Friday, September 12, 2008

Shirley Lowery Explains how a victim isn’t really a victim and it’s all the governments fault

I often wonder when a person is convicted of consensual incest with a family member how government intervention and exposure to the victim and what the victim has been through is any less traumatic than the consensual act itself.

Just as government intervention in the sale of alcohol didn’t work during Prohibition, I do not believe the problem of consensual sex between adults and post-pubescent young women can be cured by government.

What does the government do with an incest case of the past where both are now grown adults? Do they put little cameras in the apartment and monitor the family members?

I find it ironic that homosexuals were considered deviant at one time and institutionalized and today, an older man being attracted to a post-pubescent young woman is considered a deviancy. Last time I checked the definitions ephebophilia was quite natural and normal for grown males in a sense. Isn’t that how we reproduce as a species? One does not have to be blood related necessarily to commit incest according to law

Everything seems to be backwards and our legislative servants have somehow become our lords and masters

The problem is not the system but the people who allow this horrendous Beast of government to operate in the fashion it does. They use us like chattel and we allow it. Isn’t that co-dependency as like with an abusive taskmaster or husband? What is the difference in concept?

No comments: