Voodoo Molestation: Difference between revisions

From BoyWiki
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Quotation|'''Voodoo''' describes a set of spiritual folkways which originated from African traditions. Practitioners of Voodoo believe in “sympathetic magic”. Sympathetic magic principles state a powerful link exists between entities that are similar in appearance or come into contact with each other. Items such as photographs, nail clippings, hair and other objects may be used to create an “image” of another person. This “image” may be used to cast a curse or spell. For this reason, there are some practitioners of Voodoo who are cautious of photographs, as they are powerful items capable of harm.<ref name=parabolic>{{cite web|url=http://parabolicevidence.com/occult/the-religious-belief-that-a-photograph-can-steal-a-soul/ |title=The religious belief that a photograph can steal a soul|date= |accessdate=April 27, 2014}}</ref> Magic and superstition have surrounded photography from the beginning. Because of the way it captured the image, especially of living people, the camera was widely believed to cause death or illness or to steal the soul.<ref name=Oxford>{{cite web|url=http://www.answers.com/topic/magic-and-superstition#ixzz306XI5JMN |title=Oxford Companion to the Photograph:magic and superstition| first=Elizabeth | last= Edwards||publisher= Oxford University Press |date= |accessdate=April 27, 2014}}</ref> While some cultures still believe that photography can steal your soul. Most of the people today allow their photograph to be taken, however infants are protected. It is still believed the souls of infants are fragile and are susceptible to leaving the body.<ref>http://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/8380/did-some-cultures-believe-that-photography-can-steal-your-soul</ref>}}
{{Quotation|'''Voodoo''' describes a set of spiritual folkways which originated from African traditions. Practitioners of Voodoo believe in “sympathetic magic”. Sympathetic magic principles state a powerful link exists between entities that are similar in appearance or come into contact with each other. Items such as photographs, nail clippings, hair and other objects may be used to create an “image” of another person. This “image” may be used to cast a curse or spell. For this reason, there are some practitioners of Voodoo who are cautious of photographs, as they are powerful items capable of harm.<ref name=parabolic>{{cite web|url=http://parabolicevidence.com/occult/the-religious-belief-that-a-photograph-can-steal-a-soul/ |title=The religious belief that a photograph can steal a soul|date= |accessdate=April 27, 2014}}</ref> Magic and superstition have surrounded photography from the beginning. Because of the way it captured the image, especially of living people, the camera was widely believed to cause death or illness or to steal the soul.<ref name=Oxford>{{cite web|url=http://www.answers.com/topic/magic-and-superstition#ixzz306XI5JMN |title=Oxford Companion to the Photograph:magic and superstition| first=Elizabeth | last= Edwards||publisher= Oxford University Press |date= |accessdate=April 27, 2014}}</ref> While some cultures still believe that photography can steal your soul. Most of the people today allow their photograph to be taken, however infants are protected. It is still believed the souls of infants are fragile and are susceptible to leaving the body.<ref>http://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/8380/did-some-cultures-believe-that-photography-can-steal-your-soul</ref>}}


