Policy statement on child abduction

 I have to make an obvious policy statement about child abduction. I omit "kidnapping" because that is the broader offense, meaning it is wrong, and is one of many ways that adults abuse children. Child abduction is one of the most serious crimes that a pedophile, by the clinical understanding, is capable of committing. We all, as adults, have it in us, under some level of distress, to remove a child from the providing custody of an inept parent. This is how it usually goes.

It says in Exodus 20:17 KJV:

And he that stealeth a man, and selleth him, or if he be found in his hand, he shall surely be put to death.

"found in his hand" was applied broadly under the Mosaic Law and opposed corporal punishment, as well as any unlawful acts of child abduction to remove the child from an abusive home. Child abduction was not a practice of the Israelites, and was unlawful under the Mosaic Law. Christians observe the spirit of the Law, in which case kidnapping is a major form of entitlement leading to theft. 

Child abduction is a form of victim entitlement projected onto the child, sadly a child that is already being abused. Most adults, including most pedophile adults, even in a weak state, don't snatch a child up. Where would I find the resources to care for a child? I just felt the urge to do something, every single time we went shopping. It was an anger and anxiety mixed that was at a low level that made you freeze - you could do nothing to help the poor child, and thought of dying yourself instead for being so helpless to save a child from imminent danger. This is a common struggle of most pedophiles I've known, and an antisocial pedophile could take it all the way, misuse verses like the one above, and then commit a horrific crime to add to horrific abuse...Instinctively, I knew I couldn't stop it, and that was scary, like it was happening to me, like my childhood was happening all over again. I just couldn't help but start a blog to journal my trauma. That is the main function of this blog today.

I don't step in by way of coercion or force of any kind, so not to overly disturb things. I step in with the least intrusive measures to achieve the desired result. The goal is not to avenge trauma, but to protect a child, so I would just voice my opinion, then shun the parents when they refused proper anti-spanking assistance. The child would naturally be removed from my life alongside the parents, as parents have providing custody over children, and I can't change an idiot's mind.

Nadine Block has been attacking my advocacy for a good reason, but with evil weapons that cancel out that good intentions. She is genuinely concerned about me traveling all the way to Delaware County and "checking out" her grandchildren. She says "cordoned off". They may want to be friends, but are they competent in that desire. The fact that their parents spank is more of a bright versus darkness, with child victims of corporal punishment being shrouded in darkness, as is the case with any trauma - you really stop there because the child is harmed and traumatized, and you do not add to that ever. 

Who failed the child in the case of pro-spanking parents having their child abducted? All the adults, meaning all of them, meaning all of them. It all blends together. Adults suck in this country, so hold us all accountable, myself included. Why add to an existing trauma that is horrific in and of itself? It's usually not just the parents either keeping that poor child down, but everyone who enables the parents, pointing down the line stating "respect parents" and backing them up - your whole community hates you. I never wanted to be kidnapped as a child. I wanted my father to experience that - locked up for something, meaning a sex crime he never committed, because I saw it as serious on those lines, as I do today.

Therapy-to-prison pipeline - taking a U-turn toward pedophilia awareness/acceptance

Pedophilia is a disorder that affects 1-2% of the male population. Most people think either a pedophile is very difficult to treat, or cannot be treated. "They cannot be treated" remains one of the most common myths. The origin is not that belief itself, but a false Christian doctrine that "they need spiritual help, not medical help" because pedophilia is a "aberration" and "spiritual disease". It is not according to my beliefs, but maybe an aspect of a much larger one - parental entitlement.

Picture the Pennsylvania state house. Picture two pipelines headed in the other direction, the mental health system, and the prison system. One is afforded more resources on this subject, and that is the prison system. Who controls the state house on this issue? My lobby. The purity lobby. I do believe in Christian privilege, and do believe that pedophiles are victims of it more than anyone else in society. I am often disgusted by how fellow conservatives deal with this issue. This is the one issue that I respect liberals on, because most quietly understand that pedophiles need proper mental health treatment.

Things have improved since the founding of the Virtuous Pedophiles forum in 2012, meaning the educated sectors of American society do quietly acknowledge the existence of non-offending pedophiles, but only as an aside in a conversation, then focusing on other things. Most of these people, in my experience, share my parenting views to varying degrees, meaning they respect the modern science on parenting as well. None condone child abuse, including child sexual abuse, but think, like me, that abuse can be prevented by way of treating pedophiles before the fact, meaning before their first offense with a child.

Lawmakers are beholden to society, and a large amount of society opposes the existence of non-offending, non-abusive pedophiles, meaning they project their own abusive traits onto pedophiles. These tend to be parents that are pro-spanking to the core, pride themselves as "old school", and since they don't want to blame themselves for causing trauma to their child, project onto a bogeyman, meaning pedophiles. Lots of this is rooted in abusive "Christian" beliefs based on Catholic infiltration of our Christian church (yes, I'm that kind of conservative Christian) that teaches a toxic "predestined nature" of "male desire", meaning the false belief that men "can't help it" due to "being men and that's just how they are".

We never intended any of this to happen here at children's rights. Organized pedophiles were long our adversary, but ordinary clinical pedophiles not affiliated with a "tribe" are allowed by the movement framework allotted by the United Nations, meaning we are very generous to actual pedophiles, because we know the truth - the actual abusers are peacekeepers, not pedophiles. There is some overlap, but not much of one. Most pedophiles are somewhere on the autism spectrum, meaning at least having autistic traits or PDD-NOS. A predatory pedophile does not know his age, and hangs out with children in public gathering areas not knowing that such is inappropriate. These offenses exist on the lawful unlawful level, despite their possibly peacekeeping characteristics. However, only 1 out of 4 pedophiles are abusive, according to research done by the Canadian Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH). We know all this knowledge here at children's rights, but sit on it, because we don't want it misused. This is all about "stolen knowledge", meaning the anti-contact lobby now knows all concerning our research, and is presenting it for public consumption. This is something that needed to happen at some point, and the sooner the better.

Why? Therapy abuse is a common form of abuse committed against pedophiles, meaning in the form of therapist alienation. Not all therapists are equipped to treat pedophiles, but they should have a referral to a more sex-positive specialist handy, and not either dump clients without a referral with scathing remarks, or worse, report them to the authorities based on their self-diagnosis to the clinician alone.

Anti-parental entitlement is all about getting the adults of society to admit their own guilt, choose not to abuse children, and stop projecting their abuse onto small minorities with limited defenses. Where does this all start? Abusive religion, of the Christian purity variety. I myself believe in Christian sexual purity, yet see no reason to single out pedophiles as the abusers, and give them special treatment in the reverse, meaning special punitive treatment. The idea is enforced coddling, and that idea stems in the false doctrine that men are driven to have sex no matter what. Such is false. You don't accidentally rape a child. It is a conscious, willful choice of harm towards a child. Most non-offending pedophiles don't need that kind of coddling by society, meaning we can simply choose not to abuse a child, and be the master of our choices. NOTHING can stop me from refraining from harming a child. NOTHING! I myself am a low-level advocate, meaning the one to keep the others in a group in line, and straight with the facts. I think for myself, and for God, but am not a part of this world, but of the next. 

A pedophile is a parent, meaning an antisocial parent, and is a parent conflated with sexual aggression. It is when an individual's sexual development stops at puberty or shortly after due to hormones, affecting age-oriented psychosexual development. A boy's age preferences, upon hitting puberty, are at his age and a few years lower. When these ages do not change, that is called pedophilia by psychiatrists and mental health professionals. It usually happens in individuals with autism who are small in stature and have child-centered interests, usually with an empowerment theme. Or, they may just like being around children, and "get" them more than same-age peers. When the interactions are normal and respectful, in an egalitarian way, there is nothing to worry about. However, if they get clingy or pushy, that is a prerequisite to abuse, which is perceived by the child. They should be made aware by their own choosing to reform themselves, so if your child has these traits, allow them to disclose them to you, by laying out the environment for such a disclosure. DO NOT feel obligated to praise them - they shouldn't make you feel that way when coming out anyway. Simply listen when the disclosure comes, and depending on what comes out, seek a family psychologist. Chances are, an actual child/pedophile will have repeated "kid crushes" organized like train cars. The goal is then to seek the caboose. I see this as a childhood disorder because when caught early like this, the abuse of a child later in life can be prevented...Pedophilia is an immature parent, thus a neurodevelopmental disorder based on malfunctioning pubertal hormones.

In my case, I think the list of crushes has hit the caboose. Let's hope so, for children's sake. I myself did not "play the field" or have any desire for vengeance towards a child. Just friendship in a way that was inappropriate. We all as adults are abusers of children, only I admit it - albeit a low-level abuser - and seek professional help and support from those close to me, like my mother.

Pedophile statement

I want young girls to exist, and I want them to exist right in front of me, for me to see, and for them to feel safe in relation to me, with the authority to enforce her safety to me, and me with the obligation to obey.

I want her perhaps to be my girlfriend, and my hot date, and we be pals to the core, and NOTHING can get between us, and...it's never going to happen, but a man can dream. Pro-social fantasy, pro-social daydream, pro-social time-out.

We are gentle parents, and identify by it as a core theology. We share this for full transparency purposes.

Say "please" and "thank you": Why parents should show good Christian manners to their children

 Many parents feel the need to boss their children around. Most parents in this country defend their "rights" to order children around like they are slaves, and then back up those orders with punishment. This is a form of child abuse in and of itself, when perceived by the child. Why? You want something from your child. We can't all get what we want in life, so don't throw a temper tantrum, parents.

