loopy theological cousins in the Exclusive Brethren: much of the crap that he posts here seems to be congruent with their shameful and mendacious propaganda.

Boaz is, of course, a member of the 'Open Brethren'. As far as I can tell the only factors that distinguish his modus operandi from theirs is that he's allowed to use a computer and vote in elections.

Perhaps it's the case that the Open Brethren are equivalent to the military wing of the EB - sort of like the relationship between the former IRA and Sinn Fein?

RObert, yes I was addressing BD with my question.

Thanks for your view on BD- I am still getting to know him-this speeds things up a little ;)

I suppose my question will not be answered by him in the way I expect it to be answered.
Still, I'd like to hear his answer- it might be amusing.

Euwwww BD, why would you glorify a crime like pedophilia? I thought you were big on ethics and morals.

C.J.Morgan
"Boaz is, of course, a member of the 'Open Brethren'. As far as I can tell the only factors that distinguish his modus operandi from theirs is that he's allowed to use a computer and vote in elections."
Oh funny! :+)That would explain a lot about BD's views!

I'll do some research on the "Open Brethern" as I have done on the "Exclusive Brethren" ;I find it extremely interesting to learn about such weirdo's- hard to believe that such sects even exist in 2007 AND get support from the government! I sometimes wonder how much the government is influenced by their medieval views.

Seriously, BD, are you a Brethren member?

Celivia, just in case there is any confusion on the issue I don't have the impression that BD acts on or supports those who do act on an interest in nine year old girls. I think he is fairly strongly against those who commit pedophile acts. My concern on that issue is that he seems to think that a sexual interest in them is natural and normal. At one point he even uses a biblical example to justify the view.

As for the open brethern I've not had any recent contact with them but was involved with them years ago. They came in a range of flavours (mostly fairly staid) but at the same time most were fairly decent people trying to live their lives by their understanding of the bibles teachings. Less inclined than other groups to shift church practice or theology because of social trends. The congregations that were dominated by older people tended to get somewhat extreme in silly ways internally (concern about how people dressed during services etc) but not generally given to violence. Not generally technophobes. It's possible that there has been some kind of widespread shift or that a couple of congregations have gone very extreme but generally I'd be more concerned about the charismatic mob than open brethren. Open Brethern tended to think the exclusives were fruitcakes.

R0bert

Dear C.J.
sorry for not noticing your rather malicious diatribe there.

Points in order.

Brown on

1/ XXX Porn available from ACT. I cannot provide a link to a Media interview which was a real time video thing . If you doubt my claim, ask him how he feels about "Stopping the mail order availability of XXX Porn (non violent erotica) to the rest of Australia" and by all means get back to me.

http://nsw.greens.org.au/policies/policies.php?subaction=showfull&id=1162582728&archive=&start_from=&ucat=1&

PORNOGRAPHY
18. The Greens NSW oppose the production, performance, and display of pornographic material where it discriminates against women and children by presenting them as suitable objects for violence or sexual exploitation, and valorising forms of power and pleasure achieved by disempowering and injuring women and children.

NOTE..."Only where it discriminates" so.. 'equality in porn' is quite acceptable, therefore, by clear implication, porn which satisfies this criteria would be quite acceptable. In fact, it gets worse, the clear meaning of those words is 'If a CHILD is portrayed in a non victimized or non objectified manner, then it is ok to portray them in porn.' This is basically NAMBLA's position

"These consensual experiences can be quite positive and beneficial for the participants, regardless of their ages."(Nambla)

AVAILABILITY OF DRUGS.
2/ http://www.nsw.greens.org.au/policies/Drugs.php
3.1.4 to regulate and remove corruption in the supply and distribution of all drugs
2.7 Prohibition. The Greens NSW recognise that the current policy of prohibition is a resounding failure:
COMMENT (the opposite of prohibition is..... availablity)

AGE OF CONSENT
http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2004/s1213412.htm
ALISON CALDWELL: You're recommending lowering the age of consent for homosexuals. Why?

BOB BROWN: That was support for NSW Government legislation which simply made the age of consent for adults of both sexes the same. That's usual law now right around the world. It's simply removing a discrimination against homosexuals.

C.J. would you like to withdraw your LIAR comment now ?