Posted on 01/30/2011 4:59:22 PM PST by decimon
“I’m all for the ultimate punishment for pedophiles, BUT...
Why exactly are US Immigration & Customs Enforcement agents protecting children in Cambodia and not protecting children in the U.S. from the foreign pedophiles running wild in the country they were hired to protect?”
EXCELLENT!!!
This is the worst sort of moral posturing, by a so-called journalist.
The story does not describe sex tourism. The story described pedophiles.
A “sex tourist” might be someone visiting girly bars in any of a hundred cities around the world. Big deal.
Someone having sex with 12 year olds, is not a sex tourist. He is a pedophile, and a monster.
Which, according to the full article, is to bribe them and you walk.
“All of them.”
Heartily agree.
She is guilty of the felony of "Sexual misconduct with a minor" in the State of Arizona, where there is no "Romeo-&-Juliet" exception, and must register as a sex offender for the rest of her life.
In the eyes of this state, she is indeed as much a pedophile as a 45 year old man who rapes a 9-year-old.
So, I take it you have sympathies toward pedophiles?
How dare you? Would you say the same thing to my face?
And my position is that the US government has no business spending money chasing them in Cambodia rather than chasing pedophiles who go after US kids in the US. Let the Cambodians deal with their own issues.
I stated that all pedophiles should be given the death penalty. By their own admission, they are repeat offenders. I feel very strongly that innocent children should be protected from such heinous people who commit perverse sexual acts against children. A child should never be exposed to such atrocities. Any one who could commit such a crime is an evil, and perverse individual.
I don’t see the comparison of consensual sex between an eighteen year old and a seventeen year old, even though it isn’t something I’d approve of. I work with children, and I encourage them to practice abstinence until marriage.
If I took your post the wrong way, I sincerely apologize to you.
Arizona should consider the charges they are imposing on teenagers, when they refer to them as sex offenders, for several reasons. Sex Offenders such as pedophiles and rapists should have the highest priority when it comes to being monitored, and we don’t want sex offender registries cluttered up with teenagers having sex. An eighteen year old needs to answer for having sex with a sixteen or seventeen year old, but they aren’t on the same level of perversion as a pedophile or rapist.
I happen to agree with you, up to a point. Adult men who prey on pre-pubescent children are indeed incurable, and I would support the death penalty on the first offense for pretty much all of them.
But what about the case I mentioned, when an 18 year old boinks her 17 year old boyfriend?
What about the case where a heavily made up and mature 15 year old throws herself at a 24 year old man? (Again, in Arizona at least, there is no “deception” defense. She could show him a fake drivers license proving her to be of age, and he would still be guilty under the law.)
What about the case when a 14 or 15 year old gets married with parental or judicial consent? This still is lawful and occasionally happens, depending on the state. My own family tree has 14 year old brides, and so does yours.
What about cases where a vindictive spouse uses false allegations of child abuse to hammer the other parent in a divorce? Or false allegations from a devious teenager looking to cause trouble? If the penalty is death, some juries are going to acquit marginal offenders and perhaps even some clearly guilty scum.
So all I’m saying is that you need to be more specific about what “all” pedophiles means.
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.