Voodoo molestation (dictionary): Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
==Voodoo molestation== | ==Voodoo molestation== | ||
'''Voodoo molestation''' is a term used by boylovers to refers to recent [[child pornography]] laws legislating that viewing an image of a child being abuse is the same as abusing the child depicted. <ref>[[Harm to victims of child abuse from the viewing of the resulting child pornography]]</ref> This was upheld by US Supreme Court in [[Paroline v. United States]] which in part stated, "restitution to the respondent, who was sexually abused as a young girl to produce child pornography, is proper under 18 U.S.C. § 2259 only to the extent the defendant, who pleaded guilty to possessing images of child porn, including two images of the respondent, was the proximate cause of the victim's losses. Victims should be compensated and defendants should be held accountable for the impact of their conduct on those victims, but defendants should only be made liable for the consequences and gravity of their own conduct, not the conduct of others. "<ref name=SCOTUS >{{cite web|url=http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/paroline-v-united-states/ |title=Paroline v. United States|publisher=SCOTUSblog|accessdate=April 29, 2014}}</ref> | '''Voodoo molestation''' is a term used by boylovers to refers to recent [[child pornography]] laws legislating that viewing an image of a child being abuse is the same as abusing the child depicted. <ref>[[Harm to victims of child abuse from the viewing of the resulting child pornography]]</ref> This was upheld by US Supreme Court in [[Paroline v. United States]] which in part stated, "restitution to the respondent, who was sexually abused as a young girl to produce child pornography, is proper under 18 U.S.C. § 2259 only to the extent the defendant, who pleaded guilty to possessing images of child porn, including two images of the respondent, was the proximate cause of the victim's losses. Victims should be compensated and defendants should be held accountable for the impact of their conduct on those victims, but defendants should only be made liable for the consequences and gravity of their own conduct, not the conduct of others. "<ref name=SCOTUS >{{cite web|url=http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/paroline-v-united-states/ |title=Paroline v. United States|publisher=SCOTUSblog|accessdate=April 29, 2014}}</ref> Meaning that it was upheld that looking at the images of a person being abused did them damage. | ||
==Objectification== | ==Objectification== | ||
Revision as of 20:05, 2 April 2015
Voodoo describes a set of spiritual folkways which originated from African traditions. Practitioners of Voodoo believe in “sympathetic magic”. Sympathetic magic principles state a powerful link exists between entities that are similar in appearance or come into contact with each other. Items such as photographs, nail clippings, hair and other objects may be used to create an “image” of another person. This “image” may be used to cast a curse or spell. For this reason, there are some practitioners of Voodoo who are cautious of photographs, as they are powerful items capable of harm.[1] Magic and superstition have surrounded photography from the beginning. Because of the way it captured the image, especially of living people, the camera was widely believed to cause death or illness or to steal the soul.[2] While some cultures still believe that photography can steal your soul, most people in these cultures today allow their photograph to be taken, however infants are protected. It is still believed the souls of infants are fragile and are susceptible to leaving the body.[3]
Voodoo molestation
Voodoo molestation is a term used by boylovers to refers to recent child pornography laws legislating that viewing an image of a child being abuse is the same as abusing the child depicted. [4] This was upheld by US Supreme Court in Paroline v. United States which in part stated, "restitution to the respondent, who was sexually abused as a young girl to produce child pornography, is proper under 18 U.S.C. § 2259 only to the extent the defendant, who pleaded guilty to possessing images of child porn, including two images of the respondent, was the proximate cause of the victim's losses. Victims should be compensated and defendants should be held accountable for the impact of their conduct on those victims, but defendants should only be made liable for the consequences and gravity of their own conduct, not the conduct of others. "[5] Meaning that it was upheld that looking at the images of a person being abused did them damage.
Objectification
Objectification means treating a person as a thing.
References
- ↑ The religious belief that a photograph can steal a soul. Retrieved on April 27, 2014.
- ↑ Edwards, Elizabeth. Oxford Companion to the Photograph:magic and superstition. Oxford University Press. Retrieved on April 27, 2014.
- ↑ http://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/8380/did-some-cultures-believe-that-photography-can-steal-your-soul
- ↑ Harm to victims of child abuse from the viewing of the resulting child pornography
- ↑ Paroline v. United States. SCOTUSblog. Retrieved on April 29, 2014.
