0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Quote from: TheContrarian on March 26, 2016, 03:16:32 pmQuote from: SCarpelan on March 26, 2016, 03:14:54 pmI'm not saying their orientation can be changed. I'm saying it can probably be suppressed which is probably unhealthy for them and increases their need for more therapy. Unfortunately for the paedophiles them not suppressing their desires causes a huge amount of harm to others so that is not a viable option.So like, conditioning a homosexual to be celibate?Precisely. The difference is that a homosexual doesn't harm others by not being celibate. A non-celibate paedophile does. That's why it's ethical to cause mental harm to one and not the other by forcing them to celibacy.
Quote from: SCarpelan on March 26, 2016, 03:14:54 pmI'm not saying their orientation can be changed. I'm saying it can probably be suppressed which is probably unhealthy for them and increases their need for more therapy. Unfortunately for the paedophiles them not suppressing their desires causes a huge amount of harm to others so that is not a viable option.So like, conditioning a homosexual to be celibate?
I'm not saying their orientation can be changed. I'm saying it can probably be suppressed which is probably unhealthy for them and increases their need for more therapy. Unfortunately for the paedophiles them not suppressing their desires causes a huge amount of harm to others so that is not a viable option.
As the left slips further and further into ridiculousness verging on self-parody, it's hard to find an objective yardstick.
Quote from: The_Queen on March 26, 2016, 03:18:41 pmI think the big thing that Contrarian is kind of overlooking is consent. Two grown adults can consent to sexual relations. Children on the other hand lack the mental capacity to consent, let alone realize what is even happening.I think the thing you're overlooking is reading what I've actually written. My point is that, regardless the specifics of the sexual attraction, the proposed method of dealing with paedophiles is essentially no different to the methods that are considered psychological abuse when applied to homosexuals.Who or what you are attracted to is totally irrelevant in this.But if we're going to take archaic and harmful methods that were previously applied to homosexuals and now apply them to paedophiles instead...chemical castration is a thing.
I think the big thing that Contrarian is kind of overlooking is consent. Two grown adults can consent to sexual relations. Children on the other hand lack the mental capacity to consent, let alone realize what is even happening.
A journey of a thousand miles begins with but a single step.
And why exactly are you so convinced that the paedo acceptance crowd are a continuation of the gay rights movement rather than an entirely separate thing? Is it really because the anti-gay religious loons say it is?
I'll stop eating beef lamb and pork the same day they start letting me eat vegetarians.
Quote from: Art Vandelay on March 27, 2016, 10:59:20 amAnd why exactly are you so convinced that the paedo acceptance crowd are a continuation of the gay rights movement rather than an entirely separate thing? Is it really because the anti-gay religious loons say it is?Not the same movement per se, but they definitely both have their roots in the progressive left.I just found it amusing that progressives who were so angry when the religious right claimed that a push for gay marriage would eventually lead to a push for acceptance of paedophilia are now pushing exactly that.
Ideologies are not individuals, and can contain people with different beliefs. Especially something as broad as 'progressives', which contains submovements who hate each other's guts.
I sympathize completely. However, to use against us. Let me ask you a troll. On the one who pulled it. But here's the question: where do I think it might as well have stepped out of all people would cling to a layman.
Quote from: Art Vandelay on March 27, 2016, 10:59:20 amAnd why exactly are you so convinced that the paedo acceptance crowd are a continuation of the gay rights movement rather than an entirely separate thing? Is it really because the anti-gay religious loons say it is?Not the same movement per se, but they definitely both have their roots in the progressive left.