Posted on 08/09/2002 8:59:43 AM PDT by NYer
WASHINGTON (AP) _ Ten Americans and six foreigners were charged Friday with taking sexually explicit photographs of their own children or children in their care and sending them over the Internet to an international child pornography ring, the U.S. Customs Service said.
Forty-five children, including 37 in the United States, were victims and have been removed from the care of those indicted, Customs officials said. Most of them are in the custody of another parent or relative.
The defendants include nine people from seven states who were indicted in Fresno, Calif., along with six residents of Denmark, Switzerland and the Netherlands. The indictment alleges that members of the ring, referring to themselves as ``the club,'' traded messages across the Internet requesting photographs of specific sexual poses. One man asked for an audiotape so he could hear a child crying while being spanked, the indictment said, and another posed naked with an underage girl.
The Customs Service coordinated the U.S. investigation that began last November with a request for help from the Danish National Police, who were acting on a tip about an international child pornography ring. ``I congratulate the investigators whose ingenuity and perseverance brought these people to justice,'' Customs Commissioner Robert C. Bonner said in a statement.
The Americans charged include: Lloyd Alan Emmerson of Fresno County, Calif.; Paul Whitmore and Brooke Rowland, San Diego County, Calif.; Tracy Reynolds, Texas; Leslie Peter Bowcut, Idaho; Michael David Harland, Florida; Harry Eldon Tschernetzki, Washington state; John Zill, South Carolina; Craig Davidson, Kansas. The identity of the tenth American was not immediately available.
The foreigners were identified as Eggert Jensen and Bente Jensen of Denmark; Jean-Michael Frances Cattin, Marcel Egli and Peter Althaus of Switzerland; and Dirk-Jan Prins of the Netherlands.
On the Net: Customs Service: http://www.customs.ustreas.gov
AP-ES-08-09-02 1114EDT
This is where we must fight them.
We also must realize that what we put into our minds comes out in our thoughts and actions. When we look at porn, our mind takes it in, processes it and then takes the info to the next logical step.
Same as when we read something and it brings up a question in another area, we follow that and we eventually may find a new hobby.
Pornography does nothing but debase human sexual drives to the mere sexual stimulation and fantasies. These fantasies then take the mind and seek to act out. It is a devaluation of men, women, children and the sex drive to the lowest common denominator - sexual pleasure. It does not build up, it does not respect person, it does nothing but debase to the lowest level - the mere animal instincts.
This is the danger of pornography - it dehumanizes man as shown in the subjects of pornography.
"Oh - but it's progress none-the-less."
"Why?"
"It just is..."
and so the insanity continues... ;-)
Sounds intellectually plausible (sophistry) until one notices there has been no attempt to distinguish between "consent" and "informed consent".
Don't you think that this goes to the heart of the discussion where pedophilia is involved?
We might begin by agreeing on whether those are moral or legal phrases.
Not so, of course. But one still has to wonder why it is that all those folks thought it was "wrong because it's wrong."
Well?
With what ammo though? If you take God and His morality out of the equation, who are we to say that treating sex as a recreational activity to be shared with whoever as long as "consentual" is wrong? By that standard, I would also agree that many children that engaged in sexual activity with adults weren't harmed.
Don't you think that this goes to the heart of the discussion where pedophilia is involved?
We might begin by agreeing on whether those are moral or legal phrases. "Consent" and "Informed Consent" are legal terms only as effective as the person making the argument.
So it can be acceptable in non-Judeo-Christian belief systems?
That's why I refuse to discuss topics like this one from any religious viewpoint.
A moral position does not require a belief system (although every belief system requires a moral position) but some may not. And there goes your argument, thank you ma'm.
I prefer to examine it based on non-religious moral truths, should any be possible. I think they are.
Either way, I'm sure there's probably some precocious 5-year old out there who can be used to test the limits. The whole issue of whether consent is "informed" or not is so subjective as to be essentially useless.
At any rate, I notice that the whole "consent" debate is a pure and simple smoke screen. It dodges the real issue, which is whether or not sex with children is wrong.
And we know it's wrong!
BTW: there's a contingent of libertarians and liberals out there (including Hillary Clinton, IIRC) who advocate the idea that kids can "divorce" their parents once they prove their competence. It's interesting to note that their position dovetails quite nicely with the pro-pedophilia crowd....
I wouldn't argue with you on that - fortunately the evidence supports my foregone conclusion.
The things that were determined right or wrong by God were for the good of mankind. Such as adultery - the damage it causes the family.
Those that don't accept a God, may try all forms of relativism but they still must come back to the respect of the individual. What one individual does effects another. When one individual stabs another because there is no harm - that other individual shows this is wrong because he has a stab wound.
When a man seeks child sex and claimns no harm - we have the child and the child's future life as the result of his ten minute sexual pleasure. It is abuse and endangerment of that child for his own selfish pleasure. No man should have the right to endanger another for his own pleasure.
Now the claims that there is no harm will have to be fought as the lies they are. What about all the people coming forward with claims of harm by the priests? Are they different than other children? There is no proof that they selfish actions have no effect on an innocent child. There is no proof that it will not cause them to seek the same sexual gratification when they are adults. This in itself is an abuse because then no longer is the person heterosexual - he is now a pervert seeking child sex same as the prior generation. This very fact is an abuse. The first pervert now has taken away normal sexual development ffrom this child and begat another sexual pervert as himself. This should be against the law.
This is no different from saying that genocide would be OK so long as it's popular. (There are obvious practical arguments in favor of it, such as: it's easier to kill them and take their land than to pay for it.)
But that's just the problem. They don't have to come back to the respect of the individual. Quite often both the oppressors and the oppressed simply accept their situation as being the natural order of things. Whole empires have been built on that basis.
(Religious people certainly are as prone to such impulses as non-religious ones -- we simply have a reason not to do something, even if we ultimately end up breaking the rules.)
Ultimately I see this as a matter for Evangelism, and treat it as such.
Would you please explain that to me? You can send me a private note if you wish.
Dimensio - I actually expected that you might get one or two slaps on the hand for your post - but to my dissapointment but not surprise you've said something that I think should cause people to erupt in protest - I think it's telling that they have not.
*sigh*
*sigh*
Oops - let me rewrite that.
I thought you might get one or two slaps on the hand for what you said - but to my dissapointment you were essentially ignored. But I am not surprised. You have said something that I think should cause people to erupt in protest - I think it's telling that they have not.
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.