PDA

View Full Version : Unbelievable Dutch liberalism!!!


angelika
03-10-06, 09:02
Dutch will allow paedophile group

A Dutch court has turned down a request to ban a political party with a paedophile agenda.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/5187010.stm





if posted before -just close

Satu
03-10-06, 09:34
That is unbelievable, what is this sick ****:mad:

They want to break the negative stigma about surrounding paedophilia by getting into parliament, so what is positive about this deplorable act.:mad:

And the bloody judge needs to be locked up for even condoning this.:mad:

VonCroy360
03-10-06, 09:38
Kill me right away, but if both the adult and the child in the relationship agree to the relationship and love eachother, I see no reason why it shouldn't be allowed.

angelika
03-10-06, 09:44
No child or under 18 person has the ability to make such decision by law.

Satu
03-10-06, 09:49
Kill me right away, but if both the adult and the child in the relationship agree to the relationship and love eachother, I see no reason why it shouldn't be allowed.

Maybe I am reading this wrong but what is so right about a 40 plus man/woman with a 12 year old. I know I am generalising here but the laws for paedophilia are there to protect kids. What does a kid know about love?

Rivendell
03-10-06, 09:50
:eek: Holy Hell, that's too much!

VonCroy360
03-10-06, 09:52
No child or under 18 person has the ability to make such decision by law.

Well, now in Netherlands they do.

Maybe I am reading this wrong but what is so right about a 40 plus man/woman with a 12 year old. I know I am generalising here but the laws for paedophilia are there to protect kids. What does a kid know about love?

I suppose you can say the 7-year-old can't make that kind of desicion, but a 16 or 17-year-olds are old enough to think as adults and if they love somebody (who is maybe just 2 years older) I think it should be allowed.
Just my opinion, sorry if it offends anyone.

Satu
03-10-06, 10:08
[quote]Well, now in Netherlands they do.

I am not familiar with the laws in the Netherlans, but where I come from the legal age is 18.

I suppose you can say the 7-year-old can't make that kind of desicion, but a 16 or 17-year-olds are old enough to think as adults and if they love somebody (who is maybe just 2 years older) I think it should be allowed.Just my opinion, sorry if it offends anyone.


This article is talking about lowerwing the age of sexual consent from 16 to 12 and legalise child pornography and sex with animals, not 16-17 year olds loving a 18 year old. Paedophile's are predators only out for the own sick gratification. If it was ok there would not be a stigma with these people.

I understand this is your opinion so let us agree to disagree.

angelika
03-10-06, 10:12
Times like these make me think that too much democracy is harmfull nowdays :cln:

VonCroy360
03-10-06, 10:18
I always believed and I will that if someone wants to do something, let him do it (if it does no harm to others), and I stand behind my beleif int his case. There won't be a big amount of people that will use this law, but if a kid out there wants to have sex with someone older, let him do it (personally it discusts me, but hey, I'm not that kid).

Child violence and sex with animals are other things -- they go in the "it does harm to the others" group.

Pipolinne
03-10-06, 10:19
I think that's a strategy to keep some groups under open vigilance!

And,Von Croy,there's no love in a peadophic relationship,just manipulation, fetichism and objectification of the child!

Nicky
03-10-06, 10:25
Times like these make me think that too much democracy is harmfull nowdays :cln:
It's not democracy that is harmful, it's the use some people make of it (like all things).

As for that group, I've read about it before; it's an absolutely disgusting case.

Satu
03-10-06, 10:32
there's no love in a peadophic relationship,just manipulation, fetichism and objectification of the child!

Well said, that's exactly what I was trying to get at ;)

Elysia
03-10-06, 11:16
I think that's a strategy to keep some groups under open vigilance!
I agree with this - at first I though 'how disgusting!', but I do wonder if there is a hidden agenda here - who else is going to join this party but other sickos? No one in their right mind would agree with policies like this, and so people who do are obviously worth watching...

