Baby they were born this way.

[classical_hero]

http://www.spectator.co.uk/australia/australia-features/9514602/sympathy-for-the-devil-2/

When future chroniclers of our particular moral decline designate milestones on our long slide into nihilism, efforts to mitigate the evil of sexual abuse against children must surely rate a dishonourable mention. A particularly disgraceful example of this genre appeared in the Advertiser from the pen of its political editor Tory Shepherd. In a meandering piece whose speciousness only surpassed its noxiousness, Shepherd argues that paedophiles are blameless because their brains are (un)naturally hardwired to lust after children. It’s ‘not their fault’ she declares, citing a University of Toronto study that found child molesters on average have lower than average IQs. She argues that if paedophiles were only given ‘sympathy’ and ‘respect’ the end result would be ‘fewer children raped.’ In essence, Shepherd wants to wager the lives of our sons and daughters on the hypothetical proposition that a ‘softly softly’ approach to paedophilia will reduce child sexual abuse.

Isn't this a similar argument used by the homosexuals that they were "hardwired" that way? I predict that within the decde we will see paedophilia normalised, after all it is step 7 in the 1972 Gay Rights platform in the state level. Considering that and number 8 on the state level aren't done yet, there is still more fight for this platform to be completed.

 

[Sonereal]

On a scale of 1 to 10, how serious are you being right now?

 

[GoodSarmatian]

I predict that we won't, because most people understand that homosexuality doesn't harm anybody.

 

[BenitoChavez]

Here is the flaw in your argument. Whether or not pedophilia (paedophilia? I've never seen it spelled that way) is genetic or not, it hurts people. Homosexuality doesn't.

 

[Goodfella]

http://www.spectator.co.uk/australia/australia-features/9514602/sympathy-for-the-devil-2/

I predict that within the decde we will see paedophilia normalised, after all it is step 7 in the 1972 Gay Rights platform in the state level. Considering that and number 8 on the state level aren't done yet, there is still more fight for this platform to be completed.

I'm not sure what this is but from a cursory google search I'm guessing that it's either a)something that didn't really happen or b)something proposed by fringe activists who are in no way representative of gay people in general.

 

[Truthy]

I'm not sure what this is but from a cursory google search I'm guessing that it's either a)something that didn't really happen or b)something proposed by fringe activists who are in no way representative of gay people in general.

Or c)a deliberate effort to misconstrue something gay rights activists support
On his link it says:

7. Appropriate executive orders, regulations and legislation banning the compiling, maintenance and dissemination of information on an individual's sexual preferences, behavior, and social and political activities for dossiers and data banks.

Edit: oops, looked at the wrong thing.

He's talking about this:

7. Repeal of all laws governing the age of sexual consent.

 

[Wolfbeckett]

Well, the article referenced does skirt close to having a good point. Pedophilia is undoubtedly a mental illness, no more the fault of the person that has it than is, say, Ebola. But just as we commit a smaller injustice by restricting people's freedom via quarantining them in the case of infectious diseases in order to avoid a greater injustice of more victims getting sick, locking up pedophiles is certainly also necessary in order to prevent the greater injustice of victimized children. It may not be fair, strictly speaking, since pedophiles certainly did not choose to have a mental illness that makes them hated by society, but the universe is a cold, unfair place.

That said, there may be therapies that can help at least some of these people and stop them from victimizing children before we have to lock them up, and having that discussion as a society would certainly help less kids become victims. It would be too great a transgression of justice to lock people up before they've even committed a crime, and by the time they have, it's too late to do anything but damage control to prevent them from harming children again, which is cold comfort to the people they've already abused. If we can do something via therapy, medication, or whatever to prevent them from hurting anyone in the first place, that seems to me a better outcome all around.

 

[madviking]

Link to video.

 

[ori]

I'm not sure what this is but from a cursory google search I'm guessing that it's either a)something that didn't really happen or b)something proposed by fringe activists who are in no way representative of gay people in general.

acually at least in Germany, but I am sure elsewhere too gay rights activists did align with pedopilia activists in the 1970s to argue for dismantling all anti-sexuality laws (though it should be noted this was a time were homosexual acts themselves were still deemed criminal - also in the US if I am not mistaken). So at the time both homosexuals and those wanting to promote "consensual" sexual relations regardless of age of the involved actually were put into the same boat by society - and then almost naturally found that they had a common cause, with gay rights activists buying or at least accepting the claim that consensual sexual activity is possible even with the very young and going from there. Today those involved then by and large would rather deny it happened instead of stating the obvious that they chose their allies inadvisedly as they bought into what society instilled, namely that they were essentially all the same.
Also the rest of the OP is specious - if you want to claim gay rights leads to pedophilia being legalized at least point to someone arguing for that now not 40+ years ago.

