UN seemingly backs child sex
Seems the Geneva-based International Commission of Jurists wrote in March with an assist from UNAIDS and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights that sex with minors below the age of consent is legal in their eyes.
A shocking report issued by international legal experts with the backing of the United Nations appears to open the floodgates to normalize sex with minors.
“Sexual conduct involving persons below the domestically prescribed minimum age of consent to sex may be consensual in fact, if not in law,” …
The report is titled “The 8 March Principles for a Human Rights-Based Approach to Criminal Law Proscribing Conduct Associated with Sex, Reproduction, Drug Use, HIV, Homelessness and Poverty.”
It does not actively call for decriminalizing sex between adults and minors. But it states that children have both the capacity and the legal right to make sexual decisions.
Guess I don’t understand this too well: the law is extremely clear on what a child can and cannot do, due to immaturity, perceived lack of experience, etc. – but there is a group of people who seem to advocate that children are old enough to permanently mutilate and damage their bodies, choose their permanent sexual orientation – at ages no sane person could support. Can’t buy a .22 or drink because you are too young, but get pregnant at age 12 or cut your schwanz off at 5 and you’re good to go?
The once-unthinkable recommendations from an international cabal of global elite legal minds appears to suggest that pedophilia could be normalized.
There is also the sudden dramatic rise in the number of transgender people and normalization of transgender culture, fueled by popular culture and public education, defying all known historic precedent.
In addition, educators in many instances now brazenly state that parents have limited rights over their children while their classrooms grow increasingly sexualized.
Caveat – note the source of this report – not exactly the most impartial.
Now if they were proposing something semi-normal, like dropping the age of consent to 16 from 18 – I could see that as at least a sane proposition. Maybe not something I would support (well, I was 16 once and probably would have backed it then in the Pre-Daughter Days) but that smacks of reasonableness. Now? Either too many whackos are under the UN umbrella or the UN itself needs to move somewhere else – might I suggest Bikini Atoll?
Category: "Your Tax Dollars At Work", United Nations
Is it wrong to think that the signatories of this document should have their testicles pounded flat with a sledge hammer?
No, but first they would have to have some big enough to hit.
So LGB/DEMS are PRO UN now, is how I read this.
No, and fuck that. Active, predatory pedophiles already have a place in society. It’s called a woodchipper. Success rate 💯 percent.
Those with no history of offending who desire to stay that way? There is hope. Start here: https://troubled-desire.com/en/
At this point, I think it’s past time the UN invades these US of A to bring our feral citizenry under control. For far too long the US has been awash with; guns, V8s, bacon, silicon breast implants, and non-subjugated peoples.
Stolen Land Yankee (re)Education Reservations when?
(most romantic song EVA! imho…)
One of my favorite Slayer songs from my favorite Slayer album.
Album name: God Hates Us All
Album release date: September 11, 2001
The UN can fall off the face of the Earth, and everyone would live just the same, maybe better. The UN hasnt done anything remotely useful since the Korean War.
“The UN hasnt done anything remotely useful since the Korean War”
I would wager long before that.
When I was a little kid in the early 50’s we had collections of donations in school for UNICEF, UNESCO etc.
Today I wouldn’t donate a steel penny to that overblown racist
leftist collection of liberals. World peace my ass.
I remember reading my dad’s Birch Society mags in the late 60’s, he just retired Air Force around late 67 and they had articles about the UN stabbing the US in the back during the Korean War and other conflicts.
Past time to Defund the UN and move it offshore, use the building for all the States to send the homeless to.
I’m a faithful follower of Brother John Birch
And I belong to the Antioch Baptist Church
And I ain’t even got a garage
You can call home and ask my wife
Sorry, every time I hear the name John Birch, ol’ Green Teeth’s heartfelt protestations in “Uneasy Rider” come to mind.
FTUN
So kids as young as six should get radical treatment for Apotomenaphila?
Im sure the LGBTNKVD will attack the ‘ hateful bigots ‘ who don’t support fking kids.
We gonna need more of these;
I’m all for the woodchipper for active pedophiles, but the word ‘seemingly’ is doing a whole lot of heavy lifting in this post. Here’s the actual report:
https://icj2.wpenginepowered.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/8-March-Principles-Report_final_print-version.pdf
Reading parts of that, it seems to me to be indicating that, to the dismay of some, adolescents are having sex, and that (for example) while a 15 year old and a 16 year old can’t ‘consent’ as we recognize it with an adult, they shouldn’t be prosecuted under ‘lack of consent’ laws for sex with each other.
We’ve got so-called ‘Romeo & Juliet’ laws in lots of states for that, and that seems reasonable. Nobody is advocating for pedophilia here.
Hell, if we want to address that, let’s stop the whole ‘child marriage’ shit we’ve still got going on in a number of states here. Pretty sure we can all agree on that being fucked up.
https://www.businessinsider.com/mike-moon-gop-missouri-lawmaker-defends-childs-right-to-marry-2023-4
But Fox News said it was true
they don’t do FAKE NEWS…..