The Tenth Commandment opposes coveting, and prohibits, in the Christian realm, entitlement as a general attitude, or an attitude towards children, and is denoted by the Greek root word πλεονέκτης (Latin: pleonektés) and refers not only to wanting things from children, but wanting to the point of seeking to impose said want on a child, leading to theft/abuse, with the Greek root word for "abuse" in the New Testament being κλεπτω (Latin: kleptó) and cross-references the Eighth Commandment, and refers to legal damages, with legal damages being evidence in terms of harm inflicted on persons, property, or effects.

This is basically an entitled attitude of "I am the parent, and I deserve respect from my child" leading to demanding, controlling, or spousifying behavior. It is wanting things from a child enough to try and impose said want on them. Parents have the right to ask a child to do anything that doesn't harm them, but if they might throw a temper tantrum themselves, enough to impose on the child or even complain, they are entitled in that request, and should either stifle entitlement or not ask at all. Usually, the correct response is to not ask at all.

Asking can mean asking them to turn down the radio in their room. Are you willing to raise your voice and get into a fit of anger? If not, do not ask. Deal with it, and center yourself by the impact of the horrific, terrorizing music that your child simply enjoys. The horrors of it all (sarcasm indeed intended)! Asking them not to run into the street, or even urging them with helpful advice? That is not an entitled request of a child, as children need to know that a street is unsafe. The thing is, however, that very young children cannot internalize that danger because of lack of brain development, thus cannot be left unsupervised where there is any car traffic.

I myself talk to children just like any other person, meaning I don't raise the tone of my voice, and don't talk down to them in any way. I myself have issues as a symbolic parent to them that render me on their level. I see them as potential friends. Saying "no" would like an telling an ordinary adult "Sorry, I can't lend you $500, because I'm broke and need that money to pay the rent". It is setting limits on those terms.

Let the parents who identify themselves by defending their "rights" to control, punish, or otherwise abuse children, languish in the lake of fire and brimstone, suffering the second death! Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand!

Adult guilt: Why the Bible prescribes it

 Many people see me as a self-hating mental case. Pro-social self-crucifixion. I do not hate myself nor love myself inherently. My view of myself changes when my accomplishments change, and the proudest accomplishment of mine is summed up by two acronyms. Children self-protect. Adults abstain.

I do not hate myself for anything other than being an adult, as adults as a whole are to blame for the child abuse epidemic - meaning every single one of us, myself included. I am part of a class of persons that society sees as higher, thus I must do the opposite of an adult society that hates children, and lower myself to a level lower than the child, under the child's lawful and judicial command as to their needs.

It says in the Tenth Commandment, in Exodus 20:17 KJV:

Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbor's.

The Hebrew word translated "covet" is לחמוד (Latin: lachmod) and refers to not only wanting things from children, but wanting to the point of seeking to impose said want on a child. The Greek root word in the New Testament cross-referencing the Tenth Commandment, refers to entitlement as a whole, meaning deadly entitlement, and is denoted by the Greek root word πλεονεκτης (Latin: pleonektés) and refers to the entitled attitude of "I am a good parent/adult, and so children owe me respect" leading to demanding, controlling, and/or spousifying behavior.

It says in Hebrews 12:5-11 KJV:

And ye have forgotten the exhortation which speaketh unto you as unto children, My son, despise not thou the chastening of the Lord, nor faint when thou art rebuked of Him. For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth. If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chastening. But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then ye bastards, and not sons. Furthermore we have fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection to the Father of spirits and live? For verily for a few days they chastened us after their own pleasure, that we may be partakers in His holiness. Now no chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous: nevertheless it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness unto them which are exercised thereby.

This passage is often used to justify spanking children, whereas it has no such purpose, as the biblical context is 100% anti-spanking for children. Language discussing scourging is denoted by the Greek root word μαστγόω (Latin: mastigoo) refer to the rod of correction, meaning a switch that was brought out by a father to an errant adult son in the Old Testament, before being sentenced to death for a capital offense. It was not used on young children at all, as ancient Hebrew culture was an attachment parenting society, meaning parents, namely mothers, were doting and selfless in nature, holding children up to age 3 and treating them as infants, not bragging about any of it. Hebrew parents then just did their job, and didn't complain about it. Parenting was seen as servitude towards an extension of God, meaning your child is extended to you, meaning handed to you, by God for you to care for and  protect. But, this means teaching self-discipline, self-control, and independence, and this is denoted by the Greek root word παιδεία (Latin: paideia) and refer to knowing one is evil, wicked, and entitled in relation to a child, leading to being convicted as an adult to change as a parent or caregiver. The Greek root word translated "grievous" is λυπέ (Latin: lupé) and refers to the pain, emotional usually, many times necessary to be chastened up as a gentle, non-abusive parent.

Parents and adults shouldn't have pride in relation to children. Only shame and guilt for their mere existence in relation to children. Children allow me to exist, and so does God. I'm grateful, as they could banish me from my existence in relation to them, and I would have to obey.

The depraved and entitled parents who provoke children to anger will not inherit the Kingdom of God! Let them languish in fire and torrents, suffering the second death for all eternity! Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand!

April 30th is International Day to End Corporal Punishment of Children

 Today, we should be aware of both the good and bad relating to children being punished in the form of lawful physical battery. 

The bad is that it is common in the United States, with 94% of parents punishing their child with legalized domestic violence. The good? God's Law is above the land, and thus we have a legal ban already under American traditional law linked to the Christian family values of this country. It states in Colossians 3:21 KJV:

Fathers, provoke not your children to anger, lest they become discouraged.

The Greek root word translated "provoke...to anger" is ερεθιζο (Latin: erethizo) and literally translates to "stir up" or "upbraid" and refers to legal damages imposed upon a child, such as pain, shame, and emotional distress. Parenting in the biblical context was attachment-based, and children were close to parents, namely mothers, with striking a child being considered unclean. Physical chastisement was intended as a form of judicial corporal punishment, after the conviction of a capital offense. Children could not be charged with a crime.

The secular authorities, namely lawmakers in state houses across the country, need to recognize the Divine Prohibition against spanking and other forms of lawful domestic violence against children...It is happening slowly, as it should, with states tightening up their physical abuse laws. Infants under age 1, here in Pennsylvania, are protected from physical violence of all sorts, with 30% of the parent population here in America striking infants as punishment for things such as crying. Spanking is wrong for any age for similar reasons - children know they have a need, usually conflated with a want, but don't know how to express it in a mature, adult manner. A 2-3 year-old cries for the same reason as an infant under age 1 - for love! Same when any child cries, or a teenager pouts. They need something, and it sure isn't punishment.

Dear parents, namely those who defend spanking and punishment, YOU SHALL NOT EXIST anywhere within the several states and territories of the United States of America, but since you do, you are undeserving of any livelihood or reputation upon this earth! YOU SHALL NOT PROVOKE YOUR CHILD TO ANGER. Instead, go KYS, you depraved and entitled spoog and speck. Hide your punitive grasp towards your child, which is unsightly, so we can vacuum it up on the last day - when we ban your right to be a parent...because parenting isn't a right. Parenting is a privilege and a duty, but more so a duty towards a child, which some of us don't have the privilege of being righteously enslaved in. Anything, for them to feel safe at home, meaning nothing in terms of violence shall be tolerated. Hide, spoog, hide! So we know where to find you, and where to find your children, so we can remove them once you give our nation's hardworking caseworkers lip. Don't give me lip as well, with me having that caseworker personality. I AM above you as a pedophile of the traumatic sort, and YOU SHALL TRUST MY TRAUMA as a clinical traumatic pedophile. Punishment of a child is pure evil and witchcraft to me.

Who is at fault: The holy war against the parents

 Many people see me as a collective thinker, meaning I judge based on group premise. I do not. I believe in pro-social prejudice, in dial up format, meaning my abuser - the parent, or adult - is nowhere yet everywhere. 

I judge righteously in a way that is strongly suited to the individual, taking into account their individual needs, which may explain the antecedent of the behavior, thus determine the priority and presence of evil or abuse of others. If I condemn one individual for a sin or for abuse, that doesn't mean the whole group goes up in smoke. I presume innocence in the rest of the group, counting heads, and if the majority of the members of the group are abusive to me, or else entitled idiots, I just leave, and that is my judgment. Close the door, but on the individual, not the collective.

Every single adult has something either to hide or show, in terms of child abuse. Every individual adult, therefore, is guilty of child abuse, during some part of their life. Only a few own up to it. The rest will be condemned to eternal Hell-fire. I judge accordingly, and this is what I see in the depraved adults such as myself. It says in 1 Corinthians 5:11 KJV:

But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with one an not no to eat.

The one word that sums up the rest here is "covetous" and refers to entitlement as a whole, and is denoted by the Greek root word translating the moral crime of entitlement is πλεονέκτης (Latin: pleonektés) and refer to the entitled attitude of "I am a good, loving parent, and so my child and other people owe me respect", leading to demanding, controlling, and/or peerifying/spousifying behavior. It is wanting anything from a child to the point of seeking to impose said want from a child, leading to theft/abuse. I don't want anything from a child, even when as a parent in loco parentis (in place of parents; babysitter or child-minder). I simply want the child to feel safe, by her definition and not mine.

