Paedophile rights- Why not?

[stringjack]

[color=indigo]String, I put my weight, such as it is, behind this argument.[/color]

Unless your heft has increased significantly since the NNN thread...

[color=indigo]Homosexuality has obvious origins in the human mind - it simply requires that a particular function or component that affects the behavior of a male behave as though it were affecting a female, or vice versa. Attraction to adults is inchoate in every developing mind - the ultimate sexuality can merely be understood, metaphorically, as the position of a switch.

There would be no reason, however, for a human mind to be imbued with a desire to engage sexually with children. Anthropologically, evolutionarily, neurologically speaking, I cannot conceive of the genesis or purpose of such a behavior. Similarly, as Indy mentioned, with bestiality.[/color]

Homosexuality does not quite have 'obvious' origins in the human mind. The 'switch' model (quite apart from having to exert effort to explain bisexuality) is a metaphorical construct based on certain premises about human behaviour, as you say. The utility of the model depends on an understanding of 'male' and 'female' as more fundamental objective categories than 'human' and 'sheep', 'old' and 'young' or 'blond' and 'brunette', which may or may not be the case, but needs argument not stipulation.

There is no 'reason' for a human mind to be imbued with a desire to engage sexually with someone of the same sex.

We are considering whether paedophilia is a 'naturally' occurring sexual orientation.

Indyjoe has said that...

...Paedophilia is wrong because (obviously) people may be inclined (however strong or resolute they are) to put their desires into a reality. They are a threat to children...

I replied...

Well, not really. Earthquakes kill lots of women and children (even some men, I'm told). Nevertheless, speaking about an earthquake as 'wrong' seems senseless.

S/he said...

...earthquakes are an act of natural, therefore they are amoral...

I said...

...if "being attracted to children" is naturally occurring phenomenon, is it not equally amoral?

Indyjoe riposted...

Being attracted to children is not a "naturally occurring phenomenon" anymore than drug addiction. People only develop paedoiphilia over time. some things that may have caused them tobecome so is beyond their control (past experiences) but much is down to decisions they make (such as whether to look up photos on the internet).

...despite not a being a psychologist, and not knowing anything about psychology. For Indyjoe to make the claim that paedophilia is wrong, s/he must also hold that someone has chosen to become a paedophile (since we can't be held morally responsible for things we don't choose - by the way, I seem to have let the 'drug addiction is wrong' claim slide this time...). Now, if one can choose to be a paedophile, one can certainly choose to be gay (which is not the same, of course, as arguing that there are no 'natural' gay people). Why do we find it more plausible that people would choose to be paedophiles rather than choose to be gay (or, you know, 'normal')?

[color=indigo]Intuitively, I feel that a properly functioning mind, human or otherwise, should see the prepubescent as being sexually irrelevant.[/color]

Need I explain to you the 'intuitive' feelings of many people regarding the sexual predilections you defend?

[ottovonbismarck]

What a stupid thread

[TommyO'Brien]

What a stupid thread

And yet you brought it back from the dead!

[ottovonbismarck]

And yet you brought it back from the dead!

I was looking for something and I hit the 'last' button. I was amazed to discover the limits that some people would go to look for attention with the sh1te that they think. sorry tommy

[slippy wicket]

Just goes to show, there are 11 very confused people on this site, or were at the time of the OP.

[fionnmccool]

who the heck voted yes ?

[fionnmccool]

There really is no need for political discussion on this subject. If you do not see paedophilia is wrong then theres something wrong with you.
People who have become sexually aroused by children need society's help, not some sort of wishy-washy let-them-do-what-they-want nonsense. I reckon most people who are paedophiles are not happy about what they do, and would like help to break out of their problem- simply they dont have the will power.

There really is no need for political discussion on this subject. If you do not see that homosexuality is wrong then there's something wrong with you. People who become sexually aroused by people of the same sex need society's help, not some sort of wishy-washy let-them-do-what-they-want nonsense. I reckon most people who are gay are not happy about what they do, and would like help to break out of their problem - simply, they don't have the will power.

Stringjack . You often don't appear to express a view on anything. However this time you appear to be equating Paedophilia with Homosexuality. And that is very wrong and unhelpful. This time I won't be dressing up my view with ''in my opinion'' etc . It's wrong. End of.

[ottovonbismarck]

Stringjack, how would you degay people?

nutcase

[ottovonbismarck]

2 paedophiles sitting on a bench and a 7 year old girl cycles past on her bike. 1 paedo says to the other "I bet you she was a fine bit of stuff in her day".