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magical_thinking


At 17, the women codenamed Amy learned that the pictures her uncle took of her had gone "viral on the Internet" and had been downloaded and viewed by an estimated 70,000 individuals <ref name=Reason >{{cite web|url=http://reason.com/archives/2014/02/12/looking-vs-touching |title=Looking vs. Touching| first=Jacob | last= Sullum||publisher= Reason Foundation, |date=February 12, 2014 |accessdate=April 27, 2014}}</ref> and has sued more than 170 men collecting about $1.7 million.<ref name=Slate /> Amy, whose real name is not used in court papers, was raped and filmed at ages 8 and 9 by her uncle who served 10 years in prison for his actions ..... As a result, her lawyers argued, she could not finish college, has had trouble holding a job and will require weekly psychotherapy for the rest of her life <ref name=USATODAY /> estimating that the cost of her psychotherapy would be $3.4 million. Doyle Randall Paroline, who possessed just two images of the 280 illegal images avalable on the internet was sentenced in 2009 to two years in prison was found liable by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit for the full amount of the $3.4 million in restitution Amy has claimed. The 5th Circuit said it was up to Paroline—not Amy—to find the other men who could also be on the hook for restitution and go after them for contributions<ref name=Slate >{{cite web|url=http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2013/12/child_pornography_restitution_and_the_violence_against_women_act_the_supreme.html |title=Paying Amy| first=Emily| last= Bazelon||publisher= The Slate Group, a Graham Holdings Company |date=Dec. 4 2013 5:24 PM |accessdate=April 27, 2014}}</ref> for their part in damaging Amy's soul. USA Today reported that the case stemmed from Congress' passage of the ''Sexual Exploitation and Other Abuse of Children Act'', which established penalties and restitution for sexual assault, domestic violence and child pornography. The law called for full restitution — but it did not specify who should pay what....  
At 17, the women codenamed Amy learned that the pictures her uncle took of her had gone "viral on the Internet" and had been downloaded and viewed by an estimated 70,000 individuals <ref name=Reason >{{cite web|url=http://reason.com/archives/2014/02/12/looking-vs-touching |title=Looking vs. Touching| first=Jacob | last= Sullum||publisher= Reason Foundation, |date=February 12, 2014 |accessdate=April 27, 2014}}</ref> and has sued more than 170 men collecting about $1.7 million.<ref name=Slate /> Amy, whose real name is not used in court papers, was raped and filmed at ages 8 and 9 by her uncle who served 10 years in prison for his actions ..... As a result, her lawyers argued, she could not finish college, has had trouble holding a job and will require weekly psychotherapy for the rest of her life <ref name=USATODAY /> estimating that the cost of her psychotherapy would be $3.4 million. Doyle Randall Paroline, who possessed just two images of the 280 illegal images avalable on the internet was sentenced in 2009 to two years in prison was found liable by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit for the full amount of the $3.4 million in restitution Amy has claimed. The 5th Circuit said it was up to Paroline—not Amy—to find the other men who could also be on the hook for restitution and go after them for contributions<ref name=Slate >{{cite web|url=http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2013/12/child_pornography_restitution_and_the_violence_against_women_act_the_supreme.html |title=Paying Amy| first=Emily| last= Bazelon||publisher= The Slate Group, a Graham Holdings Company |date=Dec. 4 2013 5:24 PM |accessdate=April 27, 2014}}</ref> for their part in damaging Amy's soul. USA Today reported that the case stemmed from Congress' passage of the ''Sexual Exploitation and Other Abuse of Children Act'', which established penalties and restitution for sexual assault, domestic violence and child pornography. The law called for full restitution — but it did not specify who should pay what....  


In the recent decision by the US Supreme Court, it was adjudicated that ''restitution'' could be awarded based not  only on the production, sell, or distribution of child pornography but by all those who have viewed the image based on the magical belief that viewing the image has essentially caused damage to the soul of the subject. It was legally maintained that there is a causal link between viewing an image and the "pain and suffering" of its subject.  <ref name=USATODAY>{{cite web|url=http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/04/23/supreme-court-child-pornography-restitution/6182319/ |title=Justices limit restitution to victims by child porn users| first=Richard | last= Wolf||publisher= USATODAY, |date=April 23, 2014 |accessdate=April 27, 2014}}</ref> However, there is no demonstrable scientific evidence which shows the existence of any psychical damage or changes to the brain structure of the subject related to the viewing or other manipulation of the image. It was argued by the plaintiff's lawyer that the damage was attributable to her knowledge that images of her uncle's crimes are circulating on the Internet without demonstrating a proximate cause of her suffering or that there was any demonstrable connection between the defendants actions and any harm to his client.   
In the recent decision by the US Supreme Court, it was adjudicated that ''restitution'' could be awarded based not  only on the production, sell, or distribution of child pornography but by all those who have viewed the image based on the magical belief <ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magical_thinking</ref> that viewing the image has essentially caused damage to the soul of the subject. It was legally maintained that there is a causal link between viewing an image and the "pain and suffering" of its subject.  <ref name=USATODAY>{{cite web|url=http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/04/23/supreme-court-child-pornography-restitution/6182319/ |title=Justices limit restitution to victims by child porn users| first=Richard | last= Wolf||publisher= USATODAY, |date=April 23, 2014 |accessdate=April 27, 2014}}</ref> However, there is no demonstrable scientific evidence which shows the existence of any psychical damage or changes to the brain structure of the subject related to the viewing or other manipulation of the image. It was argued by the plaintiff's lawyer that the damage was attributable to her knowledge that images of her uncle's crimes are circulating on the Internet without demonstrating a proximate cause of her suffering or that there was any demonstrable connection between the defendants actions and any harm to his client.   





