Homosexuality and pedophilia are kinda on different planes of existence. :|
Will Pedophilia ever be accepted like H0m0sexuality here?
This topic is locked from further discussion.
If by pedophilia you mean the attraction to children (3< y < 13 years old) by someone at or over 16 years old but doesn't act on their sexual urges, then yes they shouldn't be discriminated against.
If by pedophilia you mean the engagement of sexual acts with a child by someone 16 or over (Which your really referring to child sexual predators or abusers), then you haven't got a chance in hell unless mentality of society takes a joyride though candyland.
That's funny, because many people like yourself claim that homosexuality per se isn't condemned by The Bible, but only the sexual acts -- yet in this scenario you seem to be suggesting that peadophillia of itself necessitates sexual acts.A child is not capable of having either the mental capacity nor the physical desires necessary to willingly give himself or herself to a partner with the full knowledge of both what is happening and what the risks are that are involved. It's the exact same reason why beastiality is totally unlike homosexuality, too.
GabuEx
No, because like Zoophilia, Pedophilia defies consent and puts a person in a position of higher maturity and intellligence in a sexual situation with someone who is not at all on the same level.
Homosexuality involves consenting adults. Paedophilia involves non-consenting children. I don't even understand how anyone can draw a comparison.
Homosexuality is between 2 adults it's not as bad as having sex with a 4 year old.Sway-
^This, only that i dont think that homosexuality is something bad, is more a matter of opinions.
I mean c'mon people, is someone agree with this one? think, you're talking about adults having a relationship (sexual or not) with children, children, if any of you has ever consider to this could happen or be accepted, just take a look of your niece and think how would you feel if some sick 30 year old perv have a relationship with her, but hey, it's ok, we are now accepting this behavior, what would be next, rape legal?
Very well put. Pedophillia has no place in society and never will be. It's disgusting one-sided sick and twisted sense of love. Homosexuality on the other hand involves two people actually in love.No. Paedophilia will never be accepted because the child isn't sexually aware and can get no pleasure from the experience - only physical pain and severe psychological damage. Homosexuality is fine because both people involved want it to happen and will both enjoy it. Just remember that 50 years ago segragating black people was fine and now it isn't. Does that mean a Kangaroo will be allowed on the same bus as people in 50 years? Of course not.
manicfoot
[QUOTE="BucketsOfSpunk"]Are you calling gay people sick?3DayFinisherNo I'm calling pedophiles sick. I agree. Anybody who will put their hands on a child is sick and should be put down. They will never stop. The world would be a better place without these people running around.
Pedophillia is highly overrated in my opinion. I really dont remember being totally clueless at the age of 13. And really many men use flattery to get into the pants of women and even adult mature women fall for it and get dumped after the guy had enough pleasure from them.
Bluff_Master_2
Well, yeah, ok, 13 years old, not sound too horrible you may think, but what about 6-10 year old girl/boys?, i'm sorry, pedophilia is not overrated is a real problem and anyone who pratice this is just sick, sick, sick, sick.
A child is not capable of having either the mental capacity nor the physical desires necessary to willingly give himself or herself to a partner with the full knowledge of both what is happening and what the risks are that are involved. It's the exact same reason why beastiality is totally unlike homosexuality, too.
That's funny, because many people like yourself claim that homosexuality per se isn't condemned by The Bible, but only the sexual acts -- yet in this scenario you seem to be suggesting that peadophillia of itself necessitates sexual acts. Exactly, Gabu is clearly attempting damage control in his response to BucketsOfSpunk. Buckets is right. And everyone in this thread is confused. Pedophilia =/= molestation. Get it straight. Pedophilia is simply the attraction. As far as the example of the pictures, it doesn't even have to porn. A pedophile could look a pictures of little kids in catalogs for Toys "R Us or something, and get off to that. No exploitation whatsoever occurs by either a pornographer or a molester. You people seem to have a hard time seperating pedophilia from molestation. Instead you compare pedophilia to homosexual sex? That's unbalanced. Your intolerance comes from ignorance, and that's why pedophilia will never be accepted. Because people don't want to learn. And no, I am neither a pedophile or homosexual. I just have the ability to let go of life-long conditioning and look at things in a humble, honest manner.
Copypasta from Debate.org with permission from PoeJoe I often hear the following argument from right-wing Christian conservatives: "What the heck are you talking about Joe? Attraction is between a man and a women. A man and a women only. That's how God created it, and that's how he intends for it to be. These homosexuals are so unnatural - their sex organs don't even match up! But, hey, let's consider the thought for your benefit. If indeed there really exists such thing as predetermined biological orientation, where does it end? What about pedophilia?" I normally snicker with a cynical grin when I respond, "It doesn't end." I believe without a flinching doubt that pedophilia is a sexual orientation pedophiles are born with. That is, they cannot control their urges, and they most certainly did not choose to have those urges. Pedophiles do not see children as we see children. Pedophiles see them as any of the rest of us see our partners or crushes. Pedophiles see children just like a schoolboy/girl might see a teacher s/he has a crush on. Pedophiles are just like that - they can't control it. They just have an affinity for something society deems as inappropriate, because they were born that way. The scientific evidence proves this claim. In 2002, Canadian sexologists James Cantor and Ray Blanchard reported that pedophiles have lower IQs, score poorer on memory tests, have greater rates of left handedness, are generally shorter, and have differently structured brains. In 2006, it was reported that heterosexual male pedophiles have lower levels of testosterone. A 2008 study notes of "a dysfunction at the cognitive stage of sexual arousal processing" . . . whatever that means. Point is: Pedophiles do not choose to be pedophiles. Pedophiles are born pedophiles; and because of their societally unfortunate predisposition, they will always be pedophiles. A question arises: Is it therefore okay to lock active pedophiles up since it's not really their fault anyway? Of course it is okay to lock active pedophiles up! The perspective view must default to the child who will be psychologically scarred for the rest of his/her life. Not to mention, the act of locking active pedophiles up is such a huge deterrent . . . imagine you woke up tomorrow morning to find that there were no longer any laws! You'd bet you'd be scared. . . . Locking pedophiles up certainly isn't fair, but it is the fairest thing to do. Another question, this time rhetorical, and asked to a pedophile: If you love children so much, certainly you would love them enough not to harm them? Pedophile answers by asking, "How does it harm children?" Indeed, this eighteen year old cutoff mark is astonishingly high when compared to the rest of history. Juliet (you know, "Romeo and Juliet") is supposed to be thirteen. In Ancient Greece, male homosexual pedophilia was unabashfully rampant. Today, many Eastern countries still marry off daughters as young as thirteen, twelve, eleven, and, yes, sometimes ten! So let's backtrack to when I wrote, "The perspective view must default to the child who will be psychologically scarred for the rest of his/her life." Let us imagine a world where pedophilia isn't taboo, a world where pedophilia is common and natural and even beautiful. (That was the world of Ancient Greece after all, wasn't it?) In this world, wouldn't pedophilia not psychologically scar a child? Wouldn't it even be a life enhancing experience for the child - to be exposed to sexuality at a young age - for sexuality not to be this mysterious thing that s/he just has to go and try unsafely? Now obviously practicalities must be noted of. For example, penetrative sex would most certainly harm children. But leaving those considerations for later, first consider this point: All these sexual taboos we have today are so unnatural - not the taboos themselves, but the being of them. I'm sure all of our first reaction to the notion pedophilia is, like, ewww. The reaction is shared by me too. But let's give pedophiles some slack. They didn't choose their orientation; and the very reason they are bad isn't because there is actually anything wrong with what they want to do, but because of our instinctive reaction to call them bad. Hopefully, as history moves forward, we can become more accepting of one another's sexual dispositions. Hopefully, as pedophilia becomes more accepted by society, the possible psychological trauma children might receive will lessen. Hopefully, a more accepting day will come.hamstergeddonIt has nothing to do with it being natural.. It has to do with the fact that CHILDREN DO NOT have the ability to consent under law, so in essence its RAPE..
Copypasta from Debate.org hamstergeddon
Pretty good read, and despite every good point in that article i just can't look with mercy to some sick pedophile who has harm a poor child, yeah, poor bastards, they don't know why they are hurting them, still, is unanceptable and i hope it stay like this forever.
