Child birth is dangerous to very young females as their body hasnt fully developed to handle the stress.
Im talking about PEDOPHILES. Popping a boner to a GROWN MAN'S butt is quite different from popping a boner to a 10 year old's butt. I have nothing against gays. But Pedophiles get no sympathy from me.
Last edited by Night Wind; 2015-09-02 at 09:56 PM.
Originally Posted by Blizzard Entertainment
you don't think that a pedophilia will stay satisfied just looking at harmless nudist pics of children you don't think after awhile it just wont arose him any more and he ends up getting into harder and harder kiddie porn
I know when I was younger looking at pictures in the sears catalogue of women in bras was enough for me to get aroused then after time that wasn't enough so found my dads playboys
I'm not going to claim insight into the mind of someone who's a paedophile nor their habits or further development of their gratification.
But many people believed that weed was a gateway drug to harder compounds, that was proven incorrect.
- - - Updated - - -
No I didn't.
And I can't comment on the cost as I'm not familiar with what normal nudist DVD's sell for.
Give me an alternative reason why someone would want those pics/clips. There's no other intent to publicly share that material than pedophilia that I can think of.
There's a big difference between regular porn with adults or "freaky" shit like you suggest in that they're all full developed and conscious or incapable of feeling like plastic figurines. Children aren't and attraction towards them shouldn't be tolerated under some BS naturalist site. Someone can sit there staring and fantasising about molesting them or w/e totally isolated from any attitudes/protection at the actual camp. That is wrong.
I'd argue that since the children are not capable of consenting they are being exploited. They need protection.
Protection from who, given by who, executed by who?
Parents are supposed to fulfill the role of protecting their children. And, given that we allow parents to make gobs of decisions for their kids, I don't see a moral precedent here, especially since, say, taking your kids to a nude beach, isn't harmful.
Your equivocations are tiresome. Comparing sexuality to food preference and alcohol addiction is barely worth responding to. Please educate yourself on the matter rather than using arbitrary terms like "evil" (is a tiger evil for eating a baby?), because it just shows your argument to be unlettered.
sexual arousal is sexual arousal it doesn't make a difference what arouses you it is all the same mental mechanics
and over time what used to arouse you doesn't cut it any more and you end up having to get more explicit in what arouses you
it is why married couple have to spice things up to keep their sex life active because good old straight missionary position just doesn't cut it any more
well that same thing will go on in any sexual preference from straight to gay to pedophile the mental mechanics are all the same
so this is why that nudist pictures of children will eventually lead to hard core kiddie porn because the nudist pics just doesn't cut it anymore the pedophilia isn't getting the same sexual satisfaction from them any more
Last edited by Vyxn; 2015-09-02 at 10:24 PM.
Protection from people that take photos and videos of them naked to sell/share, protection from sexual attitudes towards their underdeveloped bodies and minds and general protection to allow them to develop without some future blowback, deep regret or resentment towards their guardians/society.
Taking your kids to a nude beach to have their naked pictures taken, uploaded and sold or shared amongst pedophiles on some website is harmful.
So you linked a study done by two Christian psychologists who work at two Christian colleges (Wheaton and Regent), and didn't bother to check whether their work was peer-reviewed outside of the "flock"? You just googled "is it possible to change sexual orientation" and rolled with it, didn't you? Yes, you did.
This is how bad science spreads. It's called "confirmation bias", and it's easier than ever with the advent of the internet, where anything can be true if you look hard enough.
so if you cant change some ones sexual orientation what sort of treatment do we have for pedophiles? do we chemically castrate them so they have no sexual arousal of any kind? that would be a hell of away to go through life? do we allow them to look at nudist pics of children hoping it will stay enough to satisfy their urges and wont escalate to kiddie born then to rape of a poor child?
Last edited by Vyxn; 2015-09-02 at 10:31 PM.
Pedophiles are like gun owners. They all like kids (guns), but only some of them go out and molest (murder) people.
- - - Updated - - -
I agree with most of what you say, but then we don't legislate against a wide array of parental behaviors that have a much higher chance of breeding resentment.
I have no problem with nudist or nudity in general...but I always thought it was odd that adults would include children in nudist activities...