Pedophiles Party

[Clodfobble]

Originally Posted by HappyMonkey

Children can't consent. The ACLU would not support it.

The ACLU would not support the actual change in law they are proposing, but they absolutely would support their right to form the party and pursue their goal to the fullest extent.

[9th Engineer]

Children can't consent. The ACLU would not support it.

Age of consent is only a concept of law, and laws can be changed. To rephrase correctly, children do not hold power of concent. How exactly the ACLU would support them depends on the current political climate, but saying they support NAMBLA's right to pursue having the age of concent laws changed could quickly turn into direct support in the right climate.

[glatt]

Are you saying that the ACLU secretly approves of pedophiles and is just biding its time until liberals control the government, and then they will push the pedophile agenda outright, and stop hiding behind their civil liberties cover?

[9th Engineer]

I'm not saying they currently hold views one way or the other. But your accusation is interesting, are you implying that pedophiles do not deserve the same rights as all of us? Careful with your reponse, and bear in mind that thirty years ago you could have replaced pedophile with homosexual in your post.

[glatt]

What accusation?

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by 9th Engineer

I'm not saying they currently hold views one way or the other. But your accusation is interesting, are you implying that pedophiles do not deserve the same rights as all of us? Careful with your reponse, and bear in mind that thirty years ago you could have replaced pedophile with homosexual in your post.

No, the question is whether children deserve the same rights as all of us. And the answer is no. Children have more protections and fewer freedoms than adults..

[9th Engineer]

You're still missing my point. Everyone is assuming we all share an immutable definition of what defines someone as a child. I think we'll hear the argument made that 'child' only describes those under 12 years old, not teenagers.

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by 9th Engineer

You're still missing my point. Everyone is assuming we all share an immutable definition of what defines someone as a child. I think we'll hear the argument made that 'child' only describes those under 12 years old, not teenagers.

You could hear any argument, it's a free country. People can make any argument they like. If someone tries to shut down NAMBLA for making the argument, the ACLU may support them, but they won't support the argument itself.

Just for note, the current federal age of consent guidelines are "12 if the age difference is under 4 years, 16 otherwise", and a few states have their own.

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by 9th Engineer

saying they support NAMBLA's right to pursue having the age of concent laws changed could quickly turn into direct support in the right climate.

No it couldn't. The ACLU has supported Nazis and Communists and right-wing nutjobs and left-wing nutjobs, in all political climates. They support everybody's right peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances, even if they disagree with the grievances.