Who is at fault for child abuse in this country? Adults, meaning all of them objectively, including myself, meaning none of them by default due to my judgment. I exist behind enemy lines, in terms of age, and am ashamed to be an adult in our society. Children owe me nothing, and I owe them everything I can, meaning none by their standard as perceived by me - none asked for me to help them out, so help means leave alone. Let the depraved adults BURN! Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand!

Pro-social rebellion, pro-social pedophilia (in siphon format): Why children are allowed to "talk back" to parents

 Many parents do not like the idea of their child "talking back" to them. This is, however, normal childhood behavior, and kids are going to talk back, and this takes place at every stage of development, in some way, in some form. 

It says in Ephesians 6:1-4

Children, obey your parents in all things, as this is right. Honor thy father and mother; which is the first commandment with promise; That it may be well with thee, and mayest live long on the earth. And, ye fathers, provoke not your children to anger, but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.

The Greek root word translated "obey" is υπακουο (Latin: hupakouo) and refers to surrender to parents prompted by parents surrendering to children in terms of giving children their every vulnerable need. It is a form of pro-social pedophilia, meaning speech towards parents acts like a siphon, in a trusting way that listens to the child's every concern, worry, and upset, including from the word "no" or its various variants. It was total submission to a child and her every need, leading to total acceptance of one's child. Children may appear calm in the store, the restaurant, and other public venues, but will be rambunctious and energetic in the reassuring and validating shelter that parents hold for children. 

The Greek root word translated "nurture" is παιδεία (Latin: paideia) and refers to Christian discipline and chastisement, meaning the chastening of the Lord, which is being convicted of one's evil nature, leading to attitudes of adult non-entitlement towards children. It refers to co-regulation, meaning exemplary teaching of self-control by listening to children when they cry, protest, or complain about something, instead of shutting it down due to adult entitlement. Just because "I am the adult" does not give me the right to control, punish, or spousify a child. The Greek root word translated "admonition" is νουθεσία (Latin: porneia) and refers to gentle verbal correction, namely the word "no" or its various variants. This did not include punishment or reward, as any punishment or control of a child was illegal then, under Jewish law, outside the realm of a judicial setting.

Children should not be dealt with strictly, but children should learn to be strict with themselves, which is best taught by a parent who shows self-discipline in relation to a child, and does not lash out at a child. Religious instruction then followed the Socratic method of reasoning, in that students were able to question what they were taught by the Law, by their own understanding, especially as an older child.

The depraved and entitled controlling parents will BURN! Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand!

"Make it 18": Pedophiles for age of consent reform and sexual purity in Pennsylvania

 Many people do not know this, but need to know now. The media seems to have it said that sexual abusers have been put down, and that our child protection system is taking care of the issue. The age of consent is not 18. It is not 16, meaning the opposite, meaning the same, meaning the former "meaning" statement. This is an age of consent that is way too low. Why? Let's explore what the age of majority is.

The age of majority within the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania is 18, meaning a parent or parent in loco parentis has power of attorney over a child. A parent in loco parentis, even with a 16-year-old, can be any adult merely hanging out with her, in which case having a sexual relationship with such a child of that age would be a conflict of interest, but a legal one.

It is not wise to have sex with anyone who has a power of attorney over you. Why? They can manipulate you to let them rape you, meaning let them give you unwanted sex. Any sex that you don't want is rape, and rape is a crime.

Even when the age of consent does protect the child, loopholes allow for "healthy pedophilia", meaning sex with children in positions that avoid physical contact in a way that evades the law. As an advocate, I do not advise parents on how to get around the law, and anyone who defends it on my pages will be banned/blocked. We don't see any sex with a child as beneficial for them apart from adult self-interest, here at Anti-Parental Entitlement. Most people here do agree with me on this, but there is a certain segment of the community that still experiments with children in a sexual way...In the 1990s and early 2000s, such sexual abuse of children was actually endorsed here.

It says in 1 Corinthians 7:36 KJV:

But if any man think that he behaveth uncomely toward his virgin, if she pass the flower of her age, and need so require, let him do what he will, he sinneth not: let them marry.

This is a verse to apply flexibly, meaning not literally, while understanding the text literally in context. The Greek root word translated "flower of her age" is ύπερακμός (Latin: huperakmos) and refers to the age of consent under Jewish law then, meaning 12 for females, and 13 for males. This means the age of consent exists, and exists at the age of majority, regardless of what the secular law prescribes. This verse can be applied today as a command for avoidance/escape, meaning possibly avoiding a child, including maybe your own, when you, the pedophile, feel unsafe around a child in terms of acting out. 

The age of consent is also absorbed into the pull-up meaning of πορνεία (Latin: porneia) and refers to any sex outside of marriage recognized by God. Jewish customary law then opposed intergenerational marriage. All sex crime laws under the Mosaic Law can be applied by this Greek word.

This is a new campaign, from a children's rights pedophile source, against a pedophile's self-interest to sexualize and spousify children, thus raising the age of consent in Pennsylvania to 18. Sex is not a right, for anyone, including myself. It is a privilege included in a God-ordained marriage. Let the fornicators who defile themselves next to children BURN! 

Why children's equality already exists in America - examining the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment

 Many people do not believe children can have equal rights. Say it the wrong way and people think you are a pedophile - so I just admit it to gaslight the abusers (works every time). However, children's rights is an American idea, and originated on her soil. The Fourteenth Amendment grants children equal rights to adults, to the degree that they can accept the responsibility, based on their developmental level.

AMENDMENT XIV Section 1

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and the citizens whereof they reside. No state shall make or enforce any laws which shall abridge or immunities of the United States; nor shall any state deprive a person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny anybody the equal protection of the laws.

"Equal protection of the laws" refers to equal justice for battery under the law. Battery is the slightest of touch without consent, under the English common law. Battery is a criminal act that is protected in the case of a parent "within reason" disciplining their child. Assault is not, with assault meaning any documented injuries from a child being battered by parents. Here in Pennsylvania, battery is decriminalized, meaning a form of either harassment or disorderly conduct, depending on the venue, location, and convenience for law enforcement agents (LEAs) in terms of court mandate. Assault of a child is seen as "endangering the welfare of children" (18 Pa.C.S. §4303).

Not only does children's civil liberties exist in the law of men, but also in God's Law, and is denoted in Colossians 3:21 KJV:

Fathers, provoke not your children to anger, lest they become discouraged.

The Greek root word translating "provoke...to anger" is ερεθιζο (Latin: erethizo) and literally translates to "stir up" or "upbraid" and refers to momentary damages, such as pain, shame, emotional distress, defamation of character, loss of possessions/tokens, and/or fornication. The Greek root word denoting fornication towards a child is πορνεία (Latin: porneia) and refers to the age of consent, as does 1 Corinthians 7:36 KJV:

But if any man think that he behaveth uncomely toward his virgin, if she pass the flower of his age, and need so require, let him do what he will: let them marry.

"Man" here refers not to any suitor or husband, but to her father. The Greek root word translated "flower of her age" is ύπερακμός (Latin: huperakmos) and explicitly refers to the age of consent, whereas other age limits, including even the age of infancy, are implied by the pull-up word κρινο (Latin: krinó) and refers to all procedures of legal judgment under the Mosaic Law. The age of consent was conflated with the age of majority. Today, the age of majority in most U.S. states is 18, as should the age of consent be here in Pennsylvania, where it is unfortunately 16, with the law rendering some girls in particular at risk of forced marriage.

All these children's rights values were transported by God from Israel to the Westernized world by the Bible, which is the most powerful legal document in all of human history, meaning most read, and also most burned. Children's rights is a biblical concept, therefore American as apple pie. Why don't we buy into it. Political correctness from the purity police, with me speaking as a Christian who endorses tenets of sexual purity. The difference for the children's rights Christian/conservative is that one focuses on purity in oneself, and adults in relation to children, while allowing freedom for the child to do what she will, dress as she will, and so forth.

The depraved and entitled parents will burn and languish in the lake of fire and brimstone, suffering the second death! Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand!

 

Parent hypocrisy: Why not all leftists are on our side

 Many people are worried about my stance on parent hypocrisy. Gentle, non-violent parents often commit child abuse in a struggling, remorseful fashion, and many pedophiles can be overprotective in such situations. I see gentle parents as consistent nonetheless, because of their will to improve - and that's where I judge parents. Do you want to move past control and violence as a way to manage children's behavior?

Hypocrisy is not a window, but more like a jaded path, with two paths going in two different directions, meaning inconsistency in a way that is discriminatory to others. It is taking a moral framework, such as the Bible, and applying it loosely where you want it go go, instead of where God wants it to go.

There are a great many Americans these days, mostly Millennials, are leftists. Leftism is not centered in children's rights circles, which is a bipartisan movement, but on college campuses, namely ultra-progressive ones like Yale, Harvard, and UCLA. It is an indoctrination machine, and purposefully omits any mention of theodicy on spanking, being the social justice religion that it is, pretending to be anti-parent yet a parent lobby lapdog.

They hate every other injustice, yet support spanking children in the majority of cases, mostly for cultural rights causes, or even feminazi causes that feign true feminism, which is 100% anti-spanking and pro-gentle parenting. 

This children's rights campus simply gets political when it shouldn't, because it shuts out conservative viewpoints in favor of its mission and goals, but its ideology fully includes certain arrangements of conservative Christian family values that endorse the rights of the child. This includes pro-youth rights conservatives like me. Youth rights, in conservative language, is the doctrine of original sin reversed from its common projection on the child - project it onto yourself and your own entitled attitudes towards children. Children aren't developmentally ready to accept the yoke, so cut them a break and don't punish or control them for anything. The most force I would use with a child is yanking them out of a busy street, or away from a hot stove.

