from Enigma
In a move that’s sure to please perverts everywhere, the Supreme Court has lifted a federal ban on “virtual” child pornography. The ruling reverses a 1996 statute that was intended to protect kids from pedophiles, but a ruling (the Court said) that also ran the risk of banning serious works of art and literature.
The law lifts the ban on images “conveying the impression” of children having sex, but produced without the use of actual children; as well as completely fake, computer-generated images of children having sex.
Real or not, images of children as sex objects are reprehensible. The people who create, who watch, and who are stimulated by these images, are seriously disturbed and potentially dangerous. Contrary to the misguided and clichéd arguments of supporters of this ruling, “free speech” is not the issue here.
The portrayal of sex with children, no matter the context, is obscene. Any “art” that utilizes this obscenity as a selling point, or “key element of the plot,” is the work of a demented mind, and not worthy of praise. Even if it is up for an Academy Award. Any celebrated portrayal of sex with a child runs the risk of stimulating and provoking actions that are illegal and immoral. Giving validity to this type of “art” will, eventually, give validity to the idea of sex with children as a new celebrated and increasingly accepted “alternative lifestyle.”
In the wake of the media’s current obsession with child abuse at the hands of Catholic priests, it is interesting to note their hypocritical praise of the Supreme Court’s “open-mindedness” towards sex with children.
In a recent story, USA Today pandered to “expert” researchers and academics, who want to drop the term “child abuse” altogether, in favor of a more “neutral term such as ‘adult-child sex.’”
College campuses, which are quickly becoming hotbeds of swill, are also helping this cancerous cause. Penn State recently hosted a speech by a supporter of NAMBLA (the North American Man Boy Love Association), a group that advocates sex between men and boys. And the University of Minnesota has helped to publish a book that, at least partially, endorses pedophilia.
If we continue on this decrepit path, we will wind up with thousands of cases of statutory rape and ruined lives. Child abuse is a learned behavior, and today’s victims will often become tomorrow’s perpetrators.
Children aren’t allowed to vote. They’re not allowed to drink alcohol or smoke. They can’t join the military or drive a car. All of these rules are in place because of the assumption that they need guidance from adults. And if children aren’t mature enough to handle any of these aforementioned things, why would anyone think that they are rationally capable of consenting to have sex with an adult?
Our country is quickly becoming unable to determine right from wrong, and unwilling to even accept that there are “rights” and “wrongs,” at all. Our entire code of conduct is being rewritten according to whatever “feels good.” And for an increasing number of psychopaths, feeling good means having sex with children.
When someone watches even the most sanitized portrayal of children having sex, they run the risk of being stimulated by the idea. And if they, indeed, become stimulated by it, they run the risk of becoming addicted to it. And if they become addicted to it, they’ll soon want to act on their urges, and that will mean having sex with a child.
When something horrible, like child abuse, happens, the first question that’s always asked is, “Why?” The answer lies in the twisted logic that produced this irresponsible Supreme Court ruling.