Netherlands Allows "paedophile Party" To Run In Next General Election.

[Kromovaracun]

Should freedom of speech include to those who call for lowering the age of consent to 12? Or for legalising child pornography? Or should voters be entrusted to reject these policies on their own, as the court has ruled?

"The new party, which was formed in May, pledged to intensify its campaign to remove the taboo on paedophilia which, it claims, has worsened in the past decade after the arrest of the notorious Belgian paedophile Marc Dutroux. In his most notorious crime, Dutroux kidnapped and imprisoned two young girls and starved them to death."


Guardian:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/jul/18/topstories3.mainsection

Voice of Russia:
http://english.ruvr.ru/2013_04_16/Europe-ready-to-defend-child-molesters-rights/

[ummmm]

I can't see them getting many votes.

[jackthehat]

I think distasteful as the prospect is, perhaps the court ruling is right. Take it to the polls and let the sensible Dutch people kick it into touch........

It'd be interesting to see what the Authorities do with the list of 500 'supporters'.

[Sharingan]

The age of consent is 12 in The Vatican, but how many people will seriously vote for anything called The Paedophile Party? I don't think they will generally have a very nice time canvassing for votes do you? They'll self destruct at the first election imho.

[New Judge]

The problem is, who decides which policies are acceptable for an election manifesto and which are not?

[jim360]

The biggest reason paedophilia is taboo, for me at least, is because the children can't possibly be consenting. They aren't old enough, in the eyes of the law at least. It becomes maybe more of a grey area at 14-16 perhaps, but in general the child isn't able to consent. So it becomes a violation of that child's rights. That seems to me to trump the "freedom of speech" issue.

[Sharingan]

New Judge might be able to help me here but isn't the age of criminal responsibility 10? If so it doesn't make a lot of sense to say that someone of say 12 can make the decision to steal or kill and have to pay the price but not decide if they can have sex. The age of consent is 13 in lots of places in Europe, and whatever age is decided it might be best if it was Europe wide, as for example I can legally have sex in Germany since last year but not in the UK until next year.

[LazyGun]

It is a true test of the principles of free speech though. Should ideologies which we regard as frankly repugnant be allowed to be aired, or should we move to ban, censor, repress?

I take heart from the fact that they have zero chance of gaining any sort of political power - from the report itself I think it said that the overwhelming majority of even such a liberal country as Holland had no time for their manifesto proposals.

The danger with allowing them to promote their views, giving them air time, is that they might be able affect the debate, to move the boundaries of what would be considered acceptable, or to give such views a veneer of "respectability" that might encourage some individuals to think such impulses are the norm and attempt to act them out.

More generally, the age at which an individual is legally responsible for their own actions - the transition from a child to an adult, I suppose - does seem
confused, depending on what actions are being considered.
Criminally liable at 10. Sexually adult at 16. Matrimonially (?) responsible at 18.Only legally able to buy drugs ( cigarettes and alcohol) at 18, or to vote at 18. Not absolutely sure what the situation is about tax :)

And most cultures seem have their own internal inconsistencies as to what constitutes an age of competence as an adult, it seems to me.

[joko]

i think the age of consent is more about the naivety and vulnerability of the person, rather than their ability to agree and want sex

plenty of 10-12 years olds already have sex and want to have sex - and even though physically they are 'equipped' to do it, in reality they probably shouldn't, as they are likely too young mentally and emotionally to deal with it and all that it brings.
so i think the age is not chosen by when they themselves want it and can understand it, but when they're deemed to be old enough to be able cope with it.
in fact many 16 year olds are not particularly able to deal with it mentally and emotionally either ... but there has to be some age.


i expect this party is just a controversial joke, designed to shock and see what reaction they get.
they must know they cannot win.

[emmie]

joko, i would think most parents wherever they come from would be horrified to think their 10/12 year have the desire or already have had sex, i know i would be. I know time marches in and children are growing up too quickly but i don't think that would be right.
As to the point of the post, let them run, one would hope they don't succeed in their aims.

[youngmafbog]

1) Don't judge other countries principals vs ours. Britain is not the Great dictator.
2) for democracy to work then providing it is not breaking the law of the land it is taking part in (not our country - theirs) then it should be allowed to happen. That way the electorate can show their feelings in true democratic fashion.

[Kromovaracun]

Interesting. I have to say, although I was somewhat undecided when I posted the question, I agree with the sentiments expressed so far - that the best way to deal with people like this is to allow them to speak and be defeated on their own merits.

I was expecting a much greater difference of opinion among ABers though, I must confess.

[ummmm]

Paedophilia is an attraction to prepubescent children so the age of consent is irrelevant.

[LazyGun]

@Umm Not going to argue about the definition of what constitutes paedophilia. Technically, the question was badly worded, since this proposed new party wants an age of consent at 12, and paedophilia is technically 11 or less, but the upper age is blurred.Practically speaking, in the media and when the term is used in general conversation the term paedophilia is used as an umbrella word to describe sexual attraction to minors - those under the age of consent.

As described, this parties manifesto seems more aimed at early teens to me, and so might better be termed Hebephilia - and then of course the age of consent and the age at which your are considered adult enough to make and be considered responsible your own decisions becomes very relevant.

Take another look at their manifesto pledges ( if you can stomach it) for details about their views on pornography, age at which a teenager can be classed as an adult for the purpose of appearing in adult films etc.

All in all, pretty distasteful stuff, and it would seem the Dutch population agrees with that sentiment too.

[Ellipsis]

The Guardian article quoted in the OP is from 2006 and refers to the "Brotherly Love, Freedom and Diversity party (PNVD)".

The Voice Of Russia article is from 2013 and refers to the "Mercy, Freedom and Variety" party which I guess, allowing for translation, could be the same thing. I wonder, 7 years later, how they're getting on ...

[joko]

em10 - ?

I didn't say it was right! read my post again.

and yes of course most parents would be horrified - doesn't make it not the case though does it?

[emmie]

i read it the first time, you said plenty of 10/12 year olds already have sex or want to have sex, if that is the case the boys and men involved are breaking the law, and if caught should go to jail.

[ummmm]

They often have sex with their own age group.

[emmie]

10/12 year old? i honestly can't find any stats to back this up. Perhaps someone else can. there is enough data for 15 -16 year olds, but i would be truly astonished, and i don't live under a rock, to find that many were having sex at that very young age, not consensually.

[ummmm]

I obviously don't know how common it is. How could anybody know so stats would be useless. It does happen though.

[Sharingan]

I'm not sure why a 12 year old boy having sex with a 12 year old girl ought to go to prison and the girl not Em10? Why do you think this?