Of all the posts DP has put here that is the strangest.
Women have baby,s without men.
Who would wash the dishes mow the lawn provide the food and look after the kids while mum put the make up on?

And people ask why I'm an atheist ? Ok, I guess we can't level blame at the Christian religion per se. Rather it's those who seek to advise, lead and subsequently interpret the gospal for us all, who really should bear the guilt. Don't you think ?

I've not had much to do with those individuals charged with offences pertaining to children, so I can't speak with any real authority.

However, another crime, that I consider ranks right up there with these vile offenders, are those in the Church who conceal, engage in obfuscation of police enquiry, and generally 'blindside' the coppers from doing their job, thus protecting the malefactor. To me, they're a real piece of work.

In the old days, there was a serious offence attached to this type of behaviour. Called a 'misprison of a felony'. So serious in fact, it was said, that a misprison is contained in every treason and felony, and if the Crown so please, the offender may be proceeded against for misprison offence alone.

It's my understanding this stuff has now been repealed altogether, and replaced by other statute(s) ?

Why the Church needs to protect and generally harbour these dreadful people, has me stumped ? Aren't young children entitled to, and in fact, worthy of both respect and protection from clergy ? And aren't these clergy directly under the aegis and discipline of the Church hierarchy ?

I've got to say, nothing and I mean nothing surprises me in this pitifully weak, and wretched (once great) country anymore ?

We've been blessed, with...

(a) An impotent police force;

(b)'Jelly' Judges; and

(c) A new, socially decrepit, and tender hearted, Prisons boss, for NSW.

Sorry, did I hear you ask, do I ever despair ? Hell no, I've just got to teach my grandchildren how to fight, is all. But despair, never !

Cheers...

Yuyutsu>> the act may be abhorrent, but the desire to commit it is not. In fact, those who have the desire but manage to suppress it, willfully (as I believe that most of them do) in order to avoid hurting children, are commendable and deserve every respect.<<

I agree in principal Y.
The compulsion is psychological and as I said treatments don't have a decent strike rate.

The virtue of compassion over desire should be recognized, it is not an easily managed compulsion given libido is the furnace that needs to be stoked.

But overwhelmingly paedophiles are recidivists and because of this are constant predators of our children, the ones too young to protect themselves and too naive to accuse an adult after they have been groomed.

Very emotive subject, the preying on the defenseless and my view is that we were born with free will so regardless of the desire it is a willful choice.

I would class paedophiles I the same category as sociopaths for one single reason, they are exclusively interested in themselves. All others they interact with are meaningless interpersonally to them unless they can be used to satiate their sexual needs.

So even though I agree in principal Y this line concerns me:

" In centuries ahead, the attitude of 21st-century society toward paedophiles will be remembered alongside the 15th-century society's attitude toward witches."

Is it to be kindergarten sex in yor minds brave new world sport?

DiamondPete I'm finding the seeming contrast between your views on thought crimes here and the views you express on the thread about Julia and the Carbon tax Lie/Broken Promise interesting.

Care to elaborate on that.

I can see why you might take Houellebecq comment as an insult but maybe time to step back a bit.

- You admit to having looked for child porn on the internet (an experiment I won't be replicating).
- You express the view that a sexual interest in young children is very normal.

You then seem to suggest that thought crimes should be illegal.

By that argument and based on your other admissions you should be on the way to the nearest police station to hand yourself in. No one can prove for sure your motives when you went looking for child porn but the act of looking for it combined with the other view would seem to put you in a difficult position.

I do wonder what happens if the police come across your search records. Is it a crime to look even if you don't find? If you go searching for a hitman leaving a record of doing so but don't find one
then I suspect that you can still do time for it.

As to the earlier point "So let's not moralize too much, and "pretend" that most men don't have pedophilia inclinations."
I wonder how many men have readily embraced sex with pre-pubescent children when it's been culturally accepted. I can understand a degree of socialisation about it, I can accept that some actively want it, that for some any hole will do (eg the rates of "hetrosexuals" in prison who engage in what the rest of us consider homosexual acts). I can accept that sometimes people in war situations have been so brutalised and deprived of intimacy for so long that any substitute will do.

I still don't think it follows that all else being equal most adult men will find young kids sexually appealing if the legal restraints are lifted.

R0bert

'By that argument and based on your other admissions you should be on the way to the nearest police station to hand yourself in. No one can prove for sure your motives when you went looking for child porn but the act of looking for it combined with the other view would seem to put you in a difficult position.'

'difficult position' . Lmao! Wonderful dry understatement.

That's made my night.

Houellebecq, I'm trying to tread carefully in the hope that what I say is the focus rather than an assumed insult. Don't know how that will go, it often does not work but you've seen enough of my posts to know I can't help myself ;) I have to try.

R0bert