- Joined
- 2 June 2011
- Posts
- 5,341
- Reactions
- 242
No, I'm just saying paedophilia is not a sexual orientation. That's all.
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?
Thats right bellenuit, they are all the same, homosexuality and pedophilia, and it has nothing to do with the Church.
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.
I’m only for depriving other people’s rights and liberties if doing so stops them harming somebody else.
Agree. Thank you for expressing so well what I was musing about earlier.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).
Again, well summed up, as usual.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".
My understanding of what bellenuit said above is the opposite of what you have just stated, Tink.Thats right bellenuit, they are all the same, homosexuality and pedophilia, and it has nothing to do with the Church.
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.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.
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 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 made it quite clear that I was not suggesting any such thing.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.
See bellenuit's post above. Could you define 'sexual orientation'? My understanding is that it is biologically determined, viz as in homosexuality.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.
Julia said:So, are you saying paedophilia is not biologically determined, and is therefore the conscious choice of the individual?
Julia said: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.
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.
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?
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'm sure you know the answer to my question, but like Sydboy you side-step the issue with long-winded 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.
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.
Just because some people in a group share attributes of another group, doesn't imply that both groups are the same.
The simple answer was c), not probably c).
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
It took you two days to see the light of my previous comment - but you eventually got there.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.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?