Archive for category Sex

Gay is a Sickness, like Alcoholism

God-Loves-EveryoneI was listening to the CBC Radio this morning where the host had two guests on talking about an issue similar to this one.

The American politician (name not worth mention) was saying that homosexuality is a mental disorder like alcaholism, and for society to grant them the same rights as heteros is to also grant pedophiles, beastiality and incest the same legal rights and freedoms.

Why? How could he possibly justify that? Well, he thinks that those things are all part of sexual patterns people get into early in life. He said the homosexual movement has a plan to lure young people, convert them to the gay side and grow their movement.

I can’t believe this is 2010!

The other guest is a Ugandan Christian Priest. He said his sister wanted a divorce but that’s against his faith, so he advised her not to. She listened to him and while he was away in school her husband murdered her. It took the death of his sister for him to realize that his faith did not provide him with the answers to life’s questions. So if the bible says marriage is permanent and gay is wrong, but he cannot take his faith as it is written, then what can he do? Read the rest of this entry »

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

What Do You Tell Your Kids About Strangers?

By Lance D’Aoust

I write this after hearing about the Tori Stafford case in Woodstock Ontario (Video Article here). Short version: An 8 year old girl willingly walked away from her school with a woman. Apparently that woman’s boyfriend killed Tori that same day, April 8th 2009. Absolutely disgusting and completely deserving of the death penalty.

This story leaves many parents obviously shaken, but more importantly worried about their own children and how they can help prevent this from happening again. Please comment on this article with what methods you employ to keep your kids safe. Here are some comments I’ve read from my friends own web-postings. It’s important to collect this information and distribute it to all parents because as we’ve just seen it is really that simple for major harm to happen to a child.

A.M.
I tell my ___ not to yell help but fire! Because stupid f__ks wont look when someone yells help cause they don’t want to get involved but they’ll look at a fire.

C.P.
“When my ___ were younger I told them to never go with ANYONE, even their aunts and uncles unless I told them to. If ANYONE (even friends and family) tell them to go with them, without me telling them to, they had to ask them what the secret password was.

We made up a password, that they would remember, and if I sent anyone for them I would tell it to them. That’s how they would know it’s ok to go with them. Once that password was used by someone, we thought up a new one.

And I told them that even if someone said I was hurt or in the hospital, don’t go with them. The only person exempt from the password was my mom. (just in case I was injured so bad I couldn’t speak).”

One tactic that I read about from a police officer was that if the child is on a bicycle DO NOT get off it. Hold onto that bike and bike away. If you’re grabbed, hang onto that bike because it is really hard to steal a child and the bike at the same time.

I like these ideas.  I taught my children to push their thumbs into their attacker’s eyeballs, to bite them repeatedly, anywhere and to fight for their lives; screaming “stranger,” “you’re not my daddy/mommy,” “fire” the whole time, kicking and generally making themselves difficult to steal or sneak away.  We go through it every time I think they’ll be out of my reach or go into crowded public areas. I even have them practice biting and thumb-poking (on me) so they can actually feel it and not be surprised if it ever happens.

An interesting note about the eye poking: The eyes are like balls of jelly and when you poke them they feel strange but they don’t burst. If an eye poke goes too far the eyeball will be forced out of it’s socket. Sounds gross and it is, and the reason I type this is because should this ever happen the surprise of the result can immobilize the child who should be running now that the attacker is blinded.

When I was little my mom would worry so much about me that I am surprised she didn’t have monthly heart attacks. I would try to reassure her by telling her that I would just kick the attacker in the ding-ding (my way of saying man’s privates). One day at around 13 I went out after midnight and stole a bike. I was riding the stolen bike around when a compact car full of undesirable people spotted me. I dodged them 3 times before they finally located me. One of them was on foot while the others drove. I pedaled that bike as fast as I could. I headed for an place I thought I could lose them, but having never been there at night I did not realize the gate would be closed. I was cornered. I knew it and so did they.

I tried to ride around them but 4 older teens or young men were too much for me on the bike. I had no idea what to do, no training, no prior instructions – nothing. They pretended to be off duty police who knew that I had stolen the bike. I didn’t buy the police bit but I remember wondering how they knew I stole the bike. They told me to put the bike into the hatchback and they would take me to the station. I played along, put the bike in the back and took off running. My hope was that had what they wanted and I would not be chased. Luckily for me they did not chase me.

