Testing your faith

Quote:
In 1990 the Journal of Homosexuality published a double issue which was later republished as a book entitled Intergenerational Intimacy Historical, Socio-Pyschological and Legal Perspective. In this book a number of writers make the case for relaxing the laws against sex between adult men and boys. The volume also includes two short responses, extremely critical of adult/child sexual relationships.

In the forward to the volume, Gunter Schmidt presents a sympathetic view of pedophilia.

Pedophile relationships are extremely varied, despite their common features, too varied to allow us to use the term “sexual abuse” as a synonym without being guilty of discriminating against and defaming a whole group of people.

There are, even where no physical force or pressure is exerted, relationships which are exploitative, damaging, and blind to the child’s needs; there are also relationships in which children realize that the adult is in a weak position because of the law and use this power in the a blackmailing fashion. And there are successful pedophile relationships which help and encourage the child, even though the child often agrees to sex while really seeking comfort and affection. These are often emotionally deprived, deeply lonely socially isolated children who seek , as it were, a refuge in an adults’ love and for whom, because of their misery, see it as a stroke of luck to have found such an ‘enormously nurturant relationship.’… It looks as though children who are not emotionally deprived are, so to speak ‘immune’ to the advances of an adult seeking sexual contact. Each individual case must be looked upon on its own merits and, for this reason the threat to make all pedophile acts punishable by law can barely be labeled civilized; on the contrary, it is unjust, for it implies the discrimination and persecution of a minority and should be abolished.

THE PEDOPHILES’ PLAN FOR LEGALIZING THEIR PERVERSION

Quote:
But in the second stage, Mirkin says, the discussion must move on to such issues as the “right” of children to have and enjoy sex.

If this paradigm shift could be accomplished, the issue would move from the moral to the political arena, and therefore become open to negotiation. For example, rather than decrying sexual abuse, lawmakers would be forced to argue about when and under what conditions adult/child sex could be accepted. Once the issues becomes “discussible,” it would only be a matter of time before the public would begin to view paedophilia as another sexual orientation, and not a choice for the paedophile.

On the Pedophilia Issue:
What the APA Should Have Known

Some people don’t want ever to consider that sexual acts between children and adults(the legal definition of it) could ever be consensual and good, right now it is clear cut for the legal system and a very vocal part of the population is against muddying the issue with things like when it is good for the child to have sexual relations? it is always harmful?

The issue discussed by some is about sexuality and how people learn about it, should it really have an age limit defined by a government? or should it be something that society should learn to define by itself?

That is not the same thing as trying to punish rapists, that causes real harm to people no matter what their age or sex is.

Still that is not a subject I like to discuss or am interested in the fact is that, there are groups of people that also deserve to be heard if we believe that everybody have a right to be heard then paedophiles, racists and violent speech and hate speech also should be tolerate and be able to let those groups speak out about it.

Would you be able to go defend those people in public?
Because if you are not, than you are just being the same thing as the other guy there just in the opposite side of the same coin.

I would defend their right to free speech, I may hate their guts, but they should be able to say anything they want to.