Gay Marriage

[McLovin]

So, just to be quite clear, you are saying that an adult feeling a desire for sexual contact with children has absolute choice in the matter, that it is not at all like one man or woman feeling desire for sex with their same gender?

No, I'm just saying paedophilia is not a sexual orientation. That's all.

 

[bellenuit]

Thats right bellenuit, they are all the same, homosexuality and pedophilia, and it has nothing to do with the Church.

Tink, if you are going to concur with my statements, please don't omit parts and distort what I said to your own ends.

I did not single out homosexuals and pedophiles as being the same, but included them as part of the make up of everybody in society. I said: I think heterosexuals, homosexuals, pedophiles and people with other sexual orientations are predominantly the way they are because of their biology.

I did not say they were the same. I said quite the opposite. I said: We are all dealt different hands, not just in relation to sexual orientation, but other physical attributes as well as mental capabilities.

 

[Calliope]

Tink
my opinion is your a biggot. To say a person who is homosexual is the same as a pedophile. On what basis do you make this statement?

Working on the assumption that you are not bigoted nor biased in any way toward the left or towards same sex marriage, then perhaps you can answer me the following question.

Is a guy whose sexual preferences are for males under the age consent, considered to be a:

a) A paedophile,

b) A homosexual,

c) or both?

Note. In most states the male age of consent is 16. In Queensland no male under the age of 18 can give consent to sodomy.

 

[sydboy007]

Working on the assumption that you are not bigoted nor biased in any way toward the left or towards same sex marriage, then perhaps you can answer me the following question.

Is a guy whose sexual preferences are for males under the age consent, considered to be a:

a) A paedophile,

b) A homosexual,

c) or both?

Note. In most states the male age of consent is 16. In Queensland no male under the age of 18 can give consent to sodomy.

Why are you even linking the two? Any discourse over homosexuality always seems to fall into the pedophile question. It's nearly always a family member that does it, so if anything children should statistically feel safer with a homosexual stranger than an extended family member or family friend.

What about a heterosexual man who gets "aroused" by a bill board poster of some female models that are under the age of consent. Quite a few female fashion models are well < 16 years old.

Would he be a pedophile?

What is the age of the guy who is attracted to the underage person? Is that question really relevant? Maybe if the older person is using say a position of power to sexually abuse the under aged person eg Catholic and Anglican churches.

I'd even ask what you mean by sexual preference? Are they acting on their preference, or just admiring? Would a heterosexual man be a pedophile is say he had a preference for women with a "flat chest" and similar body shape to say a 14 year old girl who hasn't "fully matured"

Got to love that term sodomy. A story about group RAPE, and the only thing main stream society has taken from that over a couple of thousand years was some of the same sex nature of the rape.

 

[craft]

I’m married – whilst the ritual itself didn’t mean that much too me the general concept of being married is wonderful.

Gay marriage – who does it harm? Nobody as far as I can see so I’m not for a second going to stand in the way of other humans having the same rights and pleasures as me.


I have kids – There is simply nothing better!

Gay couples raising kids – who does it harm? If you are going generalise and say Gay parents cause harm to kids and deprive Gays the liberty that the rest of us have to raise kids then I think the onus of proof needs to be on proving the harm. From what I have seen Gay’s parenting abilities are a spectrum – just like the rest of us. Forget the Gay debate let’s instead put the effort into helping all parents, It’s a tough job and community (tribe, extended family etc) isn’t what it used to be. Kids have no choice who their parents are regardless of whether they are biological or adopted. The biological lottery can really suck for some and I’m sure even ‘consensual’ adoption/surrogacy/IVF outcomes are sometimes less then desired.

I’m only for depriving other people’s rights and liberties if doing so stops them harming somebody else.

 

[sydboy007]

I’m only for depriving other people’s rights and liberties if doing so stops them harming somebody else.

+1

 

[Julia]

I would say that pedophilia is likely a biological condition outside the control of many pedophiles. It is not uncommon to hear of pedophiles asking for chemical castration because they know they cannot control their urges and will offend again. Apart from some who might get some perverse kick out of "playing" with children, why would anyone chose to obtain sexual gratification that way considering the grave consequence of being ostracised from society if caught.

I think heterosexuals, homosexuals, pedophiles and people with other sexual orientations are predominantly the way they are because of their biology. There is nothing any of us can do to change the biology of ourselves or others (though that may soon not be the case).

