How I protect children

 I have pedophilic disorder conflated with my parent. A parent can, in terms of emotional makeup, be an L, meaning a parent usually victimizes themselves next to adults, while naturally seeking to control and punish children, as part of its inherent sin nature. A pedophile is a reverse L, where we view children as a high elect that sit alongside us, in a high and proud manner above society, in affinity format, knowing literally that we are adults, but we are on the side of children to that much - and I punch your lights out if you try to violate the rights of my friends. Verbally, but nonetheless you're gone, because the joker sometimes comes out for practice runs.

In reality, it is a centered way to protect children. Think the CIA while in Russia. I am not really a citizen of the United States, even if I am and am grateful. I am not of this world but of the next, and that includes in terms of citizenship.

I have eyes in the back back, meaning covert erotic gaze, meaning covert protective gaze, meaning both, meaning both. I am alert in the store, and pay attention to these things, marking parents for dead, intervening rarely, holding wrath as a burden for advocacy elsewhere (or maybe there if the topic of children's rights comes up), having a religious peacekeeper that is anger at a child hating world, as a servant and tool of God directed towards said parents.

When a child is abused, and I find out, I do an assessment as to what remedy to apply, which may or may not involve state intervention, depending on the age and development of the child, depending on what the child wants with the case (some don't want to leave parents), and whether the abuse has the potential to be life-threatening. Smaller children have no say, due to their lack of communication skills, and so I would be very much more likely to report, especially since smaller children are more likely to be murdered in the course of child abuse. I assume that reporting will revictimize (largely due to state competence) until proven otherwise, beyond a reasonable doubt, with bias towards the least intrusive measures. That means that if a parental abuse situation can be resolved without state intervention, I will allow it....Basically, when picturing, say, an 11-year-old, if he/she comes forward to me and says "I hate my dad. Please report him", no matter what his expressions or however I like his dad, I must report, because the child's word is factual proof that abuse occurred by my faith standard, and the child is also describing something illegal inflicted upon them. There are many stories of children being burned by the authorities making false promises, with me being one of those cases.

I do not rush to protect a child, because if you rush too quickly, you end up hurting the child and/or the family dynamics that currently keep the child afloat, even if so barely. I respect any child's wish to be removed (which I can better relate to) but also any child's wish for me not to report, and just "tell him off". When you make it a big deal when a child self-reports, you scare them from cooperating, and encourage more secrecy. Sometimes I would have to go against the wishes of a child, but pretty much only in clear, life-threatening cases. Otherwise, I'd disagree with their choice, but know my place as an ignorant adult in that regard, not knowing what the child's home life really is like. Maybe he/she tells me a lot, but maybe I don't know the full story. Every case is different. Every child is different. We need stronger laws, such as an anti-spanking law.