Our parents here are devoted to their children, and will not be targeted by feigned pedophiles who misuse my mental health label to commit abuse of trauma. My pedophilia is trauma, and you shall obey it...meaning everyone who genuinely was here to attack. Some here weren't, but were framed by Blake as such, as well as having their tea minced with false "instructions" from anti-children's rights.

The pro-spanking parents are the hypocrites, especially the liberal ones in fact (due to the SJW roots of their beliefs). It doesn't take merely a conservative to ruin a child's life through corporal punishment. A liberal parent can abuse too, and they often do. Just come to Reading, and you'll know what I am talking about. The cops here even instruct it. But, things are getting better, as our Children and Youth Services here in Berks County advise against it.

Let the parents BURN! I have a near-universal "parent" existence trauma, meaning I want their anger to be non-existent, just like I am incapable of anger towards a child (think sleep gaslighting instead). I can't even fathom the inequality of getting angry at a 2-year-old, or even a 10-year-old. It chars the interaction, and still makes me afraid at some level. I know why parents have controlling tendencies - mine are sexual in nature - by why does a parent need to control a child, on a moral level. Why would God allow that to happen? Then I realize, I live behind enemy lines. This whole world hates children, and I'm a screaming nut trying to point to that fact...A parent is a strand of either controlling anger or sexuality, and I hate them all beyond the grave, even when inserted to a gentle, loving parent. I simply praise the parent, meaning the individual raising children, for having commonsense. Usually, my praise is non-verbal, because a parent should just know that it is wrong, from the get-go. I'm okay with praising and encouraging parents who come to me, but I really am only wired to get children, in terms of social skills. They compel me to be friends when they want to be friends, and I just can't say "no" naturally, but now know how to say "no" and be assertive. Kill every parent, validate every victim of parents.

Understanding parent servitude

 Many parents in the United States appoint themselves to a position of power and control, meaning either authoritarian or authoritative parenting. Many believe that the Bible allows for parental authority, when, in fact, the Bible prescribes the opposite.

Christian love is a selfless state. It says in 2 Corinthians 13:4-8 KJV:

Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not, charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up, Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil; rejoiceth not in inequity, but rejoiceth in the truth, beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things. Charity never faileth: but whether they be prophesies, they shall fail; whether they be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away.

The Greek root word translated "charity", denoting Christian love, is αγαπαο (Latin: agapao) and refers to a form of servitude, meaning righteous enslavement. In reality, it is simply a very selfless parent that allows the child to guide you to their needs, instead of the reverse. It is a convicted parent, meaning a parent that loathes their nature as such.

It is a doting, listening attitude where parents stand-by children, and are there to listen to children, and assist them with life. It says in Colossians 3:20 KJV:

Children, obey your parents in all things, as is well-pleasing unto the Lord.

The Greek root word translated "obey" is υπακουο (Latin: hupakouo) and refers to surrender to parents, prompted by parents surrendering to children. It is a form of pro-social pedophilia, meaning in siphon format. The servile nature of parents entails being their, selflessly, to be safe adults that are there to listen and validate, like a sounding board, and otherwise model to children discipline and self-control, as denoted in Ephesians 6:4 KJV:

And, ye fathers, provoke not your children to anger, but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.

The Greek root word translated "nurture" is παιδεία (Latin: paideia) and refers to co-regulation, meaning centering oneself as a parent, accepting the chastening of the Lord, and modeling said discipline to children. The Greek root word translated "admonition" is νουθεσία (Latin: nouthesia) and refers to simple verbal correction, namely the word "no" and its various variants. Correction of children in 1st Century Christian homes was rare, and only brief enough to redirect the behavior.

Parents are to show self-control, and not lash out in anger or sexual violence towards their children. Christian discipline in parents is selfless, in an hourglass way, and can be understood as "I am evil" gaslighting. This means coming to the knowledge that you don't mean well around your child, and that no adult can truly mean well, and that any adult is capable of harm, as well as the fact that adults can never again know what it is like to be a child. The idea is to be convicted of being a depraved, wicked parent in this regard, and work on it by avoiding antisocial behaviors such as punishment such as spanking or false imprisonment, or permissiveness such as corruption, peerification, or spousification. The idea is to be ashamed of being the flawed and hopeless parent that you are, then build yourself back up.

Time-out is healthy, including maybe sitting down and having a snack or soda, or even pro-social sexual fantasy (in the case of pedophilic parents). Many times, time-out includes turning one's anger at their child into a jurisdictional peacekeeper about something else entirely, in a way that the child is not impacted at all. Selfless parenting need not be completely selfless, or else it turns selfish nonetheless.

Selfless parenting simply is about avoidance of pride in parenting, meaning humility and understatement are attachment parenting values. Pride is boasting in a way that makes you stand out in a way that seeks attention and glamour from society, demanding rights because "I am a good parent, and only other adults harm children". It is adult guilt, meaning knowing that we adults oppress and abuse children, thus paying penance for your own individual sins and abuse against children (which we all are guilty of).

Let the entitled parents BURN! Let them languish in the lake of fire and burning sulfur! Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand!

Why our Christian family values as a society prohibit spanking children

 Many parents in this country find parenting advice in their religious values. The dominant and founding values in the United States is Christian in nature. Many parents misuse these values to justify child abuse, namely the lawful physical battery against a child.

America is a Christian nation, founded on Judaeo-Christian family values, meaning non-entitlement and respect for children in parenting. The Greek root word cross-referencing the Tenth Commandment not to covet denotes an attitude of entitlement, and is indicated by the Greek root word πλεονέκτης (Latin: pleonektés) and refers, in this context, to the entitled attitude of "I am a good parent, and so my child and everyone else owe me respect" leading to demanding, controlling, or spousifying behavior. It is wanting from a child to the point of seeking to impose said want onto a child, leading to theft/abuse.

Parenting in ancient Israel was based on the concept of mutual submission, meaning parents surrender their power and prowess over children, leading to surrender from the child in the form of cooperation and friendship with parents, with parents and children seeing each other as pals. It states in Ephesians 6:1-4 KJV:

Children, obey your parents in the Lord: for this is right. The first commandment with promise; That it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live upon the earth. And, ye fathers, provoke not your children to wrath, but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.

The Greek root word translated "obey" is υπακουο (Latin: hupakouo) and refers to surrender to parents, thereby coming from parental surrender to children, based on the concept of Christian love, denoted by the Greek root word αγαπαο (Latin: agapao). This refers to submission to the every vulnerable need of a child, knowing that one is evil and wicked in relation to their child for their mere existence, just as mankind is guilty for his lowly existence in relation to God, serving children in an attendant manner, with said child being in place of the Lord, with a child being one of the "least of these" handed in front of parents for care and protection. Parents are to submit to the every need of a child, including attachment needs, from beneath yet from above. The Greek root word translated "nurture" refers to discipline, and is denoted by the Greek root word παιδεία (Latin: paideia) and refers to self-discipline and self-control, modeled by co-regulation. Parents remained calm and stoic in the biblical context, but in a listening way, with children emulating said discipline, with boys receiving a religious education from their father in a homeschool. The Greek root word "admonition" is translated νουθεσία (Latin: nouthesia) and refers to simple, verbal correction on occasion, namely the word "no" or its various variants...Parents were seen as servants, meaning an attendant and slave to the child's needs, and didn't complain about it. Parenting was a selfless endeavor, not an excuse to impose power and control on children. I myself see myself as a servant to the needs of children, which usually means avoidance.

The Greek root word translated "provoke...to wrath" is παροργίζω (Latin: parorgizo) and refers to damages such as pain, shame, emotional distress, defamation of character, loss of possessions/tokens, and/or fornication. Whatever the child perceives as abuse is in fact such, objectively so, as children do not lie about abuse. The law of the land may disagree, but God's Law is above the law of the land, meaning spanking is already banned, as far as my values are concerned.

Christ came not to repeal the Law, but to uphold the Law, thus taking it further. There is nothing in the Law, contrary to myth, that allows for the punishment or control of a child. The Law did allow for corporal punishment, but only for adults who were found guilty of a crime, namely a capital offense. The punitive nature of the Law, in terms of physical brutality (which was already rare then - about 1 or 2 times in a century, in a settlement), was repealed, and replaced with the concept of shunning, meaning avoiding your enemy, with theft, instead of being a list of tenets, being any damages imposed upon your neighbor, judged in the form of pro-social mob, but with Christians taught to turn the other cheek. The Bible serves a vehicular purpose - to lift up Judaeo-Christian family values, and transport them to the Western world, including the United States.

We have been wrong about Scripture before, as a collective religious society. I can't think of a single conservative that advocated to bring back slavery or Jim Crow laws, and those that do tend to be on the fringe of conservatism these days. I am predicting that, one day, it will be that way about punishing and controlling children, including spanking them, to conservatives. We evolve, but much slower than most Americans. We are more cautious of rapid change. But, something needs to change with the status of children in this country. Most conservatives that are bigoted still are older, and it has to do with the environment they grew up in, meaning conservatism will still exist, but hate is thankfully dying, including hatred of children, even among conservatives. Things are changing, so let's put our input into the pot, and see how things play out.

The depraved and entitled pro-spanking and permissive parents will not inherit the Kingdom of God! You shall not exist, dear punitive parents, except while not on this earth - behind closed bars! Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand!...Children have been enslaved by adults, so flip the scripts - I enslave myself to THEIR needs.