I always told my mom I would kick them in the privates, but that never happened. I didn’t even think of it, and to be honest I am glad I didn’t because as a man I have been kicked there; I have seen others kicked there and I can say from experience that it will not stop an assailant. In every instance where a man has been kicked in the groin in a violent encounter it either didn’t do enough or it made the man angrier. Perhaps it is revenge or some other instinct.

A groin kick does not immobilize so it is a wasted effort.

Looking back at my experience I can’t help but realize a few things. Talking about what you’re going to do is not enough. Practicing it is very important and that’s why I practice the things I tell my children. They know that if they kick or punch me it will do nothing to stop me, and I am not a large person. They know that a bite will take my attention away and place it onto the bite. They know an eye poke will make me drop them. They know because they’ve done it already.

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

FBI Raids Houses for Clicking a Link

The FBI has recently adopted a novel investigative technique: posting hyperlinks that purport to be illegal videos of minors having sex, and then raiding the homes of anyone willing to click on them.

Undercover FBI agents used this hyperlink-enticement technique, which directed Internet users to a clandestine government server, to stage armed raids of homes in Pennsylvania, New York, and Nevada last year. The supposed video files actually were gibberish and contained no illegal images.

A CNET News.com review of legal documents shows that courts have approved of this technique, even though it raises questions about entrapment, the problems of identifying who’s using an open wireless connection–and whether anyone who clicks on a FBI link that contains no child pornography should be automatically subject to a dawn raid by federal police.

Roderick Vosburgh, a doctoral student at Temple University who also taught history at La Salle University, was raided at home in February 2007 after he allegedly clicked on the FBI’s hyperlink. Federal agents knocked on the door around 7 a.m., falsely claiming they wanted to talk to Vosburgh about his car. Once he opened the door, they threw him to the ground outside his house and handcuffed him.

Vosburgh was charged with violating federal law, which criminalizes “attempts” to download child pornography with up to 10 years in prison. Last November, a jury found Vosburgh guilty on that count, and a sentencing hearing is scheduled for April 22, at which point Vosburgh could face three to four years in prison.

The implications of the FBI’s hyperlink-enticement technique are sweeping. Using the same logic and legal arguments, federal agents could send unsolicited e-mail messages to millions of Americans advertising illegal narcotics or child pornography–and raid people who click on the links embedded in the spam messages. The bureau could register the “unlawfulimages.com” domain name and prosecute intentional visitors. And so on.

“The evidence was insufficient for a reasonable jury to find that Mr. Vosburgh specifically intended to download child pornography, a necessary element of any ‘attempt’ offense,” Vosburgh’s attorney, Anna Durbin of Ardmore, Penn., wrote in a court filing that is attempting to overturn the jury verdict before her client is sentenced.

In a telephone conversation on Wednesday, Durbin added: “I thought it was scary that they could do this. This whole idea that the FBI can put a honeypot out there to attract people is kind of sad. It seems to me that they’ve brought a lot of cases without having to stoop to this.”

Durbin did not want to be interviewed more extensively about the case because it is still pending; she’s waiting for U.S. District Judge Timothy Savage to rule on her motion. Unless he agrees with her and overturns the jury verdict, Vosburgh–who has no prior criminal record–will be required to register as a sex offender for 15 years and will be effectively barred from continuing his work as a college instructor after his prison sentence ends.

How the hyperlink sting operation worked The government’s hyperlink sting operation worked like this: FBI Special Agent Wade Luders disseminated links to the supposedly illicit porn on an online discussion forum called Ranchi, which Luders believed was frequented by people who traded underage images. One server allegedly associated with the Ranchi forum was rangate.da.ru, which is now offline with a message attributing the closure to “non-ethical” activity.

In October 2006, Luders posted a number of links purporting to point to videos of child pornography, and then followed up with a second, supposedly correct link 40 minutes later. All the links pointed to, according to a bureau affidavit, a “covert FBI computer in San Jose, California, and the file located therein was encrypted and non-pornographic.”

more at http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-9899151-38.html?tag=nefd.lede

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Bill Targets Parents of Porn-Viewing Kids

Reference: www.xbiz.com NSFW

DES MOINES, Iowa — A bill under consideration by Iowa lawmakers proposes that parents face punishment if their children are allowed access to pornographic content.Under the bill, House 443, and its companion bill, Senate File 271, parents whose children view adult content would be guilty of child abuse and earn placement on the state child abuse registry.

Since its initial proposition last week, House 443 has been a subject of controversy.

Supporters of the bill are saying that several existing bills of a similar nature contain loopholes exempting parents from accountability in obscenity distribution, and that child abuse has a direct relationship to pornography.

This legislation isn’t the icing on the cake. It’s the cake,” said Kathy Lowenberg, director of counseling for Growth and Healing in Iowa City. “We have to have it.

Lowenberg added that in her experience treating victims of child abuse, pornography plays a considerable role in most cases.

The bill’s critics claim the existing bills are effective, and that the bill is broad to the point that ”even a child who sneaks a peek at a Playboy magazine could push parents into legal turmoil,” according to the Des Moines Register.

This would have the state intervening in families every time a parent drops their guard,” said Randall Wilson, legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Iowa. “You have adolescent hormones raging here, you have curiosity and I think, truth be told, you would find that a whole lot of kids would qualify as children in need of assistance who belong to perfectly normal families.

Critics have also raised the issue of the bill’s stance on children viewing pornography inadvertently or without their parents’ knowledge. It is reported that the bill does not answer these and other questions.

We need to do a lot more discussion,” said Sen. Becky Schmitz (D), “and be a little more specific about what we mean and the ramifications of it.

My Comments

First of all, we can argue that this is a good idea just as easily as we can argue that this is a bad idea.

First, FOR:

This is good for the sole purpose of keeping porn out of kids hands. I imagine this bill is targeting really young kids, not teenagers. I imagine they want to keep their kids innocent just like you and I would want. 

AGAINST:

Wow, where do I even Begin!? Invasion of privacy, civil liberties, freedom of thought, political intervention of parenting, overbearing, and just plain stupid!

The first time I encountered porn was my dad’s Playboy magazines as a teenager – about 14 years old. I am not the only buy I know with that story to tell. We’re all normal people. It did not ruin us.

I have been working on adult websites for 9 years now and I have never seen this idea come up. Considering I work in the adult industry I am very aware of keeping this stuff out of the hands of kids, and I am also very aware of HOW to do it. Never have my kids seen anything related to my adult work. YouTube has shown them more mature themes than any other method yet there is no Bill tabled on that.

This legislation is a bad idea – period. There are so many people consuming adult material nowadays – videos, DVDs, websites and sex toys, pillows, gadgets etc – that it would be impossible to defend an innocent person and immeasurably easy to convict an innocent person. Consider what this law is trying to accomplish… It wants your home to be free of sexually themed paraphernalia. THAT is governing your interests. There is no way for you to have such things in your home and make it completely child-proof. You just can’t do it.

Imagine your home has nothing related to sex in it at all, on any level – BUT – you DO have a computer connected to the net. Well guess what – you now have ever sexual concept ever conceived of plugged right into your home. If any kid figures out that spelling YouTube.com produces a porn site, You’re Guilty, BAM, you lose. What are you guilty of? Nothing. No one is guilty of anything so what is there to punish that would require a law?

Here’s a Better Idea:

Instead of inventing ways to take children out of their home, come up with ways of IMPROVING the home. Wow, that’s a better idea!

Make parental education easily available. 
Let’s face it, some people became parent’s when they were not ready and they could use all the tips they can find. The 17 year old boy who knocked up his girlfriend does not understand the need to hide his porn collection from a baby – teach him!
There are some things that people just don’t think about until it’s pointed out to them, and this is likely one of them, because if you look at it otherwise you would be saying that there are parents who show the porn to kids. Ridiculous! Those aren’t parents, those are pedophiles and this law would never find them!

The better idea is to get smarter, not to get more laws. 
Society is falling apart and it’s ideas like this that accelerate the process. 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,