Elsewhere on this site -- I will not link top it -- there is a debate unfolding between a guy who is an advocate for virtual child porn and incest, versus someone who finds him disgusting. The CP advocate is also speaking on issues of homosexuality, which infuriates me.
As I have mentioned many times, I am in law enforcement, dealing exclusively with issues relating to the sexual abuse of minors. I know a lot about this. And I will not tolerate this garbage being advanced without response. Because the consequences of what he does involves more than children.
BTW...diarist, I am not talking to you. I don't want to bother with your rationalizations. I have heard them all before, almost always from someone sitting in the interrogation room. (I'll get into that in a minute.)
I am not gay, but gay rights are very important to me. Our society cannot continue to cast certain people as full citizens and others as not (this applies to both gays, Muslims, the poor, etc.) And people like this diarist feed directly into the conservative BS that gay people molest children. (this is being presented in state legislatures as a "fact" right now.) The VAST majority of molesters are straight.
But this guy undermines the real issues on gay rights. He boo-hoos for the pedophiles and promoters of incest, calling the laws "fascist" and un-American. (BTW...incest is a child molestation issue. Most molesters go after family members)
Maybe he's a fraud. Maybe he is a troll trying to create "proof" about homosexuals. Either way, he has to be destroyed with a response. And here it is.
Let's start with this guy's sig line. He wants to REPEAL the protect act. Not the portion dealing with virtual CP. All of it. And he does so by calling it "fascist" and "un-American."
Here is what the law does. Think of all the things this guy is trying to get repealed.
The law has the following effects:[1][4]
1. Provides for mandatory life imprisonment of sex offenses against a minor if the offender has had a prior conviction of abuse against a minor, with some exceptions.
2. Establishes a program to obtain criminal history background checks for volunteer organizations.
3. Authorizes wiretapping and monitoring of other communications in all cases related to child abuse or kidnapping.
4. Eliminates statutes of limitations for child abduction or child abuse.
5. Bars pretrial release of persons charged with specified offenses against or involving children.
6. Assigns a national AMBER Alert Coordinator.
7. Implemented Suzanne's Law. Named after Suzanne Lyall, a missing college student of the University of New York at Albany, the law eliminates waiting periods before law enforcement agencies will investigate reports of missing persons ages 18-21. These reports are also filed with the NCIC.
8. Prohibits computer-generated child pornography when "(B) such visual depiction is a computer image or computer-generated image that is, or appears virtually indistinguishable from that of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; (as amended by 1466A for Section 2256(8)(B) of title 18, United States Code).
9. Prohibits drawings, sculptures, and pictures of such drawings and sculptures depicting minors in actions or situations that meet the Miller test of being obscene, OR are engaged in sex acts that are deemed to meet the same obscene condition. The law does not explicitly state that images of fictional beings who appear to be under 18 engaged in sexual acts that are not deemed to be obscene are rendered illegal in and of their own condition (illustration of sex of fictional minors).
10. Maximum sentence of 5 years for possession, 10 years for distribution.
11. Authorizes fines and/or imprisonment for up to 30 years for U.S. citizens or residents who engage in illicit sexual conduct abroad, with or without the intent of engaging in such sexual misconduct. [5]
12. Incorporated other proposed legislation existing at the time as:
the Code Adam Act of 2003, (Title III, Subtitle D)
the Truth in Domain Names proposed language (Title V, Subtitle B)
the Secure Authentication Feature and Enhanced Identification Defense Act of 2003, also cited as the SAFE ID Act, (Title VI, Section 607.)
the Illicit Drug Anti-Proliferation Act of 2003 (Title VI, Section 608.)
For the purposes of this law, illicit sexual conduct includes commercial sex with anyone under 18,[6] and non-commercial sex with persons under 16 when there is at least a four-year age difference or the person is under 12 years of age.[2][7][8][9]
Previous US law was less strict, only punishing those having sex either in contravention of local laws OR in commerce (prostitution); but did not prohibit non-commercial sex with, for example, a 14 year-old if such sex was legal in the foreign territory.
13. The PROTECT Act mandated that the United States Attorney General promulgate new regulations to enforce the 2257 recordkeeping regulation, colloquially known as the '2257 Regulations'. The Free Speech Coalition has filed a lawsuit against the United States Department of Justice claiming the 2257 Regulations are unconstitutional.
14. The PROTECT Act includes prohibitions against illustrations depicting child pornography, including computer-generated illustrations, also known as virtual child pornography.[1][2][4] Provisions against virtual child pornography in the Child Pornography Prevention Act of 1996 had been ruled unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2002. However, the provisions of the Protect Act are distinct, since they establish the requirement of showing obscenity as defined by the Miller Test, which was not an element of the 1996 law.
Ok, so the virtual porn has to violate the Miller Test, which has been around since 1973. Here is what this involves:
The Miller test was developed in the 1973 case Miller v. California.[2] It has three parts:
Whether "the average person, applying contemporary community standards", would find that the work, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest,
Whether the work depicts/describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct specifically defined by applicable state law,
Whether the work, taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value.[3]
The work is considered obscene only if all three conditions are satisfied.
So we are talking about hardcore CP, done virtually. Yah, boo-friggin-hoo. This guy's objection isn't to the Miller Test as it applies to all pornography (which is a far more reasonable area of controversy.) His objection is SOLELY related to CP. Gee, I wonder why.
As for the interview room: He (all these people are he) wants to say that virtual CP has nothing to do with molestation. Bull.
As an interrogator of molesters, I can tell you that now, easily 95% of the time, we find virtual CP on their computers. (90% of the time, that goes with regular CP.)
After we get through the "it's first amendment man" and the "it's consensual man" and the "children are sexual beings man" and the "she/he wanted it man" we get to reality world. Most of these people eventually confess. I have also found that there are dicey cases, where there are reasons for wondering, where people go to trial. Just like in any other crime.
Once we get through the BS -- usually through a lengthy "so if you believe this, let's take a polygraph (i'll get into this again below) -- we get a confession. And ALMOST EVERY TIME those with virtual CP talk about a form of escalation -- the virtual stuff satisfied their desires for awhile, but then they felt like they needed more, and they escalated to real CP and CP/molester chat rooms where of course they hear endless justifications for their behavior and the perpetuation of this "the kids want it, man" BS. And then we reach molestation.
You want to boo-hoo about freedom of speech? There are plenty of issues that don't involve CP -- there are states that are trying to ban personal expressions of religious behavior for Islam, there are student newspapers that are banned from discussing issues related to homosexuality, there are people in jail for blowing the whistle on wrongdoing.
But those aren't as important to this guy as allowing pedophiles to jack off and others to rape their sisters.
This garbage should not be on this site.
And now to the diarist -- don't message me again. I deal with you CP (and molestation) advocates five days a week and listen to their garbage. I don't need to do it online.