ok theirs no sugarcoating this, why do they not think having sex with children is wrong. Why do they think they could get legal rights for doing something that is not ok.
ok theirs no sugarcoating this, why do they not think having sex with children is wrong. Why do they
It annoys me that they equate the relationship of two consenting adults to forcing themselves upon a non-consulting minor. Why not have people argue "I get off on killing people, so my sexual orientation of murdurer should be respected and legal"? What is the difference?
It annoys me that they equate the relationship of two consenting adults to forcing themselves upon a
there is no difference, when are people gonna learn its wrong to put a child into sexual situations like that. It messed them up psychologically due to molestation.
there is no difference, when are people gonna learn its wrong to put a child into sexual situations
I read that article. It's definitely weird and challenging.
But what "liberals" are you talking about? The APA = Scientists = Liberals? Is that what you're saying?
Or are you referencing the Democrats blocking the Republican's non-science amendment to the bill in question? I figure that no politician has any business substituting easy rhetoric for real science.
I read that article. It's definitely weird and challenging. But what "liberals" are you talking ab
I hope you're not trying to justify fear-mongering laws, here. I don't think you are, but it could be misunderstood that way.
Beyond that, you have a very fair point. The human brain is way to complicated for us to truly understand, let alone the consciousness inside it. And psychology is still infantile and in-development as a practice, let alone a science.
But that's still kind of beside the point. Humanity needs experts on human behavior and the brain. In America, the APA are those experts. They study and debate this stuff all the time. Because even though they aren't necessarily scientists by the strictest definition, they care about solving the puzzles of human suffering.
No one should be promoting human suffering, period.
I hope you're not trying to justify fear-mongering laws, here. I don't think you are, but it could b
LOL but what if the child is conscious and wants that? But I'm not with or against this move, just made me laugh because this reason; anyway, I think I'll just go. :P
LOL but what if the child is conscious and wants that? But I'm not with or against this move, just m
I really, really, REALLY don't want this to burst into flames... please take this as a question for debate, not for screams of indignation. Anyone who frequents and/or supports and/or participates on the InkBunny site would, it seems to me, not be in much of a position to scream against pedophilia ... at least in the sense of art, fiction, role play, etc. that exists here. This is NOT a condemnation, as I too am a participant of this site. My own work does not include underage characters, but it could, and very easily.
The biggest point here, and in the realm of zoophilia, is a question of consent. "Furries" are sentient and intelligent, able to state quite clearly, "YIFF ME!" If we speak of children under "the age of consent" -- itself, a slippery and fluid term with no universally agreed-upon age -- we're questioning the ability of said child to consent to sexual contact. Lack of consent constitutes rape, and thus the charge itself should not be "pedophilia" but rape. I completely admit that this will appear to be verbal hair-splitting (to use a term in Judaism, "pilpul"). However, remember that words define reality, not the other way around. Therefore, properly, a pedophile is not a criminal per se; if he rapes, he is a criminal in the same way as any other non-consensual sex would be defined.
Just as drawing a picture of a cub having sex with an adult is not by definition "child pornography", having the desire for sex with a child is not a crime. Until Minority Report becomes reality (may all deities forbid!), thoughts are not actionable as crimes. A tort is an act, not a document, not a thought, and not an expressed desire. It's a tightrope here, and all on this site who enjoy those cub pictures and stories owe it to themselves, and others, to consider this idea carefully. Perhaps there but for the grace...?
TL;DR ... sorry for the length. Peace to all; hoping only for thoughtful conversation.
I really, really, REALLY don't want this to burst into flames... please take this as a question for
"Part of the Muslim brotherhood agenda is to get pedophelia downgraded in this country to a non crime status, this is their way of life, groom and then destroy Lil boys lives through sexual abuse. They teach their Lil boys that this is an HONOR, how could be raped by a grown man when you are a small child and honor? Its sick and the bible warned us these things were going to happen. No it is up to us, the people of America to stop it. Our government supports it, we must stop it. NOW."
Is this a satire website?
The first comment on the article page: "Part of the Muslim brotherhood agenda is to get pedophelia