The age od consent is 16 in the UK, but I'd advocate to have it raised. So far this term, I've heard of three 14 year old girls who are pregnant, and all of them have boyfriends who are 16 or over. If they actually upheld the bloody law and prosecuted these boys, maybe they wouldn't be so keen to get their underage girlfriends into bed...

Pipolinne
03-10-06, 12:01
We've the same problem here,being the new found excuse: she didn't look like a 12 years old girl,she looked a 16 years old one;she trued to seduce me,etc!

The perversion is that some children are more frail and dependent,and they'll enter the seduction scheme!

I don't know how it's in England,but,here,some pathetic conservative groups want to stop sexual education in schools,where all these questions could be though and discussed!:hea:

Lara Croft!
03-10-06, 12:09
This is an outrage!!!:mad: :mad: :mad:

angelika
03-10-06, 12:20
Truth is that I 've lost the control of my car quite a few times :yik: when I drive by some 12, 13 or 14 year old girls dressed ( or undressed) like ''live show girls'', turning people on (no matter what age)..................


and then they say it's the murder's fault.....(as a greek song says)

Lara Croft!
03-10-06, 14:10
True...^^^^^^^^

interstellardave
03-10-06, 14:45
Bottom line is that they have every right to exist as a political party in a democratic society, and if they are advocating legalizing something but are not practicing it while it is still illegal they are breaking no laws. Their views should be heard--just remember their views have no power unless society as a whole begins to adopt similar views. Since they seem to have very little support (3 members!) what's everyone worried about? If everyone starts to think the same way then the law will change--but that's how laws are supposed to change, when society as a whole feels it is necessary.

Gabi
03-10-06, 15:50
Truth is that I 've lost the control of my car quite a few times :yik: when I drive by some 12, 13 or 14 year old girls dressed ( or undressed) like ''live show girls'', turning people on (no matter what age)..................


and then they say it's the murder's fault.....(as a greek song says)

And it is!!!!
The girls could jump on him naked and it would still be his responsibility as an adult to not take advantage of that situation.

As to the "party": let's hope they never make it into parliament.

Mona Sax
03-10-06, 16:02
And it is!!!!
The girls could jump on him naked and it would still be his responsibility as an adult to not take advantage of that situation.

As to the "party": let's hope they never make it into parliament.
Totally agree. The whole situation is like a bunch of wannabe killers trying to legalize murder.

As for their agenda, while I'm in favor of teenagers being able to decide freely whether they want a (sexual) relationship with someone of more or less the same age (not to mention the freedom to wear whatever clothes they like), the ratio of power and influence between an adult and a child or teenager is nowhere near balanced, so that freedom cannot be guaranteed. IMO it's reasonable that a few precocious teenagers have to wait a couple of years to have sex with adults if that means everybody else can be protected.

interstellardave
03-10-06, 16:08
The key thing here is what is a child? At or around 13 people become adults in a physical sense (puberty). They start desiring sex like any adult--and they are fully capable of doing it physically as well. I think the thing is that, while in ages past (probably most of human history) you were viewed as an adult at those young ages things have now changed... now we're saying you're a child until 18! 21! Are we holding back peoples' psychological development while their bodies have been fully mature for many years? Before anyone answers in haste just remember that we have the relatively new problem now of people who are maladjusted, afraid to leave home, and don't really "grow up" until they're in their 30's!

Rickéh
03-10-06, 16:13
Ok i have only this question:
WHY do I Live in The netherlands :(.
And im not saying anything about this because i get the comment:
"You are too young to speak for this" Blablabla. :)

Mona Sax
03-10-06, 16:17
The key thing here is what is a child? At or around 13 people become adults in a physical sense (puberty). They start desiring sex like any adult--and they are fully capable of doing it physically as well. I think the thing is that, while in ages past (probably most of human history) you were viewed as an adult at those young ages things have now changed... now we're saying you're a child until 18! 21! Are we holding back peoples' psychological development while their bodies have been fully mature for many years? Before anyone answers in haste just remember that we have the relatively new problem now of people who are maladjusted, afraid to leave home, and don't really "grow up" until they're in their 30's!
Well, as I mentioned, I don't see any problems with 13 year olds getting laid by other teenagers, but adults have an influence that could easily be abused to manipulate those kids. I don't think it's that hard to wait a little if somebody absolutely has to have sex with an adult, just to make sure it's really out of her/his free will.

