I don't care if the swear filter kicks in, if this is true then I hope the sick ****ers get lynched by the public.
You ARE criminals. Sex with a minor is illegal for a reason - it's wrong. Alright, maybe the concenting age should be lowered by a year or two, but that's not what this is about, this is about stopping paedophilia. As for child porn, no way, and child-prostitution?! What?! Have children out on the streets selling themselves? Welcome back to the 19th century...
Absoutely. These people have something wrong with them. They want sex WITH CHILDREN. What The ****?! It's unbelieveable. Toddlers with sex education?! What the hell are these people taking?? As adverse to knee-jerk reactions as I am, a public lynching is something I would actually consider attending for these people.
Okay then, someone catch the loonies who want to have sex with animals... Sweet Jesus... if they get voted into power I'll eat my beloved computer. While it's on.
These people are even worse than lawyers.. "But who in the hell is going to vote for them hahahaha. Don't push your luck, people said the same thing about the Nazis, granted, their ideas appealed to the German public and they used the current economic affairs to their advantage, and they also had a brilliant speaker and propaganda nailed, but if they can get into power, so can these frackers.
What we have here folks, is democracy in action. We have people banding together to form a party in order to attempt to change the law to legalize what they want to do. As citizens of a democracy, they have a right to try and the rest of the citizens have the right to vote for someone else. To Krikkit, technically, it's only a crime if you actually have sex with a minor. Wanting to is not a crime, and so unless they have had sex with minors (or posess child porn or whatever else) they are not criminals. What they are trying to do is legalize somthing which is current illegal. I don't think they have a hope in hell, but I admire the gall to try! Care to expound on that?
What's with the last point of the manifesto? What does free train travel have to do with anything...?
Don't knock it, it worked here not that long ago. Someone wrote an initiative promising to make the fee for getting car license plates $29 and the fine print spelled out all the programs they wanted to kill. The people voted for it, and it nearly killed the schools, parks and transportation budget. Hundreds of popular programs died because few people read the fine print and were too greedy to think that those license tab fees paid for somthing.
Not quite. This only applies only to rights which will not harm someone else. To wit segregation in the South of the U.S.: It could be argued that politicians and voters in favour of segregation (i.e. discrimination based on ethnicity and race) were simply pursueing their democratic rights. However it was not generally seen that way, because those rights end where they adversely impact on others. Similarly, this group of people pursues rights which would adversely affect children (no matter what they claim). So sorry, but this is not open to democratic campaigning. Technically, there is such a thing as criminal intent. I'm Dutch. I left Holland 13 years ago. Although I do admire a few aspects about Dutch culture, i.e. a more tolerant attitude towards soft-drugs and a healthier child sex education system leading to much lower teen pregnancy rates, most of the time what is regarded as proverbial Dutch level-headed tolerance is in fact just indifference or a weak-willed attitude. Racism is institutionalised, the law passive and ineffectual, and a lot of bad stuff happens insideously because nobody will stick their head out and protest. God forbid most Dutchmen would actually take a moral stance on anything (although when it comes to making money, they get quite entrepeneureal). There are a few notable exceptions, but that is the general impression I've always had. I would not want to raise my kids there --I would not feel they were safe from a legal/crime point of view.
i sincearly hope this is a clever ploy to catch peados in Holland. IE: set up a party that wants to lower the limit of consent, Then have a secret camera in the voting booth, When someone votes for that party, they get wisked away by someone, and beaten untill they dont want to have sex with a minor. other wise this is sick.
I'm going to disagree, though this may be based on different legal systems. Under the US legal system, nothing is expressly forbidden from being passed into law through one process or another. Even the constitution itself can be changed, though that gets awfully complicated. If a majority of citizens decide that pedophelia should be legal, or that all migrants should be stood up against a wall and shot, or that witches should be burned at the stake, there is nothing to prevent such laws from being passed. Let me offer an example... Lets say that I think that all people with six toes are the spawn of the devil and should be burned (I don't think that, but I need an example that is not drawn from an already contriversial issue). Under the US system, I would need to convince my representatives to introduce a bill stating that everyone witth six toes should be executed. If enough representatives voted for it, the bill would be come law. Sooner or later it would be challenged in court and ruled to be unconstitutional, but then I would go back to my representatives and they have the power, by a two thirds majority vote to change the constitution to allow the killing of six toed people. As a side note, they are trying to use exactly this method to ban gay marriage in this country. The fact that my proposed legistlation is considered morally repugnant by today's standards is irrelevent. If the people, and their representatives, can be convinced to support it, there is nothing in law to prevent immoral laws from being passed. This is one of the fundamental contridictions of democracy. by giving the power to the people it empowers those people to do things that would be considered immoral. Morality is nothing more than the concensus of the people as to what is and is not acceptable. Once again, I don't think this party has a hope in hell of succeeding, but as I see it they are using the democratic processes set forth in their nation to try to enact change. Democracy allows a fair hearing for all ideas, even the really bad ones. Criminal intent is the intention or planning to commit a crime. I posit that this is not the same as wanting to do somthing that is a crime or wanting somthing that is currently a crime to be legal. Desiring the legalization of marijuana does not constiture criminal intent to posess marijuana. Sounds like my kind of place Do you want to live in a country where people are beaten for voting for a particular party (Iraq and Afganistan come to mind, as does the Soviet Union under Stalin)? I certainly don't.
I didnt mean it like that, ie in iraq. but the people who vote fo this party must gain in some way from wanting to drop the legal age of consent of minors. IMO the voter is the pedophile or some one wanting to have sex with an under 16 year old. this is wrong on so many levels. IMO it should be raised to 18. i am thinking with my emotions and not my head, but this is a subject i do feel passionate about. i have family that is between 10-17, and to think that a older (much older) man could steal their innoncence is wrong. they dont really under stand the full implication of their actions. the distraught it can cause the families (for life in some cases) and the child that has now turned adult has possible commited suicide. i dont want to go to far in to this, but it is wrong, and if i could i would do something about it (but what i have in mind is..................)
Agreed, wanting is not a crime, but as it says in the first line of the quote a pedophile is someone who is sexually attacted to children (from the collins dictionary) this to me would imply that they may not engage in sexual activities with minors but would pay for pornographice pictures/videos of these minors and to me that is equally as bad as doing the act. as these people are funding this sick act.
