|
|
|
|
|
| |
Thursday, February 24, 2005
"F--- the Children":
Planned Parenthood's Teenwire Sends Kids to Pedophile Site
UPDATE, 2/25/05: It seems likely that The Dawn Patrol is one of the Teenwire editors' morning reads. [UPDATE #2: No kiddin'!] Within hours of the following post's appearance, Teenwire took down its original "Does Age Matter?" article and reposted a radically altered version. The new version has a different author's name and does not contain the link to the pedophiliac "Age of Consent" Web site referred to in this post.
Unfortunately for Planned Parenthood, while Teenwire's socially irresponsible editors can run, they can't hide. Dawn Patrol reader Paul has posted screen grabs of the article as it originally appeared, including a close-up of the section of the article referred to below, where it says, "Check out Age of Consent for more about the laws in your state..."
DP reader Saint Kansas writes that "the Age of Consent folks also apparently run [a site called] loveworks, which (ho hum) sells sex toys." (See the site's WHOIS entry for details; a loveworks employee is Age of Consent's technical contact.) The "ho hum" is because the news comes as no surprise—as I write below—Teenwire sends readers as young as six years old to Scarleteen, a Web site whose shopping portal sends the kiddies to a pornography/sex-toy outlet.
Planned Parenthood's sex-ed Web site Teenwire—where children as young as six may register and ask "Experts" sex questions—currently features the article "Does Age Matter? When Girls Date Older Guys," which invites readers to visit a pedophile-run Web site.
The article tells little girls that besides the possibility of an older man's being too "controlling," "a girl who's hooking up with an older guy needs to think about something else, too—the law....Check out Age of Consent for more about the laws in your state."
The words "Age of Consent" in the Teenwire piece link to a Web site which is very clearly run by pedophiles.
Although the link opens up a window that first shows a disclaimer saying Teenwire does not "necessarily" endorse the site, it offers no warning of Age of Consent's actual nature. That nature may easily be discovered by anyone clicking on the words highlighted beneath the banner atop each of the site's pages: "Cool Teen Sites." The "Cool Teen Sites" that the Teenwire reader will find through Age of Consent include a page of shots of teenage girls stripping or kissing one another for webcams.
But that's the least of it.
Age of Consent's main page has a prominent link to its "Editorials"—dozens upon dozens of articles offering justification for having sex with children and viewing child pornography.
One of these editorials is titled simply, "Possession of Child Porn Should be Legal." It begins (deletion mine): F--- the Children
Plain. Simple. Blunt.
The possession of child pornography should be legal. Again, this article is accessible directly through Planned Parenthood's Teenwire. All the child—as young as six, by Teenwire's own rules—has to do is click on the link to Age of Consent, and then click on "Editorials."
Voila. "F--- the Children."
How can parents trust an organization that, with all the money it gets from taxpayers—over a quarter-billion a year—can't pay someone to check the links for children on its own Web site?
The truth is, this is not an aberration. Teenwire already links to Scarleteen, a Web site founded by a lesbian pornography writer, whose store enables children to purchase pornography from a sex shop. Scarleteen volunteer bulletin-board moderator Tim Adams, writing to me to complain about The Dawn Patrol's Teenwire/Scarleteen exposé, has stated, "In regard to pornography as itself, I am of the belief (as well as a great many who...support comprehensive sex education) that pornography isn't as 'harming' as you'd like to portray it." That is Teenwire's attitude as well (link features graphic images).
So remember, when you hear Planned Parenthood educators rail against abstinence-only education in favor of "comprehensive sex education," this is what they mean by comprehensive: "F--- the children." God help us.
I've closed the comments section for this post because it's grown too unwieldy. (For some reason, Blogger wouldn't let me close the comments unless I hid them all—sorry. Thanks very much to Paul, Saint Kansas, Jivin J., Gormuu, and others who wrote with helpful information.) If you have additional information to add on this topic, please send it to me at the address at left (several inches down from the ol' tip jar) and I'll put it up if the mood takes me. Thanks.
3:17 AM
|
|
| |
|
|
|