It has nothing to do with it being natural.. It has to do with the fact that CHILDREN DO NOT have the ability to consent under law, so in essence its RAPE.. sSubZerOoPedophilia does not hurt children. Molestation does. Big difference. Pedophilia is only the attraction. A child can not be hurt by attraction. :roll:
[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"] It has nothing to do with it being natural.. It has to do with the fact that CHILDREN DO NOT have the ability to consent under law, so in essence its RAPE.. Righteous_RagePedophilia does not hurt children. Molestation does. Big difference. Pedophilia is only the attraction. A child can not be hurt by attraction. :roll: We are talking about accepting the acts of Pedophilia.. Other than that, no its a persons fantasy by all means, just as long as a real child doesn't take part in it.
[QUOTE="hamstergeddon"]Copypasta from Debate.org with permission from PoeJoesSubZerOoIt has nothing to do with it being natural.. It has to do with the fact that CHILDREN DO NOT have the ability to consent under law, so in essence its RAPE.. No, the idea that active pedophilia is different than just pedophilia is what defines his argument. Active pedophiles actually act on their urges, other pedohpiles just have a natural URGE to act on those instincts. Obviously active pedophiles should be punished, but passive ones that don't act on those urges should still be accepted in our society, and not ostracized
[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"] It has nothing to do with it being natural.. It has to do with the fact that CHILDREN DO NOT have the ability to consent under law, so in essence its RAPE.. Righteous_RagePedophilia does not hurt children. Molestation does. Big difference. Pedophilia is only the attraction. A child can not be hurt by attraction. :roll: see my other post ^^^^
[QUOTE="GabuEx"]That's funny, because many people like yourself claim that homosexuality per se isn't condemned by The Bible, but only the sexual acts -- yet in this scenario you seem to be suggesting that peadophillia of itself necessitates sexual acts.A child is not capable of having either the mental capacity nor the physical desires necessary to willingly give himself or herself to a partner with the full knowledge of both what is happening and what the risks are that are involved. It's the exact same reason why beastiality is totally unlike homosexuality, too.
MetalGear_Ninty
Had you read this thread, you would have seen the posts stating not only that I was not talking solely about sexual activity, but also that for pedophilia to be accepted in the same way that homosexuality is accepted it would be necessary for acting upon those desires to be accepted, considering that even the strongest anti-gay preachers accept that homosexuals exist.
And I have never claimed that homosexuality is condemned in any way, either in terms of desire or terms of acting upon those desires, by the Bible...
[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"][QUOTE="hamstergeddon"]Copypasta from Debate.org with permission from PoeJoehamstergeddonIt has nothing to do with it being natural.. It has to do with the fact that CHILDREN DO NOT have the ability to consent under law, so in essence its RAPE.. No, the idea that active pedophilia is different than just pedophilia is what defines his argument. Active pedophiles actually act on their urges, other pedohpiles just have a natural URGE to act on those instincts. Obviously active pedophiles should be punished, but passive ones that don't act on those urges should still be accepted in our society, and not ostracized We all have our fantasies.. The point being if you don't want to be ostracized for it, THAN don't committ to it.. When people say pedophile we immediately think about people who actually act upon that urge..
[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"][QUOTE="hamstergeddon"]Copypasta from Debate.org with permission from PoeJoehamstergeddonIt has nothing to do with it being natural.. It has to do with the fact that CHILDREN DO NOT have the ability to consent under law, so in essence its RAPE.. No, the idea that active pedophilia is different than just pedophilia is what defines his argument. Active pedophiles actually act on their urges, other pedohpiles just have a natural URGE to act on those instincts. Obviously active pedophiles should be punished, but passive ones that don't act on those urges should still be accepted in our society, and not ostracized Exactly, and thanks for not being a tool.
[QUOTE="hamstergeddon"][QUOTE="sSubZerOo"] It has nothing to do with it being natural.. It has to do with the fact that CHILDREN DO NOT have the ability to consent under law, so in essence its RAPE.. sSubZerOoNo, the idea that active pedophilia is different than just pedophilia is what defines his argument. Active pedophiles actually act on their urges, other pedohpiles just have a natural URGE to act on those instincts. Obviously active pedophiles should be punished, but passive ones that don't act on those urges should still be accepted in our society, and not ostracized We all have our fantasies.. The point being if you don't want to be ostracized for it, THAN don't committ to it.. When people say pedophile we immediately think about people who actually act upon that urge.. well if we're arguing about active pedophiles than there's really nothing to debate... if someone actually molests or rapes a child than they should be punished. But what I'm saying is that people that have the urges but don't act on them shouldn't be rejected or tabooed by society.
[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"][QUOTE="hamstergeddon"]Copypasta from Debate.org with permission from PoeJoehamstergeddonIt has nothing to do with it being natural.. It has to do with the fact that CHILDREN DO NOT have the ability to consent under law, so in essence its RAPE.. No, the idea that active pedophilia is different than just pedophilia is what defines his argument. Active pedophiles actually act on their urges, other pedohpiles just have a natural URGE to act on those instincts. Obviously active pedophiles should be punished, but passive ones that don't act on those urges should still be accepted in our society, and not ostracized
Accepting the fact that pedophiles exist and cannot simply will away their desires is not the acceptance of pedophilia. That's the thing. If pedophilia were accepted "like homosexuality", as the thread title states, it would be necessary to accept acting upon those desires - otherwise one would be forced to agree with the statement that Pat Robertson "accepts homosexuality", which I don't think is a statement many would agree with.
[QUOTE="MetalGear_Ninty"][QUOTE="GabuEx"]That's funny, because many people like yourself claim that homosexuality per se isn't condemned by The Bible, but only the sexual acts -- yet in this scenario you seem to be suggesting that peadophillia of itself necessitates sexual acts. Exactly, Gabu is clearly attempting damage control in his response to BucketsOfSpunk. Buckets is right. And everyone in this thread is confused. Pedophilia =/= molestation. Get it straight. Pedophilia is simply the attraction. As far as the example of the pictures, it doesn't even have to porn. A pedophile could look a pictures of little kids in catalogs for Toys "R Us or something, and get off to that. No exploitation whatsoever occurs by either a pornographer or a molester. You people seem to have a hard time seperating pedophilia from molestation. Instead you compare pedophilia to homosexual sex? That's unbalanced. Your intolerance comes from ignorance, and that's why pedophilia will never be accepted. Because people don't want to learn. And no, I am neither a pedophile or homosexual. I just have the ability to let go of life-long conditioning and look at things in a humble, honest manner.A child is not capable of having either the mental capacity nor the physical desires necessary to willingly give himself or herself to a partner with the full knowledge of both what is happening and what the risks are that are involved. It's the exact same reason why beastiality is totally unlike homosexuality, too.
Righteous_Rage
So basically your saying that is not bad as long as a pedophile just watch pictures, not porn of course but only pictures, ok, fair enough, it could be, but do you think that a pedophile doesn't want to go beyond that, that's when the problem comes, when some of this sick persons acts, and you can call it whatever you want (rape, molester, relationship) that is wrong.
Accepting the fact that pedophiles exist and cannot simply will away their desires is not the acceptance of pedophilia. That's the thing. If pedophilia were accepted "like homosexuality", as the thread title states, it would be necessary to accept acting upon those desires - otherwise one would be forced to agree with the statement that Pat Robertson "accepts homosexuality", which I don't think is a statement many would agree with.GabuExEnough with the damage control. :roll: It's not like that at all. Pedophilia, the reality of adults being ATTRACTED to children, is what is not accepted. And should be, since it's simply an attraction that does not have to be acted upon. No one is suggesting the acceptance of molestation/child abuse. The suggestion is that people lose their ignorance and realize that pedophiles can't help who they are attracted to anymore than anyone else can. Heteros don't choose to be straight, homos don't choose to be gay pedos don't choose to be attracted to children. It's just the way it is. Accept THAT.
