what the hell is wrong with people today? Does these sick bastards have a right to post/troll on facebook? Why are these perverts not in jail? Seems like facebook is fuul of shyt for allowing this to happen.
MM


The world’s largest pro-pedophilia advocacy group uses Facebook to connect with its members throughout the world; to find and exchange photos of children; to hone its members' predatory behavior; and to identify, target and reel in child victims, an investigation by FoxNews.com reveals.

Facebook says it has a strict policy against the posting of content that supports groups engaged in child exploitation, yet a simple, five-second search on Facebook, conducted on Sept. 23, yielded dozens of pages devoted to the infamous North American Man/Boy Love Association (NAMBLA). Many of those pages featured numerous photos of unnamed boys, some of whom appeared to be too young for kindergarten.

The same day, FoxNews.com found hundreds of links to NAMBLA’s website on Facebook, which has more than half a billion users worldwide. And posts on known pedophile blogs and chat rooms show an organized effort by pedophiles to use the social networking site to prey on children.

“This is just the downright filthiest of society setting up on Facebook in a public way, and the question is, 'Why is Facebook allowing this?'" said Hemanshu Nigam, co-chairman of President Obama's Online Safety Technology Working Group and a member of the board of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children.

Last month a joint investigation by U.S., Canadian, United Kingdom and Australian authorities brought down an alleged international child exploitation syndicate that operated via Facebook, and 11 suspects were arrested. Australian officials criticized Facebook for not alerting them to the online activities of at least one suspect; Facebook responded by reaffirming its commitment to preventing pedophiles from using the social networking site.


“We take safety very seriously and have a strict policy against the posting of child exploitive content or content that supports child exploitive groups," a spokesman for Facebook told FoxNews.com in an e-mail. "Facebook is highly self-regulating, and users can and do report content that they find questionable or offensive. Our team of investigations professionals reviews these reports, removes content that violates our policies, and escalates to law enforcement as necessary.”

But, a search for “North American Man/Boy Love Association” on Facebook on Sept. 23 produced 87 different groups. Some appear to have been created as a joke, or in protest, but there are others that appear nefarious.

The page for “Greensburg group of the North American Man Boy Love Association,” in the category of “Common Interest-Philosophy,” features a photo of a child around 4 years old.

“N.A.M.B.L.A. (East Lansing Chapter) also has a photo of a child, who appears to be about 5 years old.

Another, “NAMBLA” in the “Organizations-Advocacy Organizations” category, features a photo of a man being kissed on the cheek by a small child. Its description reads: “We are the North American Man/Boy Love Association. Our sole purpose is to push forward the concept that a consenting man (18+) and a consenting minor (-18) can have a sexual and loving relationship legally. Feel free to send your questions comments or constructive criticism to [redacted e-mail address]. Thank you for your time and support and remember keep fighting the good fight!”

more here...
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/09/28/pedophiles-find-home-social-networking-facebook/

playing devils advocate here....

but where is the line drawn?

is it illegal to publicly share in writing a common interest? is it illegal to post a childs picture? does there have to be evidence of some actual 'crime' that occurred or is it enough to have pictures and words?

if these folks are 'born' this way, is it undue bigotry to force them to hide that interest? or does the law only require that they not ACT upon that interest?,,,,,

seems pretty illegal to entice children to have sex...

was that what was proven to have happened?

doncha just luuuv your constitution..??

it makes lawyers, judges, politicians, and news pundits a WHOLE lot of money,,,lol

Another, “NAMBLA” in the “Organizations-Advocacy Organizations” category, features a photo of a man being kissed on the cheek by a small child. Its description reads: “We are the North American Man/Boy Love Association. Our sole purpose is to push forward the concept that a consenting man (18+) and a consenting minor (-18) can have a sexual and loving relationship legally. Feel free to send your questions comments or constructive criticism to [redacted e-mail address]. Thank you for your time and support and remember keep fighting the good fight!”

sounds pretty cut and dry to me...

just sounds as if they want the laws concerning consent changed and that they invite coments and questions. I dont see where they are inviting children to have sex,,,,

I am blown away these azzholes have a constitutional right to exist!

i agree...just the idea of wanting to have sex with boys should be illegal...

cant litigate peoples desires,,,

besides, isnt all male homosexuality a desire to have sex with a boy at SOME point ?

One way --IT'S WRONG< but why not MSNBC use this as an opportunity to stage another taping of their show, That would be great. And all their profiles are right there on facebook.

i can't speak for the cupcakes, but if that is true, just another reason to hate them...

they could call it "the cupcake chronicles" but to many homos watch msnbc and they would lose their ratings... fox needs this one...

MsHarmony, right in this sentence is where they are saying they want to have sex with children.

My opinion is that they are very sick people because a child cannot make up their minds and are not emotionally mature to have sex, especially one who is not even old enough to be in kindergarten. This sick group's motto is "Eight is too late" meaning the younger the child, the better.

I read that they want to push for legalized consentual sex with those under 18. Advocating their 'cause' is their constitutional right as much as it is others right to push for making abortions illegal or homosxual marriage legal,,,,,its just another agenda,, however offensive it is

exactly! if a grown woman doesn't want to get raped, why would anyone think a child would? these guys are selfish degenerates that can't control there urges. dead or castrated is the only cure...

and there is the rub,, the word 'consent' gives adequate argument to the issue of 'rape'


in this culture where sexual activity has no stigma and adolescent experimentation is widely accepted,, it is hard to argue on one hand that kids have the ability to consent with each other, but not with an 'adult'

kids should have sex or they shouldnt and its really hard to logically debate why the age of their chosen partner should even figure into that equation. If they are mature enough for the activity, than they are mature enough to decide with whom.

I remember reading that you have two children of your own and take care of nieces and nephews (I think it was, we talked about it in another thread) but did you really think that at the age of 4 or 5 these children would have been able to make a rational decision about something like sex? I know when my girls were that age, they couldn't decide on what shirt to wear or what toy to take to grandma's that day.

Making homosexual marriage or abortions legal is of no comparison to letting some man have sex with a young child. Abortion and homosexual marriage is between consenting ADULTS.

my unpopular opinion is that consistency and balance are the best teachers

I think there is a distinct difference between say,, a seven year old, and a 13 year old

I absolutely would not expect a seven year olds body and mind to be able to handle sex BUT

after puberty, I truly believe each childs emotional and physical maturity varies as well as what they can handle

the issue here is that the law states anyone under 18 is a minor , but there are obvious differences in maturity in the age ranges of 0-18 which are worthy of logical consideration

if a 'woman' has sex with a 'boy' who is 16, why is it worse for the boy if that woman is 35 than if she is 21, the physical and emotional impact will be the same for him

I take issue with the age for sexual consent and the inequity with which it is applied,, I do not support anyones 'right' to have sex with a pre pubescent minor

I do not MORALLY think it is correct for a dependent minor to have sex with ANYONE, but legally I dont think the laws should be age discriminatory once we accept as a culture an age at which 'children' should be 'expected' to 'experiment'