Agree. Thank you for expressing so well what I was musing about earlier.

I think in the case of homosexuality it has gone from being seen as detrimental to society to being benign. It was seen as a deviation from the norm before, rather than just another normal. It was misunderstood as being a lifestyle choice that could be opted into or out of at a whim. It was the church which demonised homosexuality, for two main reasons. Badly interpreted scripts from the bible, a book which is irrelevant as a moral code in any case, and also it being seen by its very nature to go against the dictate "increase and multiply".

Again, well summed up, as usual.

Thats right bellenuit, they are all the same, homosexuality and pedophilia, and it has nothing to do with the Church.

My understanding of what bellenuit said above is the opposite of what you have just stated, Tink.
I've never seen any valid claims from the medical/scientific community that homosexuality and paedophilia are
(a) the same
(b) one can lead to the other

I'd have thought the idea had about as much validity as the suggestion that male homosexuals just wish they were women and ditto for lesbians, i.e. none.

I get that you're devoted to your religion and will therefore firmly adhere to whatever the church teaches in this regard. It puts you in a difficult position, I guess.

At least there was a standard for children that marraige was about raising families, having children, loving your mum and dad, knowing your roots, the list goes on.
Now they want it just about sex - no meaning to the word at all.

At least try and keep something sacred for our children.

As others have pointed out, plenty of marriages are anything but sacred and simply being married doesn't, sadly, guarantee a healthy, happy bunch of children.

I personally tend to think that the anti-gay marriage section of our community tends to be mostly over 40, and consists of people likely to hold their views based on either religious beliefs or a general dislike/distaste for homosexuality in general.

I don't agree. Some will, of course. But, given people over 40 have had the life experience of observing various social changes, most of which have been good, but not all, they may simply be concerned about what they see as the discarding of valid traditions.

I don't think I'm atypical of the age group you refer to, I have minimal tolerance for religion and am not homophobic. As McLovin (I think) said, sexuality is on a continuum and many people - whilst predominantly heterosexual - will also be interested in some homosexual activity.
I couldn't care less what people do with their bodies, or how many people they do it with, as long as it's not in public and it doesn't involve children or animals.

I'm just not persuaded that - given full legal and social security benefits are conferred with existing civil unions, the heterosexual tradition of marriage needs to be junked.

I don't think it's a natural extension of the discussion. It seems more like paedophilia is used as a comparable to homosexuality. How can a relationship between two consenting adults can be comparable to the sexual abuse of children. There's no evidence (I've seen) that homosexuals are more likely to be paedophiles.

I made it quite clear that I was not suggesting any such thing.

No, I'm just saying paedophilia is not a sexual orientation. That's all.

See bellenuit's post above. Could you define 'sexual orientation'? My understanding is that it is biologically determined, viz as in homosexuality.
So, are you saying paedophilia is not biologically determined, and is therefore the conscious choice of the individual?

 

[Tink]

Wow Sydboy, you are throwing that word alot around in here, I dont agree with changing the law regarding marraige, they have their union, nothing else needs to be changed in my view and I am entitled to that opinion, and you can call me all you like.

Bellenuit, they are both a sexual orientation and wired that way was what I said, and if it wasnt taken that way, thats what I meant, sorry
One article - http://articles.latimes.com/2013/jan/14/local/la-me-pedophiles-20130115

Dock, I dont think it has anything to do with my religious views, as I said, I think its wrong that the standard will be changed for our children BY LAW to include all and sundry, opening the door to who ever else complains they arent included.

Marraige is about families and having children.
My opinion

 

[McLovin]

See bellenuit's post above. Could you define 'sexual orientation'? My understanding is that it is biologically determined, viz as in homosexuality.

I already did give a definition of sexual orientation, straight from Wikipedia. Maybe in time it will become out of date, but at the moment it is the generally definition of sexual orientation. Having no real expertise in matters of the mind, I'll defer to those with more.

So, are you saying paedophilia is not biologically determined, and is therefore the conscious choice of the individual?

I'm not saying it is or it isn't, because I don't know.

I couldn't care less what people do with their bodies, or how many people they do it with, as long as it's not in public and it doesn't involve children or animals.

This is basically my opinion as well.

 

[sydboy007]

Maybe this example could help with understand how attitudes have changed over the years.

When I was first starting to go out in Sydney I'd sometimes drag friends to clubs / bars along Oxford St in the early 90s. Quite enjoyed the piano bar at the old Albury Hotel and a good laugh at some of the crass jokes Hugh Monroe and Sigourney would come up with while they did their show.

