Paedophilia Just Another "Sexual Preference" That Should Be Allowed?

#5
I'm shocked, JJH reading The Guardian, bloody hell.
 
#7
that seemed quite a sensible and balanced article to me - there is generally complete hysteria in the media about child abuse. There seems little discussion about the causes of it or way to stop it. I would say the majority of abused children are victims of family/parents new partner rather than strangers who are paedophiles. If sex education is ever brought up the media seems to say children shouldn't be told about sex- I think they need to be taught from a young age to fight back if they are made uncomfortable and schools as well as parents have a role in this.
 
#9
It doesn't make it in any way socially acceptable (by modern standards) but it is just a sexual preference.

Just like blonds over brunettes or fatties over slim birds.
 
#10
We aren't to be judgemental about other people's life choices are we now? Sooner or later somebody will mount a legal challenge, and quite possibly win, if they are that way inclined, but can prove, legally, that they are inactive. Once that happens, and sooner or later it will, lawyers will do anything for money, and a chance at legal fame, then the door is opened.

For those who say it couldn't happen, the CoE is currently looking at allowing gay priests, with civil partners, to become bishops. Providing they remain celibate.

There is also the Human Rights Act to consider; a law which requires IVF treatment for incarcerated felons as part of their right to a family life, is capable of being used for furthering most principles.

Legalized euthenasia anyone, or Liverpool Care Path in hospitals?
 
#11
Well it is a sexual preference, surely?


The only real difference between this 'other' sexual preference and the accepted 'other' sexual preferences - such as homosexuality - is the damage caused. Being gay is accepted - quite rightly - as it doesn't actually do any harm, paedophilia isn't because it does.
 
#12
Well it is a sexual preference, surely?


The only real difference between this 'other' sexual preference and the accepted 'other' sexual preferences - such as homosexuality - is the damage caused. Being gay is accepted - quite rightly - as it doesn't actually do any harm, paedophilia isn't because it does.
Only since the late 60s. Before then, homosexuality was a vile and immoral act that destroyed the lives of impressionable young men to satisfy the lust of older deviants, and which threatened our society's entire moral foundation. Much as child molestation is today.
 
#13
Well it is a sexual preference, surely?


The only real difference between this 'other' sexual preference and the accepted 'other' sexual preferences - such as homosexuality - is the damage caused. Being gay is accepted - quite rightly - as it doesn't actually do any harm, paedophilia isn't because it does.
You may want to research the history of homosexuality.

Research average marriage and motherhood ages from days gone by too.
 
#14
Indeed - but that's what happens when you let religion and mob rule decide things. It's generally accepted that homosexuality wasn't any sort of threat to society (other than as a means of blackmail, which was entirely due to its being taboo and illegal) whereas pretty much any reasonable person would agree that there is significant scope for psychological harm when a child enters - even 'consensually' - into a relationship with an adult.
 
#16
Course it was. It doesn't produce babies. In a time when most babies died young, you can't be taking pieces off the board.
 
#17
Depends on how long you keep them in the basement for... Fritzl managed a grandkid/kid didn't he?
 
#18
Incest... another taboo, that has on occaision been acceptable to greater or lesser degrees.
 
#19
Incest is a funny one - it's hard to argue that sex acts between two consenting adults of the same family harms anyone, the problem is if they have full sex and conceive.

Writing a law that says 'you can do your sister up the bum but not normal-style in case the johnnie breaks' would be an interesting chapter in legal history.
 

Similar threads

Top