Opus36

Loren - The reason to ban him is that he is just out here to advertise his web site. I have read many of his posts in the past, and once he has got people tied up in a debate all he says is go to my web site. From what I can tell he is trying to increase traffice on his web site and get people to join it. Just coming out here to stur up an arguemnt. Search all his posts and find out how many times his response is "go to my website".

Maverick

Pat Kelly,

I just read through this thread I need to ask you to refrain from the subtle, yet still visible insults that you use throughout your posts.

If you have a question about this warning please either contact the administrators at iidb@infidels.org or start a thread in Bugs Problems and Complaints.

Maverick - IIDB Administrator

twisted brother

It is neither a reason to ban him or to imply he should be burned at the stake.
His ideas are not dangerous.

Information is never dangerous.

Pat Kelly

I have a tendency to respond in kind to those who respond to me. I suspect I share this with everyone else in spite of the fact I have reached different conclusions about sex. I also suspect “Infidels” and at least some of its members including some who administer this site are not nearly as committed to ideas of freethinking, open-mindedness or even truth as the website implies. It was your decision to provide a forum that you claim is free enough to openly discuss subjects outside the limits normally imposed by society. It is a good idea in theory but takes a bit of courage to adhere to such principals when things start to heat up and move into areas were emotions take precedence over intellect.

I am aware you feel a need to side with your regular posters and not take a stance that may cause them to move to another site. There are many sites where people can go to confirm instead of question what they have learned to believe. However, most such sites do not associate themselves with banners claiming "freethinking."

There is nothing subtle in my posts and I believe I have been very clear in stating my belief that currently accepted social views towards sex are wrong and fueled by ignorance, irrationalism and downright stupidity. And yes it is also my experience that stupid people harbor stupid beliefs. Though this fact may seem insulting to some when I point it out in areas related to sex, if you review this board you will find it is filled with the exact same inference concerning religion. It seems you may need to take your rather advanced reasoning in areas of religion and apply those same principals to areas of sex. If you consider it rationally, it is kind of silly to profess freethinking in one specific area while functioning as staunch defenders of social norms in another. In other words, if our societies are wrong when it comes to our religious beliefs there is no reason to assume the exact same thing does not ring true in other areas of our beliefs as well. A good indicator of irrationalism is always the level of emotion associated with a particular subject. If this gauge holds true with religion, imagine how wrong we must be when it comes to sex.

I have no vested interest in “Infidels” other than what you claim this website stands for. There is certainly no shortage of people I can find to test my reasoning on whenever I feel so inclined. However, the next time I am looking to discuss something with freethinkers truly searching for more rational answers, I will spend my time elsewhere.

tribalbeeyatch

Pat,

You were asked to refrain from insulting people, something which you as much as admitted to doing with your "respond in kind" comment. You seem to be arguing that freethought requires the free exchange of insults, but the SecWeb makes no claims to offer a forum for such behavior. I think that it aids conversations, particularly ones revolving around such hot-button topics, to expect a certain level of civility amongst participants. Other people's insults directed towards you have already been deleted by moderators, so your accusation of a double standard favoring regular posters rings a little hollow to me.

Dominus Paradoxum

I have asked you repatedly to provide evidence for your assertions, and you have failed to do so. Do you see why that would make some of us here suspicous? You seem intent upon denying obvious facts, like the fact that adults are in general far more mature than children. So I will ask you once more. You are making the claim that, in general, there is nothing about sex with an adult that would affect the well-being of a child. You are more than welcome to provide us with any evidence you have for believing this to be the case. 'Till then, there is no reason for anyone here to countenance your opinion.

Pat Kelly

I hope you are not attempting to infer that my posts are not scrutinized for personal insults at the same level of other posts and that the fact little if anything has been deleted from my posts is an indication of anything other than the fact I am not attacking others personally. Posters are not responding to my posts in the way they are because they feel I am personally attacking them. Posters likely attack me personally because they feel personally threatened by the ideas I express and feel a need to somehow silence those ideas. When they are unable to arrive at any logical argument to counter my points the only means left to express their point of view is a personal attack. I must say however, this form of expression is in my view a valid response to ideas one may not agree with and people should not necessary be restrained from expressing their disagreement or the manner they choose to express it. The only logical exception to this rule in my mind would be when attempts are made to silence opposing views. I am a big boy and there is little someone could say that would personally get under my skin. I also do not believe I have all the correct answers and am constantly looking for anyone who can provide more rational understandings. I challenge others to show me where I am wrong and would turn on a dime if someone proved me a bigger idiot than I already know myself to be.

In spite of other’s search for some vested interest that could explain away my reasoning, I have no such interest. If anything, I am predisposed towards logic that would bring my understandings more in line with currently accepted beliefs. My views get me in a lot of hot water with my closest friends who represent nothing other than mainstream society. I like the occasional beer with the boys just as much as the next guy. Personally at an emotional level I am homophobic and find it a bit disconcerting being around those whose sexuality falls outside the mainstream. I know exactly where most of those who personally attack me are coming from, at least I think I do because I have been there myself.