We want to take away your parental rights

 We focking hate your guts, pro-spanking parents. We will remove your right to exist while on this earth, meaning you will only exist behind closed bars. 

KILL EVERY PARENT, VALIDATE EVERY CHILD VICTIM, RANSACK EVERY ABUSIVE HOME, IN A FORM OF PRO-SOCIAL TERRORISM IN THE NAME OF CHILD PROTECTION AND RIGHTS. ANY RESIDUAL HARM IS COLLATERAL DAMAGE FOR A GREATER GOOD! HARM PARENTS, meaning HARM ABUSERS, meaning BOTH, ALL. IN. ONE.

Viva la future. Viva la anti-spanking revolution. We want you to be outraged, because we are harming parents by destroying their reputations and cracking down on your right to parent as you wish, making you pawns of the state, because it is unjust to you, because it offends you, FOR WE ARE CHILDREN'S RIGHTS, and since the first pedophile victim has made headway, this is war. He has reverent trauma, and he will use it to shut down the parents. Only children's rights in this country, meaning only children's rights, meaning only children's rights. All others shall be annihilated.

Pro-social mirror - Why not to get angry at "back talk"

 Many parents think that "back talk" is a bad thing in children, and that children should learn how not to "speak against authority". The Bible, however, allows back talk to parents in God's definition of respect for parents. I may refer to myself as anti-parent, but I honor my father and my mother, and listen to my mother. But, she is kind, compassionate, and peaceful in her parenting, so she's earned the respect.

It says in Colossians 3:20-21 KJV:

Children, obey your parents in everything, as this is well-pleasing unto the Lord. Fathers, provoke not your children to anger, lest they become discouraged.

The Greek root word translated "obey" is υπακουο (Latin: hupakouo) and refers to surrender to parents stemming from parental surrender to children, with parental surrender to children being denoted by the Greek root word αγαπαο (Latin: agapao) and refers to submission to the every vulnerable need of a child, knowing one's sin nature and ignorance to the child's view of life, leading to attendant and servile surrender to the every need of children, including attachment needs.

The Greek root word translated "provoke...to anger" is ερεθιζο (Latin: erethizo) literally translates to "stir up" or "upbraid", and refers to momentary damages such as pain, shame, emotional distress, loss of possessions/tokens, defamation of character, and/or fornication. Any moral crime has two components, guilty intent (mens rea) leading up to/determined by guilty action (actus reus). This model is basically entitlement to theft, and is the children's rights code when directed towards children.

When a child is talking back to you, pay attention to her choice of words. Your child is likely angry in the same way you are angry at them. The counterwill is an evolutionary resistance from being controlled, and punishment causes children to want to control back, and then it becomes a power struggle between parent and child. The idea is to instead collaborate and work with one's child. 

Parenting in ancient Jewish culture was attachment based, and based on co-regulation, and is further described in Ephesians 6:4 KJV:

And, ye fathers, provoke not your children to anger, but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.

The Greek root word translated "nurture" is παιδεία (Latin: paideia) refers to discipline or chastening up, from the parent as an exemplary influence onto the child. The idea is to be strict with yourself, and also have a good, loving parent-child bond with your child. The idea is that the more the parent tightens the girdle of restraint in emotion (avoiding verbal/physical/sexual abuse). This word also refers to religious instruction as to right versus wrong. Generally, children in this situation would look up to parents, and emulate them, when their attachment needs are fully met. Children, however, need limits, and the Greek root word νουθεσία (Latin: nouthesia) and refers to verbal correction. Think the word "no", and only rarely, when absolutely warranted. "No" does not have to happen all the time, and it doesn't have to come in that specific word package. There are many, more polite ways to say no, usually starting with "I'm sorry" in a distempered voice. The child will then cry, in which case the right thing to do is hold the child close as a form of time-in. Maybe you need a break later, so take a time-out when you can.

Self-control is a challenge for a child emulated by a parent, meaning the opposite when a child is punished - they start punishing the parent, as a means of pro-social demonstration, thereby demonstrating to the parent how they are being treated as a cry for help. Some children do that more than others, and I was a pro-demonstration autistic child when I was little, meaning I berated my parents like they did me, to "give parents a taste of their own medicine". The idea is to recognize this, and repent for your sins as a parent.

The command for mutual submission in parenting abolished the parent protection laws, as this Col. 3:21, in context, means that however you treat your child is how you will end up being treated by your child, at least now or later. Parents then, particularly of young children, were of the attendant, attachment-centered variety, with children ranging close to their mother. Punishment was only allowed in a courtroom setting, and only between adults, after a defendant who was presumed innocent was found guilty.

The depraved, entitled parents will not inherit the Kingdom of God! Let them burn and suffer from torrents of fire! Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand!

Please don't attack me on this last day

 I don't start sh*t, I finish the sh*t that you started, in a way that makes you feel sorry you ever started it. Putting the aggressor down.

Attn: Tia B.

No, I do not judge what is occurring, meaning what is mentioned to me, on YOUR end of things, but the opposite. Rape is always the fault of the perpetrator, and never the fault of the victim, and I always judge the rapist and never the victim.

Rape is any sex without consent, regardless of it's formation. The Bible speaks of mutual consent in that regard, meaning both parties have duties towards each other, but can take a break for a while as well. Basically, this refers to a mutual agreement. Such an agreement should be made with foreknowledge. 

I can't help you, meaning I can't step in, as I don't have the resources to do so. I say this flat out so that you are not burned later. If you feel like ending your own life, please seek psychiatric attention immediately.

Looking with lust: Why that does not ban sexual fantasy about children

 Many Christians have heard the phrase about looking at a woman out of lust, and how it is a sin. Some men take it literally, meaning take the text at face value, and avoid any look at a woman whatsoever that could lead to "falling into lust". Many Christian churches preach this to pedophiles, namely young pedophiles, as a form of spiritual abuse. The reality is that looking at an attractive child is not the same as looking out of lust.

Christ preached, on the Sermon on the Mount, in Matthew 5:27-30 KJV:

Ye have said that it was said of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh onto a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her in his heart. If thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable by thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell. And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable that one of thy members would perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.

Christ did not come to abolish the Law (as said by Him earlier in the chapter) but to uphold it, and take it further, meaning broaden its application to make way for flexible righteous judgment (pro-social mop). Christians are not bound by the letter of the law, but the spirit of the Law, meaning gentile believers aren't bound by the 613 commands of the Mosaic Law, but are bound by what the New Testament lifts up, usually in broad strokes. Sensory gaslighting was used as a form of righteous judgment in the Early Christian context. The young girl who felt objectified by male gaze had the right then to stand up in some way.

Young girls usually did not stray too far away from their mother, and the man that would be sexually objectifying them would be their father, meaning the young girl would run to the mother and hide behind the mother's legs, and the mother had the right to defend her child from adult sexual entitlement, meaning a scheming gaze that rules out ways to "get caught" for sexual abuse of a child. The mother had the right of divorce in such a situation, as it says in 1 Corinthians 7:10-11 KJV:

And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband. But and if she depart, let her remain unmarried or be reconciled to her husband: and let not the husband put away her wife.

Divorce was a form of righteous judgment on the husband, as stated in 1 Corinthians 5:11 KJV:

But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolator, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one not to eat.

The Greek root word translated "covetous" is πλεονέκτης (Latin: pleonektés) and refers to entitlement, in this case spousal entitlement. Basically, this means the attitude of "I am the man of the house, and I have rights over my woman" leading to demanding, controlling, or otherwise violent behavior. It means basically the slightest of entitlement, meaning wanting things from a wife to the point of seeking to impose said wants, leading to theft/abuse. This can mean ordinary demanding behavior from a male head of household that renders the husband incompatible as a spouse. Think anything that violates the wife's boundaries, or controls the wife in any way, or else anything the wife finds hurtful that cannot be answered. This can also apply to child abuse, in which case the child's judgment would have led to the divorce from the husband - a simple signature on a divorce decree - meaning mother's rights started with Christ. I support both mother's rights and father's rights, depending on the merits of the case, and who was the main abuser. I am guided solely by the best interests of the child.

Children were naked within a domestic setting in the biblical context, as was the wife. Yet, the Law states that such is no excuse for abuse, and in the Old Testament, abusers either were stoned to death or burned alive at the stake for sex crimes against children, and only rarely. Pedophilia was not named as a spiritual condition by the Early Christian church, as the term was coined in the 1800s by Dr. Richard von Krafft-Ebing, as a medical term and discovered mental health disorder. In biblical times, it was referred to in other terms, with fathers supporting each other in not falling into lust, and abusing a child sexually. The commandment not to provoke a child to anger in Col. 3:21 refers to sexual abuse, partially, but also any abuse.

Nudity, or partial undress, in the biblical context, was seen as vulnerability of a private sort, and a moral crime not for the child who is nude, but for the adult who takes advantage of such a situation. This can mean the slightest of antisocial "leer", meaning looking in a way that the child finds offensive, alarming, or uncomfortable, in which case that alone can be a form of child sexual abuse.

The depraved and sexually entitled parents will BURN! Fornicators and all defiled child predators will suffer the second death, and will burn! Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand!

Why anger at a child is sin

 Many parents in this country - most, if not all - get angry with their children. Some regret it, some defend it, and varying shades in between. Some types of parenting, namely authoritative parenting, allow for legal "traditions" that involve the parenting calming down before administering a premeditated physical battery.