Revision as of 20:59, 28 April 2014

Voodoo describes a set of spiritual folkways which originated from African traditions. Practitioners of Voodoo believe in “sympathetic magic”. Sympathetic magic principles state a powerful link exists between entities that are similar in appearance or come into contact with each other. Items such as photographs, nail clippings, hair and other objects may be used to create an “image” of another person. This “image” may be used to cast a curse or spell. For this reason, there are some practitioners of Voodoo who are cautious of photographs, as they are powerful items capable of harm.[1] Magic and superstition have surrounded photography from the beginning. Because of the way it captured the image, especially of living people, the camera was widely believed to cause death or illness or to steal the soul.[2] While some cultures still believe that photography can steal your soul. Most of the people today allow their photograph to be taken, however infants are protected. It is still believed the souls of infants are fragile and are susceptible to leaving the body.[3]


At 17, the women codenamed Amy learned that the pictures her uncle took of her had gone "viral on the Internet" and had been downloaded and viewed by an estimated 70,000 individuals [4] and has sued more than 170 men collecting about $1.7 million.[5] Amy, whose real name is not used in court papers, was raped and filmed at ages 8 and 9 by her uncle who served 10 years in prison for his actions ..... As a result, her lawyers argued, she could not finish college, has had trouble holding a job and will require weekly psychotherapy for the rest of her life [6] estimating that the cost of her psychotherapy would be $3.4 million. Doyle Randall Paroline, who possessed just two images of the 280 illegal images avalable on the internet was sentenced in 2009 to two years in prison was found liable by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit for the full amount of the $3.4 million in restitution Amy has claimed. The 5th Circuit said it was up to Paroline—not Amy—to find the other men who could also be on the hook for restitution and go after them for contributions[5] for their part in damaging Amy's soul. USA Today reported that the case stemmed from Congress' passage of the Sexual Exploitation and Other Abuse of Children Act, which established penalties and restitution for sexual assault, domestic violence and child pornography. The law called for full restitution — but it did not specify who should pay what....

In the recent decision by the US Supreme Court, it was adjudicated that restitution could be awarded based not only on the production, sell, or distribution of child pornography but by all those who have viewed the image based on the magical belief [7] that viewing the image has essentially caused damage to the soul of the subject. It was legally maintained that there is a causal link between viewing an image and the "pain and suffering" of its subject. [6] However, there is no demonstrable scientific evidence which shows the existence of any psychical damage or changes to the brain structure of the subject related to the viewing or other manipulation of the image. It was argued by the plaintiff's lawyer that the damage was attributable to her knowledge that images of her uncle's crimes are circulating on the Internet without demonstrating a proximate cause of her suffering or that there was any demonstrable connection between the defendants actions and any harm to his client.





Re-victimization http://www.publicengines.com/blog/2010/02/03/re-victimization-and-restitution-for-victims-of-child-pornography/

Ordered to pay compensation http://jonathanturley.org/2009/02/24/court-orders-former-viagra-executive-to-pay-200000-to-woman-photographed-as-a-child-while-being-sexually-abused/

References

  1. The religious belief that a photograph can steal a soul. Retrieved on April 27, 2014.
  2. Edwards, Elizabeth. Oxford Companion to the Photograph:magic and superstition. Oxford University Press. Retrieved on April 27, 2014.
  3. http://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/8380/did-some-cultures-believe-that-photography-can-steal-your-soul
  4. Sullum, Jacob (February 12, 2014). Looking vs. Touching. Reason Foundation,. Retrieved on April 27, 2014.
  5. 5.0 5.1 Bazelon, Emily (Dec. 4 2013 5:24 PM). Paying Amy. The Slate Group, a Graham Holdings Company. Retrieved on April 27, 2014.
  6. 6.0 6.1 Wolf, Richard (April 23, 2014). Justices limit restitution to victims by child porn users. USATODAY,. Retrieved on April 27, 2014.
  7. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magical_thinking

External links