interstellardave
03-10-06, 16:18
Ok i have only this question:
WHY do I Live in The netherlands :(.
And im not saying anything about this because i get the comment:
"You are too young to speak for this" Blablabla. :)

Be glad you live in a country where a judge adheres to, and enforces, the law! He didn't validate these peoples' views, he simply said they have a right to voice their views. That is quite a different thing. If they can be denied a voice, so can, and so WILL, other people with whom you might agree! What would you think then? ;)

Rickéh
03-10-06, 16:22
Be glad you live in a country where a judge adheres to, and enforces, the law! He didn't validate these peoples' views, he simply said they have a right to voice their views. That is quite a different thing. If they can be denied a voice, so can, and so WILL, other people with whom you might agree! What would you think then? ;)

Well im not worrying about it you know, they are not gonna win everyone is against for sure only those sick people.
Its just disgusting.

interstellardave
03-10-06, 16:28
Well im not worrying about it you know, they are not gonna win everyone is against for sure only those sick people.
Its just disgusting.

Okay... glad you understand what that article is really about, that's all. It's important that young people are level-headed enough to preserve their freedoms! Ironically sometimes you must support the rights of people you find dispicable in order to safegaurd your own. :)

jackles
03-10-06, 16:43
Okay there are two issues here....one the right to freedom of speech....and the other being age of consent. The reason the age of consent was moved to 16 in the uk was to protect children against underage sex and predators. After all if the age of consent is 12 then how easy for a pedophile to say....oh well I didnt know that they were 8....or 6.....they looked older.. There was a thriving trade in children in victorian times. As someone who was pregnant at 16 i can look back now and know I was a child and ill prepared for the whole thing. Children reach sexual maturity earlier these days thanks to our improved diets etc that doesnt mean that they are mentally more developed. Some girls are menstruating at 8...does that make them equipped to decide on a sexual relationship?


Back to the freedom of speech thing...yes I believe in the right to say what you want...as I also believe that the law should be upheld should someone break it....by committing unlawful intercourse.

Paul H
03-10-06, 18:13
From that report:

"The PNVD - which has only three known members …"

That suggests to me that the party would probably have ceased to exist pretty soon if not for the free publicity this court case has generated for them. A political party that has existed for only a few months, has only three known members and yet is receiving international news coverage? It wouldn’t surprise me if those three members had actually engineered the whole thing by secretly persuading someone to ask the court to ban them.

Greenkey2
03-10-06, 18:25
I find the whole concept that this group is advocating horrendous in the extreme.

Sex between consenting, protected (if rather hormonal) teenagers fair enough - it's not going to stop therefore let's just focus on the safe sex message.

But sex between an underage and an adult? Never.

Love is one thing. Sex with quite another.

AnthonyShock1515
03-10-06, 19:27
Holland 1 big pedo:p

Greenkey2
03-10-06, 19:47
Comments like that do not help Anthony. We have many Dutch members whom I'm sure would be happy to point out the majority view in their country.

Mytly
04-10-06, 09:12
Ironically sometimes you must support the rights of people you find dispicable in order to safegaurd your own. :)

Well said!

As Voltaire put it, "I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

angelika
04-10-06, 12:23
Well said!

As Voltaire put it, "I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."


Come on, it's not just a point of view or an opinion.

It's sth forbitten by law! How about childrens' rights? This party has right and kids don't in this particular case?

The term under age wasn't established one day just because.
You can't vote or drive or drink alcohol (in some countries) or get married when you are under 18. So how can an under age person can decide whether he wants a sexual relationship with an adult or not?

Laras Backpack
04-10-06, 13:08
Come on, it's not just a point of view or an opinion.

It's sth forbitten by law! How about childrens' rights? This party has right and kids don't in this particular case?

I agree. In my opinion everyone has the right to free speech, unless that speech threatens the human rights of others. How can anyone expect thier human rights to be taken seriously if they do not respect the human rights of others?

Mytly
05-10-06, 05:32
According to the article, the issue isn't whether paedophilia should be legalized - it's whether a political party that supports legalizing it (among other things) should be allowed to exist. The two are very different things: just because the party - which btw, consists of only three people so far - has been allowed to exist, doesn't mean that the judge involved or Dutch society as a whole supports paedophilia. The party is not doing anything illegal, they are just asking for the right to exist.

There are plenty of instances in history when a small group of people have been trying to promote what they believe is right, but have been cruelly suppressed by society - only to have those views partially or fully embraced by society a generation or two later. The history of race relations, and of gay rights are full of such examples.

Please note that I am NOT saying that paedophilia should be legalized, whether in the Netherlands or elsewhere. As a matter of fact, I find it utterly despicable. :mad:

But I also firmly believe that just because I disagree with someone's opinion does not mean I - or anyone else - has the right to stop that person from expressing that opinion.

Quiver.
05-10-06, 07:28
I always thought I was ashamed of my country
but now I'm sure!!

angelika
05-10-06, 09:03
I always thought I was ashamed of my country
but now I'm sure!!


Don't be! Three individuals do not characterise a nation!

Shark_Blade
05-10-06, 09:20
Legalise child pornography??? :yik:
Oh my God!! The world has turn from bad to worse from day to day.:(
And sex with animal?:eek: my, my...some people haven't got a partner and all they gotta do is bang some farm animal do they?

edit:
It says it wants paedophilia to be freely discussed, arguing that a ban just makes children curious.

Children are curious, but adults should explain it in proper way. Not legalise it!!!.... and I feel sorry for the children there:(

interstellardave
05-10-06, 15:42
According to the article, the issue isn't whether paedophilia should be legalized - it's whether a political party that supports legalizing it (among other things) should be allowed to exist. The two are very different things: just because the party - which btw, consists of only three people so far - has been allowed to exist, doesn't mean that the judge involved or Dutch society as a whole supports paedophilia. The party is not doing anything illegal, they are just asking for the right to exist.

There are plenty of instances in history when a small group of people have been trying to promote what they believe is right, but have been cruelly suppressed by society - only to have those views partially or fully embraced by society a generation or two later. The history of race relations, and of gay rights are full of such examples.

Please note that I am NOT saying that paedophilia should be legalized, whether in the Netherlands or elsewhere. As a matter of fact, I find it utterly despicable. :mad:

But I also firmly believe that just because I disagree with someone's opinion does not mean I - or anyone else - has the right to stop that person from expressing that opinion.
Mytly "gets it". Everyone else needs to reread the article carefully and deal with the facts within it. The judge did the right thing. As I said, ideas are just ideas, no matter what they are. Wanting pedophilia legalized is just an idea... if it's not something most people agree with (clearly it isn't) you needn't fear that a few advocate it. But they must be allowed to voice their arguments... any public debate is worthwhile. The only other choice is to silence their right of speech and, if you do that in this instance, what is next? Those who wish to speak out against government corruption? What if they are next to be silenced?

Believe me, a mere handful of people advocating pedophilia is nothing to be afraid of... a judiciary that ignores the law IS something to be afraid of.

Rickéh
05-10-06, 16:26
I hate my country.
I better live in Greece or better ENGLAND! :o

Mona Sax
05-10-06, 16:33
Believe me, a mere handful of people advocating pedophilia is nothing to be afraid of... a judiciary that ignores the law IS something to be afraid of.
I don't think anybody thinks the judge is wrong, more like there should be a legal limit to the freedom of speech. I really think advocating pedophilia is on the same level as advocating racism and murder. Those guys are people who want permission to hurt others.