Matthew 5:21-22 KJV:

Ye have heard that it was said of them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whomever shall kill shall be in danger of judgment: But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shalt say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of Hell-fire.

Now, parents do get angry, but if you use it to berate and verbally abuse your child, it is sin. Anger is only acceptable in the legal realm towards another adult, namely when charging and interrogating fellow believers and fellow adults for moral legal offenses. Once cannot interrogate a child, since children are exempt from judgment.

Interrogating a child, meaning raising your voice and questioning them out of anger, is perjury, since children cannot be judged for any moral crime they may commit. Any unbridled anger at a child is, in fact, sin, and a form of entitlement when it intended to manipulate or control the child. 

It is okay to feel anger, as we all do. No human emotion is banned unless it begins to plot against one's neighbor, including a child, in terms of entitled drives and demands. The idea is to do the opposite of YOUR personal abusive traits (and don't preach out loud if you don't). If you feel like striking a child, stifle that urge, and return to the conversation after putting yourself in time-out. If you are frustrated, channel the anger into therapeutic writing, meaning typing a whole Word document and filling it with anger at your child, then deleting it and shredding it. The idea is to avoid speaking to your child unless spoken to, and to hold in urges to punish a child to correct them. The goal is pro-social bowl, created by a pro-social judgmental attitude, meaning you can have your fleeting judgments about your child, and you should not directly repress the anger. The idea is to feel it in another setting, meaning avoiding angry behaviors, while allowing yourself unfair thoughts concerning children, and maybe even dwelling in them in a way that is positioned away from the child...Thoughts are not a crime, but actions stemming those thoughts color those thoughts as impure. The more you avoid a certain anti-child drive, and sequester it to your own imagination and thoughts, the safer you are around your child and other children.

I myself am allowed sexual thoughts about children, but only at a certain level where I do not want children to the point of seeking to impose said want on a child. "Seeking...impose" are key words here, meaning you can want anything from your child, but are you willing to accept that your child cannot give it, perhaps due to immature development and/or mental health issues. Simply fantasizing sexually about a child is morally meaningless, and good for one's health. However, wanting to visit a child, and seeking such while disregarding any notice that I might abuse a child is adult sexual entitlement, meaning I want sex from a child, and am following that feeling TOWARDS the child instead of AWAY from the child. It is called pro-social fantasy, meaning the more I do it, the less I am inclined to seek out a real child, because I have enough of what I want in my mind. Wanting more, and wanting to do something with a real child, and voicing it as a plan, or else planning secretly, is entitlement towards a child. Thoughts are not a crime, however, as long as they aren't shared, in which case the expression would be filthy talk (Eph. 6:4).

It is not a sin to feel anything for one's child, and taking that attitude alone is unhealthy, and sets you up for defeat. Don't repress those unfair thoughts, but center them by avoidance of their behavioral outcome. As a pedophile, that's what I do. I have unfair thoughts about children all the time, and many times go all the way with them, usually thinking of an escape. Then, I wake up, and know how delusional it would be to think I could ever get that from a child in my lifetime...It'll never happen, and if you think it could, I will shut that down immediately in this movement. Pro-social fantasy is healthier...It is turning a parental protective drive inwards against itself. It makes one feel safe and secure around children at the end of the treatment, in a segregated fashion. You can admire them from afar, but you are not to speak to them, and that is drilled into you.

Let the depraved pro-spanking parents/fornicators BURN in torrents of fire and burning sulfur! Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand!

Why not to get easily offended by children - parents today being snowflakes

Many parents in this country demand respect from their children. Oftentimes, "respect" means don't say to your parents anything that contradicts what they want to hear from children. However, that is not a proper expression of our founding Christian family values. As an adult, I am not to get easily offended by a child's verbal or other actions.

It says in Matthew 5:38-39 KJV:

Ye have heard that it has been said; an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.

This refers to an existing legal tradition under the Mosaic Law, meaning everyone has the right to find anything from anyone or anything offensive, but at the same time, if you take offense to literally everything in life, you are a peacekeeper. Entitlement by way of adversarial habit. That means basically a vexatious litigant, which this command prohibits. Christ did not abolish the Law, but took it further, spread it further, and brought forth forgiveness for sins.

The idea is not to get offended easily by what you see or hear in the media, or from other people. If someone says "I hate your guts", just take it in stride. That's what I do when I hear of hatred from anyone. It means nothing to me at this point how many people hate me out there, except maybe for personal safety purposes. But, it's like a ghetto - I can avoid certain parts of the Internet, and I'm good.

If something I see on the Internet offends me, I avoid it, or else bite the bullet, shut up, and recognize the First Amendment right of the writer or page owner to have whatever they wish on their page. I'm not offended by anything from a child, namely behavior or speech. I am to shut up when I take offense through sexually objectifying means, meaning enjoy what I see, but shut up and do nothing about it towards the child...The child has the right to be there, and dress however she wishes, and I am to shut up and allow her.

The depraved, entitled, easily offended parents will BURN! Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand!

Why adults have no right to exist in relation to children

I am an anti-existence, annihilationist children's rights/anti-spanking advocate. I have no right to exist in relation to a child, and am grateful God and the "least of these", children themselves, allow me to exist in the same community as they do, as they alone hold me as property and estate for their own, casting me aside for my worthlessness in relation to them, thus me not interacting with them.

Every single adult, without exception, is marked for deletion by God, and will be sentenced to DEATH and ANNIHILATION for merely existing improperly and abusively next to children. Only a few parents in our society are on the right track, and those are the saints worthy of Eternal Reward. All others will be destroyed by God in due time, either on their last day or the very last day...We at children's rights all have a common abuser - a parent.

The Greek root word translated πγεονέκτης (Latin: pleonektés) and refers to entitlement, meaning wanting anything from anyone to the point of seeking to impose said want onto them, leading to theft/abuse. It is a general attitude of deserving things from children due to growing older. This includes mere existence in their presence. If they hate you enough to be gone, then be gone, because you have no right to exist in front of said child.

Existence of human beings on this earth is something to be determined only by God, not any human being. Existence in relation to human beings is malleable, meaning a child has the right to issue Divine Punishment by vanishing me from her existence and company, thus placing me in Hell until I atoned for my sins of entitlement towards her...Only God can snuff out my abuser. Only the child has the primary expertise to advocate abuse against me.

I have no right to be on this earth as an adult in relation to children, but I am, and so I am grateful, because I am deserving of hatred and rejection of children simply for existing.

Why you should be grateful for your child - and why respect is earned in life

 Many parents demand that their children be grateful for their parents, or else face punishment. They do not know what gratitude is, or else they would be grateful for their child instead. You are undeserving of respect from a child, yet your child should respect you nonetheless. That is because respect is earned, and parents should be grateful for respect from their child.

The Greek root word denoting Christian love in the New Testament is αγαπαο (Latin: agapao) and refers to a form of surrender leading to surrender in parenting, meaning, ideally, total submission to the child as an enemy, just as mankind is the enemy of God, and subject to His rule as such. It is admission of one's depraved nature, meaning ability to harm a child, as well as ignorance over what it means to be a child, leading to bondservice and indentured servitude towards a child, leading to good works, expecting nothing in return from a child.

It says in Colossians 3:20 KJV:

Children, obey your parents in all things, as is well-pleasing unto the Lord.

The Greek root word translated "obey" is υπακουο (Latin: hupakouo) and refers to surrender to parents coming from surrender to children. It is secure attachment, in the form of pro-social pedophilia, with siphon intent, meaning siphoning all a child's energy to the safety of parents, with parents being safe people for children to tell anything, voice any thought or expression, and be open about anything concerning their lives and their interests. The parent and child trust each other, in a grateful way, because they are close to each other in a way that no secrets can possibly exist.

Gratitude is the attitude of not demanding anything in return from a child in terms of respect or friendship. Respect is earned. I have no right to demand respect from a child, as that is ingratitude. I must be grateful for any affection they do show me, and reciprocate it, alongside gentle teaching and listening, without violence or control...I am grateful for the grace certain children have shown me, because I was not respectful towards then, and committed a form of abuse, by my standard by their emotional reaction.

The depraved and entitled parents will not inherit the Kingdom of God! Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand.

Pedophile control statement - total subduction

 I have my pedophilic/parental cord in complete and utter control and subduction. Pro-social fantasy, mixed with anti-entitlement training guided by God. My pedophilic cord will not leave my grasp, and is complete putty in my hands. Parental defense turned inward at oneself.

I refuse to let a self-diagnosis of pedophilia interfere with my happiness and quality of life, or lead to the abuse of a child. Roll up the extension cord, and that's it. Keep it reeled in, and reel it out apart from the child, and life is good.

We all want to reparent the pedophiles

 Myself included. Reparenting is a form of parenting friendship that treats the other person with the kindness, understanding, and validation that they never received from their abuser. Yes, I have found that I have imprinted onto the pedophiles - an old grandfather, with a bit of distemper or else a warm smile, coming down only on the entitled, defensive abusers, and then I do so with pro-social sadism and pro-social evil, but only after obtaining evidence beyond a reasonable doubt, with enough application, meaning after the preponderance of the evidence has come through. I HATE sexual abusers of children - because a pedophile is actually more likely to be a victim of child abuse than a perpetrator.

I do not control pedophiles in any way except with myself, and the pedophilic/parental cord I have attached to me. 

