UN Seeks to Decriminalize Child Sex, Sex Work, and Abortion

This topic has 23 replies, 9 voices, and was last updated 11 months, 1 week ago by Vknid.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 23 total)

1 2 →

Author

Posts
May 10, 2023 at 9:36 pm #299282
Audie
UN Seeks to Decriminalize Child Sex, Sex Work, and Abortion

And here is the UN brochure, linked in the article.

8 March Principles

–Moreover, sexual conduct involving persons below the domestically prescribed minimum age of consent to sex may be consensual in fact, if not in law. In this context, the enforcement of criminal law should reflect the rights and capacity of persons under 18 years of age to make decisions about engaging in consensual sexual conduct and their right to be heard in matters concerning them. Pursuant to their evolving capacities and progressive autonomy, persons under 18 years of age should participate in decisions affecting them, with due regard to their age, maturity and best interests, and with specific attention to non-discrimination guarantees. [emphasis ours]

Yes, that is the United Nations explicitly suggesting that sex with minors “may be consensual” and that our laws should reflect that. And notice that nowhere do they provide guidance on what age a “minor” can “consent,” other than to say “under 18 years of age.” Therefore, we must conclude that they mean this to include any child—toddler, middle schooler, or teen. It’s all so stomach turning!

But it’s the natural consequence of today’s sexual ethic, which is now entirely consent based. No sexual act is actually wrong or immoral as long as the parties involved “consented.” But consent is an extremely flimsy morality as “consent” can easily be obtained through grooming, coercion, and slow-and-gradual desensitization. (Pause and ask yourself if this type of grooming for “consent” from children is not exactly what’s happening with the sexual content being taught to children as young as preschool in public schools and through the media and social media every single day?)
May 11, 2023 at 2:38 am #299297
DigiCat
Moderator
WHAT IN THE ACTUAL FUCK?!?????!!!!!?????!?!?!!!!!!!
May 11, 2023 at 6:05 am #299299
Maverick
Leftist sickos…
May 11, 2023 at 6:20 am #299300
Vknid
Moderator
What do you think all the drag queen nonsense and pornographic children’s books are about? At this point I think the entire push of the gay movement is to get access to children. I am not saying that is the goal of every gay person I am saying the movement has been coopted for that purpose. And they are not only working towards that but they are daring us to stop them. At this point unless you deliver your children to them wrapped in a bow you are homophobic or a transphobe.

The truly crazy part here is that I believe the USA is the at the center of this. And it is something we are desperately trying to export to other countries whom all think we are insane sickos.

Here are 2 of the rules for “The Declared goals for Communist take over of the United States” from 1963.

25. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV.

26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as “normal, natural, healthy.”
- This reply was modified 11 months, 3 weeks ago by Vknid.
May 13, 2023 at 10:12 pm #299479
Audie
YoungRippa finds a bit that relates to the subject.
May 14, 2023 at 8:58 am #299483
DragonLady
And this is coming from the same group of people who cry “PEDO!” if you’re reading or watching anime and manga😡:
May 14, 2023 at 1:43 pm #299486
DigiCat
Moderator
And this is coming from the same group of people who cry “PEDO!” if you’re reading or watching anime and manga😡:

Fucking sickos
May 15, 2023 at 2:43 am #299497
comicsgate
Saw a school textbook in Germany that was much worse than these. I avoided posting it. Will see if I can find it but I really do not like it. Not even to point and say Ewww. I really despise it.
May 15, 2023 at 3:08 am #299498
comicsgate
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10829445/Parents-hit-disgusting-book-aimed-children-young-FOUR-frankly-describes-sex.html

Still can’t find the video. I think this is the book out of Berlin, Germany.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-12081785/Five-Toulouse-players-REFUSE-play-protest-Ligue-1s-campaign-against-homophobia.html

Also, this is off topic, but five soccer players refused to wear a PRIDE jersey. I don’t really blame them. What does this have to do with straight men? Why does there need to be the oppression of wearing symbols? This too, is grooming. It’s an act of domination. Rainbow flags have nothing to do with heterosexuals and there is no reason for any of us to acknowledge these fad flags.

Have you ever met those obnoxious guys that make sex jokes about every other word or line? Like everything has a sexual meaning? That is what the Rainbow flag is like.
May 15, 2023 at 8:32 am #299505
Vknid
Moderator
I think what we are seeing is a full on push to get to children trying to shield itself against push back with the threat of being called “transphobic”. It’s pure evil but it is worse than you think because it’s for 2 reasons.

1) the obvious sexual access to children

2) to separate children from their parents for the purposes of control and indoctrination
May 22, 2023 at 5:25 am #299871
SuperSoynic_Speed
I read the article and thought ”they have to be taking it out of context and running with a false narrative”, checked the author and website and sighed because I was correct.

It’s not about adult and child sexual relations. That’s obviously pedophilia. It’s about two people under the age of 18. The majority of people lose their virginity before 18 and about 1/3 before turning 16.