 

[Goodfella]

acually at least in Germany, but I am sure elsewhere too gay rights activists did align with pedopilia activists in the 1970s to argue for dismantling all anti-sexuality laws (though it should be noted this was a time were homosexual acts themselves were still deemed criminal - also in the US if I am not mistaken). So at the time both homosexuals and those wanting to promote "consensual" sexual relations regardless of age of the involved actually were put into the same boat by society - and then almost naturally found that they had a common cause, with gay rights activists buying or at least accepting the claim that consensual sexual activity is possible even with the very young and going from there. Today those involved then by and large would rather deny it happened instead of stating the obvious that they chose their allies inadvisedly as they bought into what society instilled, namely that they were essentially all the same.

Interesting.

Also the rest of the OP is specious - if you want to claim gay rights leads to pedophilia being legalized at least point to someone arguing for that now not 40+ years ago.

Watch him cite Terry Bean.

 

[Kyriakos]

acually at least in Germany, but I am sure elsewhere too gay rights activists did align with pedopilia activists in the 1970s to argue for dismantling all anti-sexuality laws (though it should be noted this was a time were homosexual acts themselves were still deemed criminal - also in the US if I am not mistaken). So at the time both homosexuals and those wanting to promote "consensual" sexual relations regardless of age of the involved actually were put into the same boat by society - and then almost naturally found that they had a common cause, with gay rights activists buying or at least accepting the claim that consensual sexual activity is possible even with the very young and going from there. Today those involved then by and large would rather deny it happened instead of stating the obvious that they chose their allies inadvisedly as they bought into what society instilled, namely that they were essentially all the same.
Also the rest of the OP is specious - if you want to claim gay rights leads to pedophilia being legalized at least point to someone arguing for that now not 40+ years ago.

That is messed up

Critical issue with blame lies on the activity harming someone (else). It is pretty out of touch with any reality to argue that pedophilia can ever not harm, cause the child there is not yet viewing adults in any way close to being realistic. Of course i refer to children there being in puberty already. For pre-puberty it is hugely more messed up. Both kinds of pedophilia should remain illegal in my view.

Re homosexuality, if it is between adults, and in agreement, i don't see anything to be regulated by law there. Rape applies in the usual manner. I think that in most euro societies homosexual people by now mostly cause antipathy when in rallies or other sorts of rather crude events. But that is about being publicly presenting your sexual elements, and i would equally be critical/annoyed of heterosexual people parading in such a manner (that said, i can obviously agree that it is far rarer to see homosexuals kissing in public, but i am not of the view one has to make much of that).
Otherwise i doubt many people care either way, and 'mind their own business'.

Another important distinction here is that it is one thing to 'accept' something, and another to 'be fond of' something. I am not particularly fond of homosexuality, but i am not fond of a lot of other (and far more common) traits in people, so it is not an issue for me, and nor my right to make it an issue in the first place. Some people wrongly think that one has to actually like X and not just accept X like he accepts an ocean of other things in other people without being particularly interested.

 

[GoodSarmatian]

Critical issue with blame lies on the activity harming someone (else). It is pretty out of touch with any reality to argue that pedophilia can ever not harm, cause the child there is not yet viewing adults in any way close to being realistic. Of course i refer to children there being in puberty already. For pre-puberty it is hugely more messed up. Both kinds of pedophilia should remain illegal in my view.

That raises an interesting question about outlets for paedophilia that don't harm anyone.
What about CGI child porn or child like sex dolls ?
One could argue that such things could lover inhibitions for people who have urges that are weak enough to be suppressed, otoh they could provide people who aren't able to resist with a way to satisfy their impulses in a harmless manner.

