Post by NFA on Nov 4, 2023 5:57:42 GMT 8
The system isn’t broke it is crook
--
Babies of the wrong gender in the womb, the disabled, the elderly and the sick.
Governments across Australia are gripped with an obsession to offer state administered death as a solution to life’s complexities.
Vulnerable mothers can be pressured into abortion and the elderly can be pressured towards state-sponsored suicide to relieve financial burdens of care.
Yet the singular group that every state government is more than happy to fund for the rest of their lives – to the tune of about $150,000 a year – is the worst kind of criminal.
Recently, Western Australia’s parliament voted to remove a requirement to record abortions where the baby was born alive, refused to require palliative care for aborted babies born alive and failed to ban sex-selective abortions.
The WA Liberal leader Libby Mettam argued that “the current involvement of the WA state coroner in all live-born babies after termination should cease”.
How have we arrived at this point, where an aborted child born alive gets the death penalty without ever being recorded as a person – while the serial pedophile stays alive to be a burden on taxpayers to cost around $400 a day forever?
Victoria and Queensland records show 700 aborted babies survived abortion with no palliative care.
A child who survives abortion to cry is not worthy of any human compassion or coronial inquest, yet those who destroy a child’s life for sexual gratification get a colour TV and three meals a day on the taxpayer.
It is inappropriate, apparently, to discuss where a state-sanctioned death penalty should be applicable, which is capital punishment for serial pedophiles who provide police with a brief of undeniable evidence they record themselves, traumatising children for their perverse depravities.
If ever there were a crime where capital punishment applies, surely it is at the pointy end of child sex abuse, where sick deviants pay big money to see babies and young children subjected to irreversible harm?
It is where the usual arguments against capital punishment don’t apply.
You don’t sexually abuse a toddler because you are hungry, in a fit of rage or in poverty.
In cases of serial pedophiles, there is no doubt of guilt. They record themselves in the act and share it online with other pedophiles. The brief of evidence will never be better.
It is not a case of who was drunk, or “he says”/“she says”. It is not a matter of being found guilty by jury. It is overwhelming proof.
Terrifyingly, it’s a booming enterprise.
Last year, the National Centre for Missing and Exploited Children received 29 million reports – a 3000-fold increase since 1998, when there were 9700 reports.
Australian Federal Police statistics show 40,232 reports in the past financial year, up from 14,285 reports five years ago.
With the growth of internet access, encrypted platforms and anonymising technology, the threat to our children is evolving and growing – with the trade in children expected soon to out-value the cocaine trade.
This has all become more real to Australian parents with the arrest of a grub who worked in childcare and allegedly committed acts too depraved to be reported, in a place where they should have been safe.
Yet some of the worst offences, to seek to fundamentally destroy a human being at the beginning of their life journey, still attract woeful punishment.
The AFP is currently seeking changes to the Criminal Code because the current maximum penalties for threatening children to obtain new child exploitation material carry a maximum penalty of imprisonment of between five and six years. Academics like to dance around it, telling a child sex exploitation committee in Canberra recently that those who view child abuse content online aren’t technically pedophiles but have an “escalation in interest in sexualised material”. This often overlaps with coercive control of their partners and “sometimes the sexual abuse of their own children”.
Sounds like a pedophile to me.
This is not just a problem in Mexico, Thailand or the Philippines, where children are abducted off the street to satisfy pedophiles. It is happening right here in Australian childcare creches.
We are skipping down the path to a growing acceptance of pedophilia in academia while the ACT mindlessly follows other countries’ euthanasia.
Legislation tabled in the ACT on Tuesday proposes the terminally ill will be able to get state-sponsored suicide without so much as an expected time frame of death.
In Canada, this includes accessing euthanasia if you are homeless.
People with a disability in that country report the government will fund access to a medically assisted death, but not the support they need to survive.
--
Babies of the wrong gender in the womb, the disabled, the elderly and the sick.
Governments across Australia are gripped with an obsession to offer state administered death as a solution to life’s complexities.
Vulnerable mothers can be pressured into abortion and the elderly can be pressured towards state-sponsored suicide to relieve financial burdens of care.
Yet the singular group that every state government is more than happy to fund for the rest of their lives – to the tune of about $150,000 a year – is the worst kind of criminal.
Recently, Western Australia’s parliament voted to remove a requirement to record abortions where the baby was born alive, refused to require palliative care for aborted babies born alive and failed to ban sex-selective abortions.
The WA Liberal leader Libby Mettam argued that “the current involvement of the WA state coroner in all live-born babies after termination should cease”.
How have we arrived at this point, where an aborted child born alive gets the death penalty without ever being recorded as a person – while the serial pedophile stays alive to be a burden on taxpayers to cost around $400 a day forever?
Victoria and Queensland records show 700 aborted babies survived abortion with no palliative care.
A child who survives abortion to cry is not worthy of any human compassion or coronial inquest, yet those who destroy a child’s life for sexual gratification get a colour TV and three meals a day on the taxpayer.
It is inappropriate, apparently, to discuss where a state-sanctioned death penalty should be applicable, which is capital punishment for serial pedophiles who provide police with a brief of undeniable evidence they record themselves, traumatising children for their perverse depravities.
If ever there were a crime where capital punishment applies, surely it is at the pointy end of child sex abuse, where sick deviants pay big money to see babies and young children subjected to irreversible harm?
It is where the usual arguments against capital punishment don’t apply.
You don’t sexually abuse a toddler because you are hungry, in a fit of rage or in poverty.
In cases of serial pedophiles, there is no doubt of guilt. They record themselves in the act and share it online with other pedophiles. The brief of evidence will never be better.
It is not a case of who was drunk, or “he says”/“she says”. It is not a matter of being found guilty by jury. It is overwhelming proof.
Terrifyingly, it’s a booming enterprise.
Last year, the National Centre for Missing and Exploited Children received 29 million reports – a 3000-fold increase since 1998, when there were 9700 reports.
Australian Federal Police statistics show 40,232 reports in the past financial year, up from 14,285 reports five years ago.
With the growth of internet access, encrypted platforms and anonymising technology, the threat to our children is evolving and growing – with the trade in children expected soon to out-value the cocaine trade.
This has all become more real to Australian parents with the arrest of a grub who worked in childcare and allegedly committed acts too depraved to be reported, in a place where they should have been safe.
Yet some of the worst offences, to seek to fundamentally destroy a human being at the beginning of their life journey, still attract woeful punishment.
The AFP is currently seeking changes to the Criminal Code because the current maximum penalties for threatening children to obtain new child exploitation material carry a maximum penalty of imprisonment of between five and six years. Academics like to dance around it, telling a child sex exploitation committee in Canberra recently that those who view child abuse content online aren’t technically pedophiles but have an “escalation in interest in sexualised material”. This often overlaps with coercive control of their partners and “sometimes the sexual abuse of their own children”.
Sounds like a pedophile to me.
This is not just a problem in Mexico, Thailand or the Philippines, where children are abducted off the street to satisfy pedophiles. It is happening right here in Australian childcare creches.
We are skipping down the path to a growing acceptance of pedophilia in academia while the ACT mindlessly follows other countries’ euthanasia.
Legislation tabled in the ACT on Tuesday proposes the terminally ill will be able to get state-sponsored suicide without so much as an expected time frame of death.
In Canada, this includes accessing euthanasia if you are homeless.
People with a disability in that country report the government will fund access to a medically assisted death, but not the support they need to survive.
Make no mistake, the state is OK with the administration of death.
It is OK to kill the very young, or very old, but not those in a particular subclass of evil.
This is not a case of justice being blind.
It’s politicians legislating justice to look the other way.