XPost: alt.support.boy-lovers, alt.support.incest, rec.nude   
   XPost: alt.anytown, alt.fan.goons   
   From: 4s00th@hushmail.com   
      
   On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 03:40:03 -0700, Brandon D Cartwright   
    wrote:   
      
   >On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 20:54:40 +1030, David    
   >wrote:   
   >   
   >>On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 02:39:23 -0400, 4s00th <4s00th@hushmail.com> typed   
   >>furiously:   
   >>   
   >>>I'm serving you notice now. Provide your proof. I've already promised   
   >>>to give it a fair hearing -- I can't do better than that. I've already   
   >>>agreed that you proved your point about Walz -- and it wasn't even YOU   
   >>>who provided most of that proof!   
   >>>   
   >>>So, I'm asking you 1 final time, provide your proof that David has   
   >>>ever endorsed incest or supported sex between adults and children   
   >>>other than the suggestion that the age of consent is too high. Oh, and   
   >>>keep in mind that I've already said that I don't care if adults want   
   >>>to carry on incestuous affairs amongst themselves -- that's their   
   >>>business as far as I'm concerned.   
   >>>   
   >>I too would love to see this proof. I have never endorsed the breaking   
   >>of any laws, instead I advocate that the laws be changed to reflect   
   >>the age of puberty rather than some arbitrary number which, in my   
   >>opinion, is way too high in many cases. I also advocate the education   
   >>of children in all aspects of sex and sexuality from an early age.   
   >>   
   >>Like 4sooth I do not believe that incestuous affairs between adults   
   >>are any concern of either the law or anyone other than the persons   
   >>concerned. The law states otherwise and it should be changed.   
   >   
   >An adult having sex with a child is doing the child a favor if the   
   >child enjoys it.   
      
   I've never seen David make this statement that I recall, and if he   
   had, I'm sure I would have repeated what I posted under the next   
   point.   
      
   >The damage done to a child fucked by it's parents is caused by the   
   >social workers and the LEA if the child enjoys it.   
      
   Boy, you sure do seem to be caught up on the word "fucked."   
      
   Sex, in and of itself, is not harmful. Being forced to perform sexual   
   acts is. If a child does not believe he/she is being forced or abused   
   and the legal system interferes, it often does more damage by trying   
   to convince the child that he/she was abused.   
      
   I, myself, have stated the belief that sex between an adult and a   
   child is not always abusive -- but I've also stated that the potential   
   harm a child would face from societal influences such as LEA and   
   social workers and even peers if the relationship is discovered is too   
   great a risk to place a child in -- especially if you claim you love   
   that child. Therefore, any responsible adult would not get sexually   
   involved with a child in the current social climate.   
      
   And I will further go out on a limb and declare that the age of the   
   child is an important factor in the situation. The younger the child   
   is generally increases the risk for harm. Gender is also a factor as   
   girls are more likely to be concerned about social rules and are more   
   likely to internalize the problem (for those of you who don't   
   understand, girls are more likely to blame themselves, to assume that   
   abuse is somehow related to a fault within themselves).   
      
   In short, sex is not inherently harmful to children, but the risk of   
   harm, either from the child perceiving the relationship as coercive or   
   abusive or from any societal influence after the fact, is far too high   
   to take a chance on.   
      
   >*NOT* to fuck your own or any other child who wants it is child   
   >abuse and a product of religious brainwashing.   
      
   Again, I've never seen David suggest that this is true. I have seen   
   others make the statement, and I've denounced it as a common   
   rationalization for child-molesters.   
      
   At the same time, the influence of religion in demonizing sex is   
   clear, and it continues to prevent us from providing our children the   
   appropriate information regarding sex so that they have the knowledge   
   they need to protect themselves from unwanted pregnancy, STD's and   
   predators.   
      
   >The day is coming when incest and pedophilia will be legalized.   
      
   Pedophilia is not, in any way, shape or form, illegal in any nation of   
   which I am aware. Again, you use the word that describes a feeling,   
   and feelings are not illegal, cannot be made illegal. Feelings are   
   neither right or wrong, they simply are. We discover how we feel, we   
   do not choose how we feel.   
      
   There are already several countries that have repealed all laws   
   regarding incest between consenting adults, and there are additional   
   countries discussing this at present. One such proposal was later   
   withdrawn from consideration in Australia when the population   
   mistakenly believed that it was aimed at legalizing child-molestation   
   (I believe that was 1999).   
      
   >You have asserted all these things and s400th is well aware of it.   
   >   
   >Are you now recanting?   
      
   I just love the way you claim to know what I am and am not aware of.   
   Next time I have a question, I'll be sure to consult with you. NOT!   
      
   -- 4s00th@hushmail.com   
      
   If you send email, I will reply to it here at asbl   
   (without showing your email addy)   
   unless you ask me not to.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)