My friends would quite often be worried about being seen on Oxford St and what others would think of them. I would reply that they're here to, so what are you thinking about them, and maybe you just need to stop worrying.

Fast forward to the the 21st Century and now no one cares. A lot of women like gay bars because there's no violence there. I can honestly say in 20+ years of going out the only time I've seen violence was at your standard bars and clubs. Once you get a predominantly gay (friendly) crowd there's not much to worry about.

Younger gen X and Gen Y in general don't give much though to sexuality as either / or. Seems there's days there's a much finer gradient, with the odd dabbling on the other side.

Part of me thinks just leave the marriage term alone, but then words do have power and by not allowing gay marriage it does tend to legitimise those who wish to discriminate against Homosexuals.

 

[Calliope]

Why are you even linking the two? Any discourse over homosexuality always seems to fall into the pedophile question. It's nearly always a family member that does it, so if anything children should statistically feel safer with a homosexual stranger than an extended family member or family friend.

Why are you dodging the question?

What about a heterosexual man who gets "aroused" by a bill board poster of some female models that are under the age of consent. Quite a few female fashion models are well < 16 years old.

Would he be a pedophile?

Why talk rubbish? According to criminal law in Australia, the age of consent refers to the age a person is considered to be capable of legally giving informed consent to sexual acts .

What is the age of the guy who is attracted to the underage person? Is that question really relevant? Maybe if the older person is using say a position of power to sexually abuse the under aged person eg Catholic and Anglican churches.

I ask a simple question and get a rubbishy irrelevant reply.

I'd even ask what you mean by sexual preference? Are they acting on their preference, or just admiring? Would a heterosexual man be a pedophile is say he had a preference for women with a "flat chest" and similar body shape to say a 14 year old girl who hasn't "fully matured"

More nonsense dodging the issue. I am talking about carnal knowledge.

Got to love that term sodomy. A story about group RAPE, and the only thing main stream society has taken from that over a couple of thousand years was some of the same sex nature of the rape.

What the hell are you talking about. I knew I wouldn't get a straight answer out of you. You are as slippery as an eel.:bad:

 

[bellenuit]

perhaps you can answer me the following question.

Is a guy whose sexual preferences are for males under the age consent, considered to be a:

a) A paedophile,

b) A homosexual,

c) or both?

Calliope, I had left it to Sydboy to answer that question as it was addressed directly to him. I thought his answer was quite reasonable and although he didn't explicitly answer a, b or c I understood what he was getting at. However, if I may interject....

The answer, in this case, is probably c. Being homosexual does not preclude one from also being a pedophile, just as being heterosexual doesn't preclude one from being a pedophile, the latter being what Sydboy was saying. Since our biology is complex, our sexual orientation doesn't just sit like a unique colour in the rainbow between the infrareds and ultra violets, but can take on a hue that is a mixture of many colours.

Maybe I am wrong on this assumption, but it seems you are implying that if there are cases where a homosexual is also a pedophile, then that must be the case for all homosexuals. I assume you are implying that because you posed the question seemingly in response to Sydboy asking Tink: To say a person who is homosexual is the same as a pedophile. On what basis do you make this statement?

Just because some people in a group share attributes of another group, doesn't imply that both groups are the same.

 

[Calliope]

Maybe I am wrong on this assumption, but it seems you are implying that if there are cases where a homosexual is also a pedophile, then that must be the case for all homosexuals.

Your assumption is not only wrong it is nonsense. I posed the question simply to get a reaction from your gay marriage support lobby, to the possibility that (shock - horror) homosexuality does not preclude a man from also being a paedophile.

Naturally you are looking at the issue through rose-coloured glasses. You think that once a gay man takes up sex with boys under 16 then he stops being gay and becomes a paedophile...then if he switches back to adult partners he reverts to being gay once more.

I'm sure you know the answer to my question, but like Sydboy you side-step the issue with long-winded nonsense.

 

[bellenuit]

I'm sure you know the answer to my question, but like Sydboy you side-step the issue with long-winded nonsense.

It appears you didn't understand my answer. I wrote: The answer, in this case, is probably c. If that is long-winded nonsense and beyond your comprehension, then there is little I can do about that.

I posed the question simply to get a reaction from your gay marriage support lobby, to the possibility that (shock - horror) homosexuality does not preclude a man from also being a paedophile.