[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"][QUOTE="hamstergeddon"]Copypasta from Debate.org with permission from PoeJoehamstergeddonIt has nothing to do with it being natural.. It has to do with the fact that CHILDREN DO NOT have the ability to consent under law, so in essence its RAPE.. No, the idea that active pedophilia is different than just pedophilia is what defines his argument. Active pedophiles actually act on their urges, other pedohpiles just have a natural URGE to act on those instincts. Obviously active pedophiles should be punished, but passive ones that don't act on those urges should still be accepted in our society, and not ostracized
How do you know that they wont act?
[QUOTE="MetalGear_Ninty"][QUOTE="GabuEx"]
A child is not capable of having either the mental capacity nor the physical desires necessary to willingly give himself or herself to a partner with the full knowledge of both what is happening and what the risks are that are involved. It's the exact same reason why beastiality is totally unlike homosexuality, too.
That's funny, because many people like yourself claim that homosexuality per se isn't condemned by The Bible, but only the sexual acts -- yet in this scenario you seem to be suggesting that peadophillia of itself necessitates sexual acts.Had you read this thread, you would have seen the posts stating not only that I was not talking solely about sexual activity, but also that for pedophilia to be accepted in the same way that homosexuality is accepted it would be necessary for acting upon those desires to be accepted, considering that even the strongest anti-gay preachers accept that homosexuals exist.
And I have never claimed that homosexuality is condemned in any way, either in terms of desire or terms of acting upon those desires, by the Bible...
Why do you assume that I have not read this thread? In reality, I have read this thread and very aware of the logical inconsistencies in your argument. All I'm saying is that in that post, you seemed to equate paedophilia with paedophillic acts, and I was just highlighting that you don't make the same mistake when it comes to homosexuality.So basically your saying that is not bad as long as a pedophile just watch pictures, not porn of course but only pictures, ok, fair enough, it could be, but do you think that a pedophile doesn't want to go beyond that, that's when the problem comes, when some of this sick persons acts, and you can call it whatever you want (rape, molester, relationship) that is wrong.madsnakehhhYou guys assume that just because someone has an attraction to children, they will act on it. You imply there is some loss of control associated with the attraction, and that is a ludicrous suggestion. In fact, if that were the case, a pedophile would have more than one problem, and would be in need of help, not ridicule, which makes the ridiculers look even worse. But anyway, in comparison, gay men are attracted to other men... sometimes straight men, but do they lose control and go jumping on every straight man they see? No. They understand the straight man wants nothing to do with it, and they don't act on it. Same with pedophiles. A pedophile can be attracted to children without acting on it, knowing it would be damaging to the child and his or her family. A MOLESTER who does act on the urges has a completely different set of problems going on up in his brain. A MOLESTER is quite plainly a RAPIST who just happens to have pedophilic tendencies. Thus, he should be treated like all other rapists. A pedophile who does not act on the urge should be left alone, just as a man who does not act on his attraction to a woman by raping her.
No, the idea that active pedophilia is different than just pedophilia is what defines his argument. Active pedophiles actually act on their urges, other pedohpiles just have a natural URGE to act on those instincts. Obviously active pedophiles should be punished, but passive ones that don't act on those urges should still be accepted in our society, and not ostracized[QUOTE="hamstergeddon"][QUOTE="sSubZerOo"] It has nothing to do with it being natural.. It has to do with the fact that CHILDREN DO NOT have the ability to consent under law, so in essence its RAPE.. madsnakehhh
How do you know that they wont act?
because that's the criteria for a "passive pedophile". And just because someone has an attraction to something beside the norm doesn't mean he'll go around acting on it. That's like saying "how do you know someone not getting any won't go out and rape a girl???" Believe it or not, pedophiles are real people too, with real morals and everything!
No, the idea that active pedophilia is different than just pedophilia is what defines his argument. Active pedophiles actually act on their urges, other pedohpiles just have a natural URGE to act on those instincts. Obviously active pedophiles should be punished, but passive ones that don't act on those urges should still be accepted in our society, and not ostracized[QUOTE="hamstergeddon"][QUOTE="sSubZerOo"] It has nothing to do with it being natural.. It has to do with the fact that CHILDREN DO NOT have the ability to consent under law, so in essence its RAPE.. GabuEx
Accepting the fact that pedophiles exist and cannot simply will away their desires is not the acceptance of pedophilia. That's the thing. If pedophilia were accepted "like homosexuality", as the thread title states, it would be necessary to accept acting upon those desires - otherwise one would be forced to agree with the statement that Pat Robertson "accepts homosexuality", which I don't think is a statement many would agree with.
I'm not arguing under legal terms or under the criterion teh TC has set out. All I'm saying is that as a society, we should be more acceptable and open to passive pedophiles. That's defined as someone who's not acting on their urges, and not doing anything illegal. Sadly, such a person today in America would definitely be outcast and ostracized even though they aren't actually DOING anything wrong.
I'm not arguing under legal terms or under the criterion teh TC has set out. All I'm saying is that as a society, we should be more acceptable and open to passive pedophiles. That's defined as someone who's not acting on their urges, and not doing anything illegal. Sadly, such a person today in America would definitely be outcast and ostracized even though they aren't actually DOING anything wrong. hamstergeddonIf they aren't doing anything wrong then I doubt anyone would know their interests. It's not something to brag about is it?
[QUOTE="madsnakehhh"]So basically your saying that is not bad as long as a pedophile just watch pictures, not porn of course but only pictures, ok, fair enough, it could be, but do you think that a pedophile doesn't want to go beyond that, that's when the problem comes, when some of this sick persons acts, and you can call it whatever you want (rape, molester, relationship) that is wrong.Righteous_RageYou guys assume that just because someone has an attraction to children, they will act on it. You imply there is some loss of control associated with the attraction, and that is a ludicrous suggestion. In fact, if that were the case, a pedophile would have more than one problem, and would be in need of help, not ridicule, which makes the ridiculers look even worse. But anyway, in comparison, gay men are attracted to other men... sometimes straight men, but do they lose control and go jumping on every straight man they see? No. They understand the straight man wants nothing to do with it, and they don't act on it. Same with pedophiles. A pedophile can be attracted to children without acting on it, knowing it would be damaging to the child and his or her family. A MOLESTER who does act on the urges has a completely different set of problems going on up in his brain. A MOLESTER is quite plainly a RAPIST who just happens to have pedophilic tendencies. Thus, he should be treated like all other rapists. A pedophile who does not act on the urge should be left alone, just as a man who does not act on his attraction to a woman by raping her.
Damn, is a good point, and i'm sorry i can't answer back.
Edit: Oh i forgot to tell, this doesn't mean that i accept in any way pedophilia, active, passive, etc, but i just wouldn't let my niece (wich i love to death) near to some people who see her with desire.
Enough with the damage control. :roll:Righteous_Rage
But my life would go to shambles if something happened to my all-important e-cred. :(
It's not like that at all. Pedophilia, the reality of adults being ATTRACTED to children, is what is not accepted. And should be, since it's simply an attraction that does not have to be acted upon. No one is suggesting the acceptance of molestation/child abuse. The suggestion is that people lose their ignorance and realize that pedophiles can't help who they are attracted to anymore than anyone else can. Heteros don't choose to be straight, homos don't choose to be gay pedos don't choose to be attracted to children. It's just the way it is. Accept THAT.Righteous_Rage
If a preacher acknowledges that homosexuals exist but says that acting upon their urges is an abominable sin that they must never do, is he preaching acceptance of homosexuality? Obviously not.
The fundamental difference between homosexuality and pedophilia is the question of whether or not it hurts anyone to act upon those desires. Because, like it or not, a desire to do something is rather strongly linked with the possibility of doing that thing. Homosexual people who deny their urges out of fear or out of whatever else tend to be rather messed up as a result at the end of the day.
If someone has a sexual attraction to little children, but is not in any position to harm anyone, do I have a problem with the person himself? No. But that doesn't mean that I unconditionally accept pedophilia as a whole. If I had kids, I sure as heck wouldn't let them near a pedophile, especially not one who has been forced to repress his desires for a long time.