I am not on some crusade to convince everyone else to agree with my views. I am not looking to insult anyone personally and that has never been my intent. If I am confrontational it is because I am frustrated no one has been able to disprove or offer a more rational set of understandings than those I have discovered that say there is nothing wrong with sex… Even when it involves children.

Buddrow_Wilson

I will say that in a utopian dream-world, sex with children would be acceptable and both sides would enjoy it. But this is not reality. Young children do not understand the implications of sex and how it will affect their future personalities and actions. If a child makes sexual advances to an adult, it is the adult's responsibility to decline and explain to the child how such advances are potentially dangerous to him/her.

In a way, I almost agree with what Pat Kelly is getting at, but I know that it would not work to allow adult/children sex. How could you judge what is forced/strong coersion or consensual? Hell, physical harm to a child could be argued as accidental!

Have you considered that laws forbidding this actually protect potential pedophiles as well as children? If my child were engaged sexually by some guy and there were no legal way to get at this guy, I would probably kill him, regardless of how "consensual" the act may have been.

I will admit that components of the law are arbitrary, such as age of consent. I realize that there are many people under the age that are fully mature enough to engage in sexual act, and likely many over who are not, but lines must be drawn somewhere. Such minor sacrifices are neccesary for a prosperous society.

I don't think there is anything morally wrong with being physically attracted to a child. I'm not sure that you can really choose who or what you find attractive. However, to engage in an act with a young person (esp. prebubescent) is inherently criminal. It is a violation of trust and not good for society.

I also doubt that any serious harm is done by viewing child pornography in itself. However, there is a minimum of child exploitation being done in the manufacture of such and so it must be illegal to view or possess in most cases. However, the penalty for anything less severe than distributing should not be high in my opinion. Virtual child porn should not be illegal, but distributors of such may possibly be sued by person's (or the parents) whose images are altered for this.

Dominus Paradoxum

And that's just the problem, Pat. You haven't given us any arguments only assertions, for which you have failed to provide evidence. You have asserted that our views our are out of touch with the 'reality' of children's "sexuality" (and how pre-pubescent chilren could have a "sexuality" is far more than I can imagine). I have asked you to establish this reality, and you have not done so. You have have also asserted that our country's views are very backwards regarding sex. Well, if you really believe that, I think you must be living in a different California than I am. I have asked you to tell us just what you think a society with "rational" views regarding sex would look like, and this you have also failed to do.

Pat Kelly

I have never denied children are less mature than adults. What I have said is maturity is not a logical measure of one’s need, desire or right to engage in sex.

Correct except you leave out two important elements. My claim is that there is nothing inherently bad in sex that would affect the psychological well-being of a child outside the social norms that condemn such activity.

My daughter was sexually involved with a neighbor who was in his mid 30s when she was 12. After she told me I walked into his house past his wife into his bedroom and put my hands around his throat, picked him out of bed and threw him against the wall without saying a word. Rather than involve the police and risk the potential for psychological harm to my daughter I simply told this individual it was not wise or healthy for him to ever come near my daughter again. It felt good. I felt I had done my fatherly duty. But after reflecting upon it I realized it was my needs I was seeking to satisfy more than my daughters. I was wrong.

The reality of today’s world, its views towards sex and the affect those views have upon children is highly damaging to children even if we adults went through something similar ourselves. It is not simply a matter of the obvious fact children can be harmed by adult/child sex because society condemns it and for this reason alone, all children should be protected from the potential of a sexual encounter with an adult. Though this is absolutely true this is not the beginning and end of the matter. The enormous though totally overlooked issue of what happens to children in our hast to protect them from sex is never even considered. How all the taboo attitudes towards childhood sexuality negatively impacts children is infinitely more damaging at a societal and individual level than the rare child abducted for sex from a school playground.

I have seen some statistics that estimate rates grater than 60% for children to have experienced one or more sexual encounters with an adult under the age of 14. I doubt few would challenge the fact most instances of adult/child sex never come to the attention of the police and if they did, we would likely not have the prison capacity to house everyone. Statistically, most sex between adults and children by far occurs within the home involving trusted and close family members. The reality is the sex continues in spite of potential legal ramifications leaving our neighbors, our co-workers, our classmates, our teachers and as we all know, our clergy with some terrible dark secret to hide for the rest of their lives along with all the children they came in contact with. People are made to feel abnormal about their sexuality when it is not their sex that is abnormal but the way society has learned to view sex.

There is a great weight that has been placed upon the shoulders of every member of society within our irrational attitudes towards sex and it will only be when that weight is removed that we will truly be able to understand how much it affected us. Nonetheless, we urgently need to carefully consider the full ramifications of meddling in human nature through attempting to forbid the natural expression of childhood sexuality just because it occasionally brushes against someone older.