26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as “normal, natural, healthy.”

homosexuality is normal, natural and just as healthy as being heterosexual so what’s up?
May 22, 2023 at 8:49 am #299879
Audie
If this ends up being a double-post, I apologize; I tried to fix some mistakes in the original post, but it looks like that post was lost, so I’m trying again this way.

PRINCIPLE 16 – CONSENSUAL SEXUAL CONDUCT

Consensual sexual conduct, irrespective of the type of sexual activity, the sex/
gender, sexual orientation, gender identity or gender expression of the people
involved or their marital status, may not be criminalized in any circumstances.
Consensual same-sex, as well as consensual different-sex sexual relations, or
consensual sexual relations with or between trans, non-binary and other genderdiverse people, or outside marriage – whether pre-marital or extramarital – may,
therefore, never be criminalized.

With respect to the enforcement of criminal law, any prescribed minimum age of
consent to sex must be applied in a non-discriminatory manner. Enforcement may
not be linked to the sex/gender of participants or age of consent to marriage.

Moreover, sexual conduct involving persons below the domestically prescribed
minimum age of consent to sex may be consensual in fact, if not in law. In this
context, the enforcement of criminal law should reflect the rights and capacity of
persons under 18 years of age to make decisions about engaging in consensual
sexual conduct and their right to be heard in matters concerning them. Pursuant to
their evolving capacities and progressive autonomy, persons under 18 years of age
should participate in decisions affecting them, with due regard to their age, maturity
and best interests, and with specific attention to non-discrimination guarantees.
So, what “false narrative” is the article running with?

Where, in all those words under Principle 16, does it say anything about it being only about “two people under the age of 18”?

The entire language of that article conveys the idea that any legal age restriction is potentially unjust, that whatever they mean by “consent” is more important than any legal age restriction, and “consent” may be legitimately given by children under 18–how far under 18 is not specified, and thus is anyone’s guess. Ah, the wonders of vague language.

What this article espouses is, essentially, a sexual free-for-all, with the only caveat being whatever they mean by “consent”, and I’ve little doubt that, when it comes to it, they’ll interpret that word as loosely as they can.

But if you want to find a false narrative, you may look at this next statement, because it really is false.

homosexuality is normal, natural and just as healthy as being heterosexual so what’s up?
May 22, 2023 at 9:40 am #299880
Vknid
Moderator
“homosexuality is normal, natural and just as healthy as being heterosexual so what’s up?”

That’s entirely your opinion. That whole line of thought is born out of the destructive thought process that if something makes someone feel good in the short term or if it is a personal desire then it must be good for you or OK. Our entire society is being destroyed by those whom would seek personal pleasures in the short term completely forgoing the future. Western society was built on the opposite premise where everything was about delayed gratification and building for the future. Now, many are controlled through their personal passions/wants/desires like lab mice who get a treat when they do what the scientist wants.

I am not advocating for disallowing people their choices. But to pretend every choice is equal and should be validated because someone feels a certain way is a path to validating ANYTHING. Which is exactly what we are seeing now.
- This reply was modified 11 months, 1 week ago by Vknid.
May 22, 2023 at 11:20 am #299885
Wisdom
“Western society was built on the opposite premise where everything was about delayed gratification and building for the future. ” I don’t see how that has anything to do with sexual orientation.

But let’s examine the claim.

“Homosexuality is normal” <- At 4-5% of the population, it’s not “normal”. Where do you draw the threshold for normal though? About 20% of people like rock music. Is it “normal” to like rock music? 40% like video games, 75% like pizza. Where does one draw the line for how many people are needed for something to be considered normal?
“Homosexuality is natural” <- it has been observed among almost all species of mammals as well, so that pretty much confirms that it’s natural. Furthermore, we know what causes it, and the cause isn’t pharmaceutical, chemical or social. So yes, it’s 100% natural.
“Just as healthy as being heterosexual” <- Yes and no. Homosexuality or homosexual sex won’t make you die one day sooner than hetereosexual sex. However, statistically it comes with an increased risk of STDs. It’s still the STD that will make you sick or kill you, and HIV hits a straight person the same as a gay person. The gay person just has a statistically significantly higher risk of contracting it, which is likely more due to promiscuity. A gay person with 1 partner in life has a lower risk of contracting a STD than a promiscuous straight person. Finally, it can be argued that on a meta level, not procreating is unhealthy in terms of one’s DNA dying out. On the other hand, humanity doesn’t require everyone to pass on their DNA, and gays are able to adopt.

In conclusion, Homosexuality: is not normal, is natural, is by itself not a health issue, but comes with slightly increased comorbities.
May 22, 2023 at 11:36 am #299886
Vknid
Moderator
“I don’t see how that has anything to do with sexual orientation.”

I never said it had anything to do with orientation directly. I spoke of choices that are pleasurable in the short term vs. ones that play the long game and aim for the future. The current culture celebrates every desire as normal, natural and valid. This is not only incorrect it is harmful and dangerous. If you defend every desire as valid simply because you have it or because it results in short term pleasure you open the door to everything. This is how we have gotten to the point where sex changes for children are a human right and we are on the cusp of pedophilia being normalized.
Author

Posts