Why pedophilia is not a good thing (but isn't sin either)

 Many people believe that pedophilia is wrong to have, meaning being one is wrong. The mere existence of oneself as a pedophile is considered to be a moral crime by many Christian denominations. I do not hold this theology. I hold pedophile non-existence theology in word format...The Bible does not use the word "pedophile" once in any of the original Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic. The Bible does not condemn pedophilia, at the core, either. It's okay to be a pedophile, as long as you work on it.

It says in 1 Corinthians 6:18 KJV

Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is outside the body, but he that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body.

The Greek root word translated "fornication" is πορνεια (Latin: porneia) and refers to a child perceiving sexually entitled intent from a parent or other adult, which colors the entitled intent of said adult, defiling the perpetrator parent or adult, rendering them unclean until the even. 

But, if you don't abuse a child, and are planning to and/or defend a right to, you are a sexually entitled adult, not a pedophile. The Greek root word translated πλεονέκτης (Latin: pleonektés) and refers not merely wanting sex from children, but wanting it to the point of seeking to impose said want onto a child, leading theft/abuse. "Impose" can also refer to abuse situations where the child is willing. 

If you simply want sex with children, or see them naked or partially clothed, you are a pedophile, but not a sinner if you know this is an unhealthy want, and so you restrain that want. Restraining pedophiles are affirmed by God, as long as they continue to restrain their sexual desires towards children. It is a part of one's sin nature, but the same as an ordinary parent daydreaming of strangulating their children - we all have unfair thoughts, and sometimes we might even dwell in them to blow off steam. Thoughts like this are not sin. Think a street sign, telling the anger and/or lust in an adult where to go, and the adult goes in said direction, defending their "rights" to do so.

Pedophilia, however, is listed as a mental disorder for a reason - it is directed towards a target that cannot consent to pedophilic acts. It doesn't mean we should shame them as "sick", "diseased", and so forth - the opposite is true about mental health labeling. We all have something, meaning we all have mental health issues of some sort. Some of them impact our ability to otherwise be kind, loving caregivers. I just happen to be a pedophile. We all have struggles as adults in being safe around children, and not abusing them. We all can struggle together, in a community for children's rights survivors, pedophiles included (no, not all of us are).

Combatting pedophile stigma is about coming forward, and self-diagnosing as a pedophile before the mental health system in one's state, namely a therapist. Trauma-informed therapists seem to work with me, alongside anti-anxiety medication.

Just because it feels good, doesn't mean it is good, but at the same time, a not so good thing can be turned harmless when turned away from its target. Pedophilia is a mental disorder that targets children sexually. "Harmless" refers to neutral acceptance, meaning it is just there, and so focus on not harming children, and then reward yourself with a bit of "time-out", so to speak, meaning fantasy of a pro-social variety.

Nadine, thanks for the apology

 When I make gaslighting statements like that, it simply is an expression of how angry I am at you, in a traumatic sense. I don't want anyone to literally kill themselves, hence the acronym "KYS" on my pages, for humane reasons. If they do feel like that, and they are on the planning stages, they should seek stay in a psychiatric unit immediately...Being in the hospital is nothing to be ashamed of. I always found a way to get something out of it.

I hid a post that made a false accusation based on a gaslighting time discrepancy, meaning the incident took place in 2017. It will likely be deleted...I do care about you, but not in the sexually menacing way you think. Same with anyone here.

Stephanie Cox is not on my watch list

 No, you are not. You seem to be worried about victim disclosures accusing a spousal abuser with autism, who confined you to an unlawful marriage, meaning a child marriage only allowed by secular laws.

You have done nothing wrong, and I am sad to know you have left the reader base for my page. I am relieved, in fact, to know you don't support abusers with autism, so I know you won't make excuses for me. We disagree in that I think they should be healthy aware of their condition, meaning a centered awareness. That's how I am.

You were lied to. That is not your fault, but the person spreading the lies.

Behaviorism: Why parents need it in this country, not children (and preferably self-applied)

 Many parents believe in behaviorism, particularly left-wing abusive parents like mine were. Most liberal parents in the United States are not gentle parents, but behaviorist parents, meaning rewards and punishments. The idea is to basically click a clicker, or snap fingers, and children do exactly what you want them to do, which is a domestic abusers' fantasy...THEY need behaviorism, for themselves, as it can be self-imposed.

It says in Hebrews 12:5-11 KJV:

And ye have forgotten the exhortation which speaketh unto you as unto children, My son, despise not the chastening of the Lord. For whom the Lord loveth, he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth. If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not? But if ye be without chastisement,. whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, not sons. Furthermore we had fathers of our flesh that corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not be in subjection to the Father of spirits and live. For they verily for a few days chastened us up after their own pleasure, but he for our profit, and we might be partakers of his holiness. Now no chastening seemeth to be joyous, but grievous: nevertheless afterwards it yieldeth the fruit of righteousness.

The Greek root word denoting "chastisement" is παιδεία (Latin: paideia) refers to a specific type of discipline, that involves self-applied behaviorism in parents, meaning not punishing and rewarding children, but punishing and rewarding oneself for how you wear your emotions as a parent, towards your child. It is an objective form of self-discipline, that doesn't let childhood behaviors offend and get under the skin of parents. This means that when a child says anything to "talk back", bite the bullet and don't get so easily offended at your child's normal, developmentally appropriate behavior.

The language about scourging is denoted by the Greek root word μαστιγόω (Latin: mastigoo) and refers figuratively to the rod of correction, which was a tree branch or switch used to correct criminals convicted by the Sanhedrin, or Jewish criminal court, in the Old Testament. Trials were very rare, as society was kept orderly and safe by traditional conviction of Jewish beliefs. It usually was spoken of as a symbol for moral accountability, linked to self-discipline. The moral legal system of the Christian churches did not use any sort of physical punishment in church discipline, but rather collective shunning judged by collective gaslighting. A parent was rebuked for their abusive acts towards children, and commanded by a church elder to repent for their sins. In the Old Testament, the PARENT would have been whipped for kidnapping before being hung in a blood-letting light. Kidnapping in the Bible is any damaging act that holds the victim hostage, in any way possible, outside of the law.

The idea behind the chastening of the Lord is to come to the conclusion of "I am evil" gaslighting, meaning you are telling yourself that you are evil, and that in order to become good, you must repent for that nature, and do good for your fellow man, to the degree that you are able to. It is hourglass conditioning, meaning you are charred, and then you do the right thing, change your ways, and feel good about that progress.

It says in Ephesians 6:4 KJV:

And, ye fathers, provoke not your children to wrath, but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.

The Greek root word translated "nurture" is the same as the language denoting Christian chastisement in Heb. 12:5-11, and is παιδεία (Latin: paideia) and refers to passing down such discipline to children by example, meaning not punishing a child, but being strict with yourself and modeling such strict, non-entitled attitudes to children by way of co-regulation. Parenting then was attachment-based, and children remained in close range with their mother, and co-slept with their mother until age 6 with boys (when the father started religious instruction) and until age 12 with girls. Think a mother holding her 2-year-old child on her back in a papoose bag. Punishment of children was illegal, as was punishment of other adults outside the realm of the legal system.

The depraved and entitled parents will not inherit the Kingdom of God! Being a parent and controlling, punishing, and/or spousifying your child will never be acceptable, even if the bulk of it is accepted and lawful. Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand!

Understanding my anger patterns

 Yes, I am self-diagnosed as a pedophile. Many unfairly link pedophilia to anger. The abusive pedophiles are angry about something, but most are not angry in the sense of hiding harmful secrets. Quite a few have anger issues, but on the level that most people may struggle with. Many of us, however, can choose to be angry or not.

My anger is basically a chosen anger, many times, but one I'm prompted to brandish when backed into a corner, perceiving abuse from somebody. It is one of pro-social evil, meaning I know I am hurting the other person's feelings, and I don't care, because they are aggrieving me at that point, and the goal is make them feel what I feel in terms of hurt, until they break down, cave, and cooperate with my needs.

I don't get angry all the time outwardly, but may quietly find disgust in certain things, meaning pro-social judgmental. I am a very discerning person, but rarely share my judgments publicly, so not to cause disharmony in a social setting, and usually, I can state anger in a calm sentence. It is when someone continues to be selfish and uncooperative is when I lambast them with pro-social peacekeeper anger, and it always seems to lead to resolution afterwards, but I had to get that frustration and anger out.

I often get angry in question marks, especially "WHY?" such as "Why aren't you listening to me" (the most common frustration I have with people - not listening to needs). I am allowed to interrogate a parent, and they are always at fault, but I am not to interrogate anyone here without reason to suspect abuse of any kind. Just looking for wrong in others reeks of perjury, thus I just am a monitor most times, in parent situations and on parent issues. A silent witness that is in this world, but not of this world.

It is not a sin to have trauma, but it must be admitted in a way that spares children. Repressing trauma leads to parental entitlement, and then child abuse, thus repressing trauma alone is a sinful attitude due to the effect on others...Sex with a child, by my preferences, has nothing to do with the level of trauma in a child, but the level of nurturing instincts in a young girl, as I like to be but in the "child" role by them. They are like a potential babysitter. That actually is abuse, autism or no autism in the perpetrator.

The gaslighting policy of Anti-Parental Entitlement

 Many people know that I am a pedophile here, and many pedophiles, on the last day of interrogation, lashed out at the community. They were under investigation for sex crimes, usually committed as a child. I myself gaslight in terms of reverse gaslighting, meaning defensive gaslighting mostly. The doctrine is pro-social bunker/hide/defend. 

