Posted on 02/15/2005 7:59:37 AM PST by HMFIC
LOS ANGELES — Seven members of the North American Man/Boy Love Association (search), including two teachers, were arrested in Southern California and charged with allegedly planning to travel to Mexico to have sex with boys, authorities said.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
stonemountain - "I'm not defending them or their beliefs in any way, but I'll try to answer your question. It's legal to be in an association that advocates the changing of laws. Just as groups that would outlaw abortion or legalize marijuana have a right to exist and to advocate a change in the law, NAMBLA can exist and try to change age-of-consent laws. There are down sides of living in a free society, and this is clearly one of them, but I think the alternative would be worse..."
JFK_Lib - I am just curious as to whether or not you would defend the KKK ina similar vein.
NAMBLA is not simply a group that advocates changing the law. They have also published material for aiding and abetting the statutory rape of young teen aged males and how to get away with it.
Were they advocating such a thing with young teenage girls they would have been shut down a long time ago as sexual predators. But one can get away with almost anything that preys on men today.
I submit that this guy is a monster, but I know plenty of homosexuals who would slit their own throats before they touched a kid.
NAMBLA is not simply a group that advocates changing the law. They have also published material for aiding and abetting the statutory rape of young teen aged males and how to get away with it.
I was not aware of this. Isn't this against the law?
An excerpt from "No Boy Scouts: The ACLU defends NAMBLA."
"... Within the realm of nonfiction, as revolting as its ideas are, NAMBLA certainly has a First Amendment right to argue that America's laws should be changed to permit sexual relations between adult men and third-grade school boys. Most Americans would disagree vehemently, as well they should. That's called debate. It's the American way.
As ACLU of Massachusetts Legal Director John Reinstein sees it: "Regardless of whether people agree with or abhor NAMBLA's views, holding the organization responsible for crimes committed by others who read their materials would gravely endanger important First Amendment freedoms."
However, as Fox News' Bill O'Reilly noted, there is more at play here than pamphleteering. "According to lawyers familiar with [NAMBLA's] website," O'Reilly explained, "it actually posted techniques designed to lure boys into having sex with men and also supplied information on what an adult should do if caught."
NAMBLA is "not just publishing material that says it's OK to have sex with children and advocating changing the law," says Larry Frisoli, a Cambridge attorney who is arguing the Curleys case in federal court. NAMBLA, he says, "is actively training their members how to rape children and get away with it. They distribute child pornography and trade live children among NAMBLA members with the purpose of having sex with them."
Frisoli cites a NAMBLA publication he calls "The Rape and Escape Manual." Its actual title is "The Survival Manual: The Man's Guide to Staying Alive in Man-Boy Sexual Relationships."
"Its chapters explain how to build relationships with children," Frisoli tells me. "How to gain the confidence of children's parents. Where to go to have sex with children so as not to get caught...There is advice, if one gets caught, on when to leave America and how to rip off credit card companies to get cash to finance your flight. It's pretty detailed."
"In his diary, Jaynes said he had reservations about having sex with children until he discovered NAMBLA," Frisoli continues. "It's in his diary in 1996, around the time he joined NAMBLA, one year before the death of Jeffrey Curley."
The practical, step-by-step advice Jaynes followed goes far beyond appeals to sway public opinion in favor of pedophilia. Such language aids and abets felonious conduct. If such conspiracy results in homicide, it is reasonable for NAMBLA to face civil liability if not criminal prosecution.
Ohio's Court of Appeals found NAMBLA complicit in an earlier child-rape case. NAMBLA's literature, discovered in a defendant's possession, reflected "preparation and purpose," according to the Buckeye State's top bench..."
Thank you edreform!
I was going to dig something up on Google and post it when I got home; thanks again!
Libertarians
will have interesting thoughts
on this charge, I bet.
You mean liberteens(sp?). People who say anything should go. I'm a Libertarian and I think this is sick. These people should be locked away for a long time. Don't make stupid assumptions about libertarians.
It seems they are saying that this sort of thing isn't against criminal law, but they could be liable in a civil action:
Such language aids and abets felonious conduct. If such conspiracy results in homicide, it is reasonable for NAMBLA to face civil liability if not criminal prosecution.
But apparently just having the language out there isn't criminal? This sentence at least seems to imply that it would have to result in homicide for those penalties to apply.
NAMBLA is "not just publishing material that says it's OK to have sex with children and advocating changing the law," says Larry Frisoli, a Cambridge attorney who is arguing the Curleys case in federal court. NAMBLA, he says, "is actively training their members how to rape children and get away with it. They distribute child pornography and trade live children among NAMBLA members with the purpose of having sex with them."
This is the key. If he had evidence that NAMBLA was doing this, I don't understand why he can't get charges brought. It seems to me that if Frisoli has evidence for these claims, the district attorney would be thrilled to prosecute them. I can't imagine that any DA, especially one elected by the public, would pass up a chance to prosecute NAMBLA members.
Again, thanks for the info - I'm going to do some more reading!
If there was ever a STUPIDER association, I haven't heard of IT!!!! Who the hell else would make it so clear as to their intentions and worldview to conjure up a name as blatant as that?
I can't imagine that any DA, especially one elected by the public, would pass up a chance to prosecute NAMBLA members.
Well, if you remember the FISTGate fiasco, charges were never brought against the pro-homosexual instructors either.
You'd have to read the whole thread ( http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/837855/posts ) to get the complete picture, but here are a few replies that will summarize:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/837855/posts?page=19#19
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/837855/posts?page=136#136
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/837855/posts?page=196#196
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/837855/posts?page=275#275
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/837855/posts?page=297#297
That a DA would be hesitant to charge NAMBLA wouldn't surprise me, especially when the ACLU is involved in defending them.
Disgusting.
"Definately time for a school assembly to warn the school kids about inappropriate advances by teachers and to report it if it happens"
Do you honestly think that they would do anything if it was reported? They would 1)say that the teacher would never do that and punish the kid for making such a statement, 2)do like the Catholic church and quietly pay off the family, 3) teach that NAMBLA, pedofilia, etc. are ok to normalize the practices with the public, just like they did with homosexuality.
Maybe we need to make their litature standard reading for parents to better protect against this happening to our children. If we know what they do, we can counteract their attempts.
see http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1366564/posts?page=1 to see who pals around with NAMBLA in SF
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.