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
That is exactly what the perverse among the population are counting on.
Yes, that would be one heck of a deterrent; especially the things that would happen to them *before* they are finally killed.
I think it would be that obvious too - but apparently it's not. Of course the same thing was said of homosexuality not 20 or 30 years ago.
Hmmmm.....Bill Clinton?
More likely it is money that they lust for, and not children. Of course, given the shameless disregard they have for their own children, if that is the case it is just as bad.
Let's be clear on the underlying assumption of this question: in and of themselves, the acts are never wrong.
Instead, acts are wrong or not, based on the context in which they're performed.
In other words, it's moral relativism.
Perhaps a better question might be: "is there any action that is intrinsically wrong?"
Problem with that is that all they have to do is to say that they fear for their lives and they will be removed from the general population, just like they did with Avila. It is well known that even prisoners have utter contempt for those that sexually abuse children.
You've hit the nail on the head - why is pedophilia wrong if homosexuality is right - particularly if 'informed consent' and be demonstrated in both? I always get "the difference is obvious" argument but no one explains why it's so obvious. From my perspective it's obvious why homosexuality is wrong but when I offer up my reasons they are discounted because they are a) religious in nature, b) suspect in their origins, c) refuted by other studies that demonstrate my studies just wrong because their study supports their point of view and mine's just obviously wrong.
But they're not. You've already noted some of them, even if you "don't buy them." Note that "demolition of arguments" requires you first to engage yourself in what amounts to a reasoned debate with pedophiles.
If some judge ruled solely on the basis of the arguments, you'd lose the general argument on the grounds of "informed consent," and also historical and cultural precedent. You would be reduced to arguing whether this or that child was capable of informed consent, and perhaps what protections must be afforded to children who are adjudged to be capable.
But of course, there's more to it than reasoned argument: it's wrong, and we both know it. Pedophiles are monsters who deserve to be severely punished.
Next we get to child pornography. Once again we're faced with the informed consent problem, and now must contend also with questions of "artistic merit;" whether it's really porn; and whether it's merely a "thought crime" (and thus supposedly unprosecutable) to be viewing and getting off on it.
But once again, we both know it's wrong -- for the same reason pedophilia is wrong: because it is wrong to view a child as an object of sexual desire.
Homosexuals are deviants, they engage in a behavior that is dangerous to their health, dangerous to the morally accepted social standards and have been known to be dangerous to the unsuspecting and weak "recruits" and victims.
Pedophilia is another form of deviancy that has "victims" that later become recruits...and then later recruiters...
The Americans charged include: Lloyd Alan Emmerson of Fresno County, Calif.; Paul Whitmore and Brooke Rowland, San Diego County,
I believe that Brooke Rowland was the San Diego guy arrested earlier
Yep, things are soooooo much better in those free and easy nations that practice democratic socialism and "enlightened" sexual mores..../sarcasm off.
Expect the liberal intelligentsia over here to adopt this pro pedophilia stance with increasing frequency. They slavishly follow any degenerate Eurotrash trend within a few years.
Why is adult-child sex wrong? I'm speaking of children <12 and adults >18 (not that I think that sex with a fourteen-year old is "acceptable" by any means, but I'm trying to stay within the context of these arrests, which I assume involved very young children).
Why is homosexuality wrong? Be specific, don't offer what "some" or "many" homosexuals do. Explain exactly why two people of the same gender engaging in sexual activity of any kind is "wrong" no matter the circumstances.
I should hope that your answers are significantly different.
Umm... be specific - explain exactly why two people of any age or gender engaging in sexual activity of any kind is "wrong" no matter the circumstances? I'll drop my own personal convictions, play the devil's advocate here and say that as long as there's 'informed consent' then there's nothing wrong with it.
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.