 

[Kyriakos]

That raises an interesting question about outlets for paedophilia that don't harm anyone.
What about CGI child porn or child like sex dolls ?
One could argue that such things could lover inhibitions for people who have urges that are weak enough to be suppressed, otoh they could provide people who aren't able to resist with a way to satisfy their impulses in a harmless manner.

CGI child porn already exists (not sure of a legal status there), and obviously pedophilia-themed hentai have existed for a long time, and are legal outside Japan as well (eg Canada, not sure about the US).
In my view those things can be legal, despite the not that unclear connections (of some sort) between them and actual pedophilia with a victim. Should be noted that a crime exists in law only if someone is harmed in some manner, financial, reputation-hurting, somatically or psychologically injured etc. In the case of pedophilia with an ephebe, the harm is also theorised upon due to the age and its limitations in forming 'realistic' views on such matters.

 

[Goodfella]

That raises an interesting question about outlets for paedophilia that don't harm anyone.
What about CGI child porn or child like sex dolls ?
One could argue that such things could lover inhibitions for people who have urges that are weak enough to be suppressed, otoh they could provide people who aren't able to resist with a way to satisfy their impulses in a harmless manner.

Now I'm wondering, if we were to create believable life-like sex robots for pedophiles to screw, how repulsive would I find it? The activity is no longer harmful, but it still seems wrong. But if the robots were satisfying enough to prevent pedos from ever harming human children, I can't think of a rational reason to feel this way.

 

[Kyriakos]

Now I'm wondering, if we were to create believable life-like sex robots for pedophiles to screw, how repulsive would I find it? The activity is no longer harmful, but it still seems wrong. But if the robots were satisfying enough to prevent pedos from ever harming human children, I can't think of a rational reason to feel this way.

Well, if believable life-like robots (looking like humans) were built so that the buyer could shoot them with a rifle, legally it would not have to be an issue at all. Regardless of some robots having 'ethnic group' traits. It is one thing to use the law against an action with harm to someone in a logical manner to back it, and another to use a law to attack people due to their (even very unsavory or nasty) private actions...

 

[Agent327]

http://www.spectator.co.uk/australia/australia-features/9514602/sympathy-for-the-devil-2/


Isn't this a similar argument used by the homosexuals that they were "hardwired" that way? I predict that within the decde we will see paedophilia normalised, after all it is step 7 in the 1972 Gay Rights platform in the state level.

Really?

7. Appropriate executive orders, regulations and legislation banning the compiling, maintenance and dissemination of information on an individual's sexual preferences, behavior, and social and political activities for dossiers and data banks.

 

[Goodfella]

He was talking about the state level #7

7. Repeal of all laws governing the age of sexual consent.

 

[Flying Pig]

I can't help but think it would be much more helpful to treat paedophilia (which, by the way, is the Commonwealth spelling - it's originally from the Greek word paidos) as a mental illness rather than a sign of being a bad person. Gradually, the same has happened with alcoholism and drug addiction, and the key to it is giving people help, without being judgemental, so as to prevent them from acting on their urges in the first place. Currently, nobody's going to go to anybody and say 'I'm having thoughts about children I don't want to act on, can you help me?', firstly because we simply don't have people in place to provide that help, and secondly because of the stigma that it would attract. So you end up with those people stewing away, and the only people who will understand and talk to them about it are others with the same impulses. That doesn't strike me as an ideal situation.

 

[Kyriakos]

^ Well, yeah, but the same is true for other harmful urges. Eg one would not have anywhere to go and say, for example:
"Hi, i have the urge to kill an old pawn-shop lady, so as to prove that killing is not only allowed to 'great men' like Napoleon, and that killing with a reason does not have to diminish the killer to a crook or criminal".



Personally i doubt a specific help organisation/groups for pedophilia can be viable, so it should be part of the overall psychological help hospitals/health services can provide. I also have to suppose that there are far less people prone to pedophilia than to illegal drugs, despite the latter being recognised by now as a symptom of psychological issues in young adults.

 

[Flying Pig]

^ Well, yeah, but the same is true for other harmful urges. Eg one would not have anywhere to go and say, for example:
"Hi, i have the urge to kill an old pawn-shop lady, so as to prove that killing is not only allowed to 'great men' like Napoleon, and that killing with a reason does not have to diminish the killer to a crook or criminal".

Well, I think somebody like that should absolutely be treated as mentally ill, rather than simply reviled or sent to Siberia.