Isn't that exactly what I wrote????

These are my words: Being homosexual does not preclude one from also being a pedophile

Naturally you are looking at the issue through rose-coloured glasses. You think that once a gay man takes up sex with boys under 16 then he stops being gay and becomes a paedophile...then if he switches back to adult partners he reverts to being gay once more.

That is completely at odds with what I said.

 

[Calliope]

It appears you didn't understand my answer. I wrote: The answer, in this case, is probably c. If that is long-winded nonsense and beyond your comprehension, then there is little I can do about that.

The simple answer was c), not probably c).The rest of your answer was a long-winded excuse for avoiding the issue that not all gays are nice people. Your rose-coloured glasses come off when anyone opposes your opinions.

Unlike Tink, I am an atheist but respect and understand her views. I'd wager that she is more versed in the art of being a loving and caring parent than anyone in your gay marriage lobby group understands.

Just because some people in a group share attributes of another group, doesn't imply that both groups are the same.

That's true. Most conservatives wish to retain the traditional concept of marriage. I have always considered you as right of centre, but you and lefty Syd are in lock-step on this issue.

 

[sydboy007]

Calliope

I still don't understand why you are linking homosexuality and pedophilia. Are you insinuating that all homosexuals are pedophiles? I've not bothered to research it, but I doubt that the level of pedophilia rates of homosexuals is any worse than with heterosexuals.

Just to provide you some insight, I was targeted by a predator when I was in early high school. He was quite smart at the way he would target his victims. I was fortunate enough that before he was able to make much of a move on me he was caught with a a few others while having a party with his friends and some underage boys. That's probably why I'm so offended by your question and the linking of pedophilia and homosexuality. The man targeting me had a family and children. Was he hetro or homo? Interesting question I doubt any of us can answer.

I find pedophilia to be abhorrent. Some things it is best to not understand, and I do not understand how someone is sexually attracted to say a 10 year old.

Just because some heterosexual men and women are pedophiles does that then mean we can infer most are? I'll say again, children are at far more risk of sexual abuse from a family member or close friend than a stranger.

I'm also gay or homosexual or what ever term you'd like to use. I don't see that it defines me, as I would say seeing yourself as heterosexual probably never really comes to defining who you are? As your post with a pic from the Sydney Mardi Gras seems to suggest, you would expect anyone who is homosexual to "shout loud and proud" and sometimes I do. In 92 or 93 I marched for the anti vilification laws that stop inciting hatred against people based on race / sexual orientation / gender as well as others. Most of the time I'm the guy you ask for help with your PC or have a chat to over the fence if we're both out back watering the garden etc.

I've not really bothered to say this before, as I don't really want to give the right wingers on this forum ammunition for barbs the likes of you or GG and his constant "misogynist" claims.

So please, explain to me what your question was really about?

Why is a discussion about gay marriage in any way linked to pedophilia??

No need to bring out names like slippery eel or lefty. We're adults. If you can't put your ideas forward in a calm logical manner, probably best to not post.

 

[bellenuit]

The simple answer was c), not probably c).

Life is so simple for some. Of course Sydboy did give the situation where the "guy" also happens to be under the age of consent. Underage sex is not uncommon nowadays. So in your simple mind, all guys under the age of 16 who have sex with other guys under the age of 16, that being the age of consent in most states and territories, are pedophiles. Or is the word probably too long winded and complex for you to understand.

And to give a more long winded additional example, according to Wiki: An adolescent who is 16 years of age or older must be at least five years older than the prepubescent child before the attraction can be diagnosed as pedophilia.. So a 17 year old guy having sex with a 13 year old would not necessarily be diagnosed as a pedophile.

 

[Calliope]

Calliope

I still don't understand why you are linking homosexuality and pedophilia. Are you insinuating that all homosexuals are pedophiles? I've not bothered to research it, but I doubt that the level of pedophilia rates of homosexuals is any worse than

No. We've already covered this and I have nothing more to say on the issue, except that you and I know that same sex marriage is inevitable and it probably will occur under an Abbott government.

I hope that when you get married, you will live happily ever after.

I am sorry if I have given you any offence, All the best.

 

[Ves]

I know that same sex marriage is inevitable and it probably will occur under an Abbott government.

It took you two days to see the light of my previous comment - but you eventually got there.

 

[Calliope]

It took you two days to see the light of my previous comment - but you eventually got there.

It's the Abbott women who will sway Abbott.