I may question someone who attacks me on another page, meaning gives a rude and offensive reply that is off topic, and/or meant to ridicule my response, perhaps bringing up a sore subject - typical troll behavior. If it is about pedophilia, I presume the best in the individual, and try to empathize with their concerns. When they clearly take my kindness for weakness, which is assumedly rare here, I lash out at them, knowing every conversation has an end, taking screenshots, and putting them on my page.

I don't expect to be gaslit all the time, meaning maybe once in a blue moon. Most people here are understanding, and most all of the abuse against me is filmed, and took place in 2017, meaning most people today are simply concern.

I do interrogate pro-spanking trolls, and with them I use academic gaslighting, in biblical format. Most pro-spanking parents call themselves Christians, but don't know their Bible enough to come to anti-spanking conclusions. It takes an advanced knowledge of the Bible to be an anti-spanking Christian.

I presume innocence in everyone, and admit privilege over everyone - I don't know everyone's life. Say a few hurtful words to me? Pffft. I can take a few hurls of anger, a few names thrown at me, here and there. However, I follow the many warnings system, and if it said behavior comes in a course of conduct, it is harassment under Pennsylvania law, and I may report it once I have enough documentation on you hung up. I rarely report others to the authorities, however, and like to solve problems through civil agreement first, meaning perhaps one member of the community submits to me blocking them. Only if they get around me blocking them, and spread rumors, do they cross into abuse territory by my perceptions, in the sense that I would wish the police involved - it would literally have to be someone stragling me, perhaps putting a little sprinkle in things, meaning posts.

Child welfare concerns are something I must submit to, and you can bring up my pedophilia on your page if you think I am a threat. I just can't. Otherwise, I follow the doctrine of pro-social sequester, meaning the knowledge I share about pedophilia stays here, and is not to be spread around the complex.

Reverse gaslighting isn't just for starting stuff with people. It is when someone is trying to start stuff with you, and you put them into their place, and into submission to your trauma. Nobody starts stuff with me tonight? Then you're good, and will be spared. I just don't want people starting stuff trying to check my nightly temperature. That is demeaning, and a nuisance. My mother is a good mother, and Robbyn should not get that involved in my personal life, and neither should anyone else.

I'm not a snowflake, and am not easily offended. Call me any name in the book, and I'll just brush it off, and maybe throw it back at you if necessary. Maybe I do get offended, but then I get right back up after the exchange is over.

Understanding the Fifth Commandment

 Most American parents expect their children to listen and not talk back. Some of us have REAL parents, meaning not the identified parents that I often slur and decry as the entitled spoogs and specks that punish and control children. I honor and respect my mother, not because I fear her, but the complete opposite - she earned it.

The Fifth Commandment is stated in Exodus 20:17 KJV:

Honour thy father and mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.

This refers to the concept of family honor, meaning I as a Christian am a representative of my family. Trauma is a sign that points to the parents or other similarly charged adult, and trauma isn't always vulnerable and pitiful. I would be misusing my trauma by acting on my pedophilic desires, and that would indicate that a parent imposed a trauma, thus "the apple doesn't fall far from the tree".

It says in Ephesians 6:1-4 KJV:

Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right. Honour thy father and mother; which is the first commandment with promise; That is may be well with thee. And, ye fathers, provoke not your children to wrath, but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.

The Greek root word translated "parents" is γονεύς (Latin: goneus) and refers not to a ruler, but a servant, an attendant to your child, serving their every vulnerable need, from beneath yet from above, guiding the child to what they need, from a humble position of surrender to said needs. The Greek root word υπακουο (Latin: hupakouo) and refers to surrender from the child that reciprocates the loving surrender of parents to their child's needs. 

The Greek root word translated "nurture" is παιδεία (Latin: paideia) and refers to discipline, meaning self-control and self-regulation, which is modeled to children in the form of co-regulation to children, where the more discipline you are as a parent, the more disciplined your child is, with the Greek root word translated "provoke...to wrath" is παροργίζω (Latin: parogizo) and refers to damages, namely harm to the child such as pain, shame, emotional distress, loss of property/tokens, and/or fornication. The Greek root word denoting "admonition" is νουθεσια (Latin: admonition) and refers to verbal correction, gently but firmly informing children of the wrongfulness of their actions, and explaining to them why their behavior was not okay, being realistic as to developmental level. The word "no" is basically what this word refers to, and that word can be paraphrased in many different ways.

Parenting then was attachment-based to the core, but in a specific way that is first-to-last in nature, meaning instead of the parent leading the child to their needs, it was the reverse - the child advocated their needs, and parents, especially mothers, followed the lawful order, and surrendered to the child's needs, with the child being in providing custody. Custody of children under Jewish law was not based on control over the child as a subject of legalistic treatment, like in our legal system, but based on duties of the parent to provide for their child's every need. Parental rights did not exist then. Only parental duties existed...This is how my mother parents, meaning all parents should be selfless like that. I tend to emulate her patience with children. 

The depraved, entitled parents who provoke children to anger will BURN! Let them suffer in torrents of fire and rage that is Divine Wrath. Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand!

Why I am not worried about my reputation

 Most people here, if not all, know some cursory things about me, namely that I have autism. There is also a camp among survivors in the children's rights movement of the United States that those with my kind of autism shouldn't "be in pain" by being aware of having pedophilic disorder. Yes, it is something you HAVE, which makes it more palatable. It is unhealthy to hide these things from yourself, meaning you are aware of this tendency to control children, so you turn it inward by pro-social avoidance/escape and pro-social fantasy.

I am actually a fairly limited individual with autism, meaning I don't have a regular job, and am on SSI. I am allowed SSI as long as I am grateful for it, and that I seek to do something to help out society, which this blog is one of them. This blog is organized as one quadrant of my life, with me being in line for a job in a sheltered workshop.

I took off from work entirely due to a movement disorder called tardive dyskinesia (TD). I was working in kitchens and so forth, and since I didn't want to drop or break anything due to the increasingly violent movements (which came with fear and insecurity alongside it). I am still on leave, which is extended until COVID-19 has abated...I have more time to blog, and that's an upside, but I actually look forward to going back to work. 

If I ever got a job that did actually pay, I would delete everything, because many employers investigate you when you apply by simply putting your name in Google search. I may or may not return under a pseudonym then, depending on what you would like to be believe.

Nope, I plan to live

I am not going to kill myself. Many here are worried that I might do something like that. No, that would devastate a lot of people. 

Suicide is self-murder, with murder being a form of theft of a person from their family and friends, in a way that imposes damages on family, friends, and loved ones in the form of emotional distress. Theft is denoted by the Greek root word κλεπτω (Latin: klepto) which is found multiple places, such as 1 Cor. 6:9-10.

I do not judge anyone's suicide by my hypothetical one, and these days I need to only lightly. I have a strong will to live, mainly for others, but also for myself admittedly.

When I go on your page

 I do not have intent to cause harm, as I am forbidden from posting by way of a Facebook ban. I wish harm on nobody here, and resent nobody here. I just cast aside abusers, to the point of non-existence.

Nobody here is abusing me TODAY. In past-tense, that was completely ridiculous.

Why I admit to being an abuser (and why abusers with autism should be aware)

 Many people here do not like that I am identifying as an abuser of children. I am, in fact, one of those that we all are, as adults, to some degree. I believe that a victim and an abuser can exist side by side in the same person, meaning a tested victim that abuses others, or a narcissist that admits to a trauma.

There are different levels of abuser, and we all as adults, towards children, fall into one of them. Some of us are regret adults, which is a form of former abusers. I myself count myself on the lower strata of the pyramid of abusers, admittedly, meaning the top level - the lawful level - in terms of abuse visibility. 

Some abusers are very discreet, and it's like they don't even exist. Other abusers are on the surface, and some of them are pedophiles. When I refer to pedophilia, I refer to adult sexual entitlement with a mental health lens, meaning pedophilia can exist before it gets to the entitlement stage, meaning it is a far removed sexual fetish for sexualizing childhood, not just children in most cases. A true pedophile fetishizes childhood in an empowering way, but in a way that, in the case that a pedophile plots against an actual child, it is as if they have already abused the child.

I myself do not find the awareness of my pedophilia troubling. It is simply reality, and I can't escape it, and trying to escape it is like repressing any thought - it might come up at the wrong time. Many sexual abusers with autism have limited self-awareness.

There are two types of autistic sexual abuser:

1. Shady/secretive
2. Bright/anti-abuse

I fit into the latter, meaning my pedophilic tendencies are conflated with parental empathic tendencies. We don't spell out "empathy" because such requires receiving, and then is compassionate empathy. Anti-abuse pedophilic abusers lack the social skills to express their parental affection for children, and so they sexually objectify them in their treatment of them. It is called spousification, meaning projecting a girlfriend, wife, or lover, onto a child.

To understand how it feels to be aware of pedophilia, one must understand the biblical definition of reverent fear, meaning the Greek root word ψοβός (Latin: phobos), meaning a very low level fear that jolts you into action, in terms of self-improvement, centering oneself around children, chastening up one's desires, by doing the opposite of what you want to do with them in terms of actions pointed towards the child...It is simply a strong sense of responsibility...It is turning one's parental protective instincts as a pedophile inwards, towards oneself.

All adults are capable of abuse towards children, and all should admit to it and recognize it. I don't feel defeated by my pedophilic nature, but empowered - a chance to protect children in a selfless way that I wasn't as a child.