🤣😆😁😀😜😂😅😭
I don’t think that particular section (Principle 16, third paragraph) is aimed at cases where both parties are below the domestic legal age of consent. It seems to argue that actual consent should be considered as a mitigating factor in cases that would otherwise be ipso facto cases of statutory rape.
On the surface, I’m not necessarily opposed to this – 18 years is a relatively arbitrary number when it comes to legal consent (neither sexual nor emotional maturity is strictly tied to age in years) and many nations apply different numbers to this. Blanket laws are usually vastly unfair.
What I think most are concerned about with this, however, is the slippery slope it implies. The age of sexual consent in Japan is 13 (though they voted last month to raise it to 16). In Angola, it’s 12. In a surprising number of nations, it’s only 14. So… it’s cool to have consensual sex with a pre-teen in Angola, but it’s to the wood chipper if anywhere else? No, any adult who has sex with a child, regardless of how mature she might be or what domestic law says about her age… there is no level of Hell in which they don’t belong, country codes notwithstanding!
You want to bang children but don’t want to be judged for it? Indulge in our 2011 vintage, aged 12 years! Hell, I think the Sudanese Ministry of Tourism just found their new slogan.
Surprisingly, Iran, Yemen, and the Gaza Strip may have the rare moral high ground in requiring marriage for consent (marrying a child is as reprehensible than is raping one promiscuously, but should reduce the societal ills that come with promiscuity).
Much of the document, such as suggesting it be perfectly excusable for a knowingly HIV-positive person to spread HIV as long as they don’t “intend” to infect the partner (and only if they actually succeed in transmission), is utterly reprehensible and will only further undermine societal issues and public concerns. It’s begging for fundamentalist backlash.
*Maldives is 9!
Ok, this is a very disturbing rabbit hole. I imagine I’ve landed on some very bad watchlists just for researching it, and it will probably be a while before I can fall asleep without crying first.
Some sources say the age of consent in the Maldives is 9, while others say there is no minimum age with parental approval.
One (ageofconsent.net) claims it’s 18 without parental approval but there is no minimum age if the folks are copacetic, that it’s possible for children younger than 1 to marry or be charged with statutory rape. It also states that “ it is possible for two individuals both under the age of 0 who willingly engage in intercourse to both be prosecuted for statutory rape, although this is rare.” I’m pretty sure this is not a good source.
Some assembly required.
Withdraw from the UN!
FOX News taped out on there lawsuit
700 plus million dollars
wow
You ain’t wrong.
UN mission vet here. It was a real choice mission, brought it up to me like room seevice, and when it was over I’d never want another.
When I read the report I take that section to mean it should not be a criminal offense if an 18 year old high school senior fucks his 16 or 17 year old high school junior date at the prom if she’s a willing participant…the section is suggesting we allow younger persons of that age the capacity to make certain autonomous decisions for themselves even if their parents and the state are not fans of those decisions.
I did not see anything in the report suggesting that they were encouraging 40 year olds to fuck little kids…in fact this sections states that the enforcement of said laws should simply reflect the reality of the age of those under the age of 18 and what level of autonomy they would normally have in any society at different points under the age of 18 and be non-discriminatory.
I will however concede it’s rather poorly written and will undoubtedly be misconstrued by not only some third world nations but a fair amount of first world nations as well…
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.
I agree, save the part about it being intended to defend 18yo high school students. If that is actually the intent, then it is not expressed in the writing. If anything, it’s arguing against using arbitrary numbers of years as a legal fine line. If a 14yo woman is mature enough (by domestic law) to consent to sex with an 18yo, then is she not also mature enough to refuse consent with an 18yo with whom she doesn’t wish to have sex? If so, is she not mature enough to make the same decision regardless of the age of her suitor?
Given the uber-libertarian approach toward sex and identity throughout the rest of the guidelines, the forward, it’s take on criminality regarding the risks of HIV, and the general tone of the document… it seems more like a defense of things like the Vagina Monologues’ “The Little Coochi Snorcher That Could” section that lauds a 24yo woman taking sexual advantage of a 13yo girl… “if it was rape, it was a good rape.” Along with other forms of predation on children (I’m not labeling all homosexual activity as predatory and I’ll stand firm for the rights of consenting adults to do with each other whatever they wish) that some have termed “grooming.”
Note, I’m not suggesting that The Vagina Monologues should be banned or censored (though the author seems to have done some censoring on her own to be less objectionable to her audience).
I have no reason to doubt that that particular section was a genuine anecdote, or that it is genuinely written from the victim’s perspective. I just use it as an example of the kind of predatory behavior the guidelines in-question seem to encourage.
Statutory rape laws exist for a reason. Should they be revisited and adjusted to better reflect reality? Absolutely. On the face, that’s all the particular paragraph is suggesting. Taken as a whole, the document suggests a much more slippery slope.
…just like FTA, only UN
FJB, & the UN