]If they aren't doing anything wrong then I doubt anyone would know their interests. It's not something to brag about is it?LJS9502_basicIt's not something to hide either. Why should they hide how they naturally feel? Just because society is full of ignorant bullies? Gay people used to be forced to be silent too. And I proud of them for finally fighting for their rights. There is one very famous pedophile who has bravely admitted he is attracted to children yet never touches them. He is chastised daily by a public that does not understand his condition. I forgot his name, maybe I'll look it up.
If they aren't doing anything wrong then I doubt anyone would know their interests. It's not something to brag about is it? That's the thing. they shouldn't have to hide who they are just because a society isn't tolerant of that characteristic, regardless of what it is.[QUOTE="hamstergeddon"] I'm not arguing under legal terms or under the criterion teh TC has set out. All I'm saying is that as a society, we should be more acceptable and open to passive pedophiles. That's defined as someone who's not acting on their urges, and not doing anything illegal. Sadly, such a person today in America would definitely be outcast and ostracized even though they aren't actually DOING anything wrong. LJS9502_basic
[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]If they aren't doing anything wrong then I doubt anyone would know their interests. It's not something to brag about is it? That's the thing. they shouldn't have to hide who they are just because a society isn't tolerant of that characteristic, regardless of what it is. Some things should not be tolerated and that is one.[QUOTE="hamstergeddon"] I'm not arguing under legal terms or under the criterion teh TC has set out. All I'm saying is that as a society, we should be more acceptable and open to passive pedophiles. That's defined as someone who's not acting on their urges, and not doing anything illegal. Sadly, such a person today in America would definitely be outcast and ostracized even though they aren't actually DOING anything wrong. hamstergeddon
Some things should not be tolerated and that is one.LJS9502_basicWell at least you admit you are intolerant, plain and simple. I can live with that as long as you can.
[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Some things should not be tolerated and that is one.Righteous_RageWell at least you admit you are intolerant, plain and simple. I can live with that as long as you can.Hey DS your other account didn't last long....society should not tolerate pedophilia. Period.
That's the thing. they shouldn't have to hide who they are just because a society isn't tolerant of that characteristic, regardless of what it is. Some things should not be tolerated and that is one. Why? You can't just make that statement and pass it off as fact. I don't see why passive pedophilia is any different than homosexuality in terms of condition. They're both things that the people just can't help but feel. And it's part of their identity. Hell, discriminating against pedophilia and homosexuality is no worse than discriminating by race or gender. Why should we let society decide the taboos without questioning it?[QUOTE="hamstergeddon"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]If they aren't doing anything wrong then I doubt anyone would know their interests. It's not something to brag about is it?
LJS9502_basic
[QUOTE="hamstergeddon"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]If they aren't doing anything wrong then I doubt anyone would know their interests. It's not something to brag about is it?
That's the thing. they shouldn't have to hide who they are just because a society isn't tolerant of that characteristic, regardless of what it is. Some things should not be tolerated and that is one. ...and how is this attitude any different to negatives attitudes towards homosexuality. I see no differences in this respect.Why? You can't just make that statement and pass it off as fact. I don't see why passive pedophilia is any different than homosexuality in terms of condition. They're both things that the people just can't help but feel. And it's part of their identity. Hell, discriminating against pedophilia and homosexuality is no worse than discriminating by race or gender. Why should we let society decide the taboos without questioning it? hamstergeddonFirst I would need you to prove that your so called passive pedophilia exists. That means not so much as looking at pictures of children that have been taken with the sole intent of being used by pedophiles.
...and how is this attitude any different to negatives attitudes towards homosexuality. I see no differences in this respect.MetalGear_NintyOh well.
That's not my problem. Explotation of children is disgusting.
That's the thing. they shouldn't have to hide who they are just because a society isn't tolerant of that characteristic, regardless of what it is. hamstergeddonSome things should not be tolerated and that is one. Why? You can't just make that statement and pass it off as fact. I don't see why passive pedophilia is any different than homosexuality in terms of condition. They're both things that the people just can't help but feel. And it's part of their identity. Hell, discriminating against pedophilia and homosexuality is no worse than discriminating by race or gender. Why should we let society decide the taboos without questioning it? Except one is a felony if you committ on those urges.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment