U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Philosophy
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 06-01-2013, 04:21 AM
 
Location: Australia
1,058 posts, read 1,446,880 times
Reputation: 1695

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by ATTC View Post
The main point is that since when is consent necessary in nature for sexual relations?

What moral basis are humans held to a higher standard to animals if they are animals themselves? (with their thoughts driven by arbitrary chemical reactions at that)
The same reason why humans wear clothing. Do you go around nude all the time? Why not? Anbimals don't wear clothes.

The same reason why it's not acceptable for humans to defecate, urinate, masturbate or fornicate in public.


Because humans are more advanced than non-humans.

If you don't think consent is important, then how would you react if a man tried to insert his penis into your mouth or anus without your consent? Would that be acceptable to you? Why not?

I can't believe you are really arguing in support of rape. Absolutely disgusting.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-01-2013, 09:29 AM
 
Location: Victoria TX
42,663 posts, read 74,111,513 times
Reputation: 36074
Quote:
Originally Posted by djacques View Post
Not quite, since "pedophile" has no legal meaning at all. It's a medical term of art, and it's a popular epithet, but there is no legal significance in the word..
Furthermore, there no actual significance to it, socially. Pedophilia is an internalized psychological desire, not a a societal action. The fact that a person is a pedophile says absolutely nothing about any actual behavior. Just as it does not make a man a thief, just because the thought passes through his mind that he would like to have money that belongs to someone else. Nor does it make Jimmy Carter a rapist for "lusting in his heart".

Pedophiles are no more nor less capable than anybody else of controlling their desires and refraining from acting upon them in a societally inappropriate manner. Those who act in accordance with their desires, whether they be pedophiles or thieves or firebugs or bullies or embezzlers, are subject to a set of laws and consequences as prescribed by community standards and cultural mores, but none, at least in the USA, are subject to judicial punishment for their unexpressed thoughts. Not even pedophiles.

Quote:
Originally Posted by StabbyAbby View Post

I can't believe you are really arguing in support of rape. Absolutely disgusting.
You've missed the import of ATTC's comment by a wide margin. Male animals do not "rape" female animals. They compete for the attention of the sexually mature females, who then voluntarily present themselves to the most suitable prospective reproductive mate. Which is not significantly different from the way human courtship proceeds. Female animals are perfectly capable of fighting off or escaping from male animals that they do not wish to be impregnated by. Male animals ignore female animals that are sexually immature -- which casts a certain amount of doubt on your other comment:
Quote:
Originally Posted by StabbyAbby View Post
Because humans are more advanced than non-humans.

Last edited by jtur88; 06-01-2013 at 09:54 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-01-2013, 10:40 AM
 
Location: Kingston, ON
410 posts, read 463,117 times
Reputation: 462
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sizzly Friddle View Post
In the bible, sex and rape of very young women is permissible and it is considered moral to marry very young, and have multiple wives. Please get help.

When I see stuff like this, I thank God that I'm an agnostic!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-01-2013, 11:46 AM
 
541 posts, read 974,971 times
Reputation: 662
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingstonBob View Post
When I see stuff like this, I thank God that I'm an agnostic!
Thanks for the laugh Bob. After reading this thread, I needed it.

As a victim of a pedophile, who acted on his desires, with a prepubescent girl, this thread disgusts me.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-01-2013, 02:26 PM
 
Location: Victoria TX
42,663 posts, read 74,111,513 times
Reputation: 36074
Quote:
Originally Posted by cislga View Post

As a victim of a pedophile, who acted on his desires, with a prepubescent girl, this thread disgusts me.

Have you ever been the victim of a pedophile who did NOT act on his desires? Has anyone? Has anyone ever been the victim of a pyromaniac or a neo-nazi or a cannibal who did not set any actual fires or harm any actual minorities or eat any actual people?

You were the victim of a person who committed sexual assault, as have many people, both children and adults, male and female. Your assailant happened to be a pedophile, but not all are.

I'm glad you had a good laugh at a thread that disgusts you. It shows a certain mental balance.

Last edited by jtur88; 06-01-2013 at 02:35 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-01-2013, 02:58 PM
 
541 posts, read 974,971 times
Reputation: 662
What made me laugh was the previous poster who thanked god, he was agnostic. Thats pretty funny!

I wasn't laughing cause I was a victim. Is that how you read it? It was not my intent.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-01-2013, 07:58 PM
 
265 posts, read 341,292 times
Reputation: 268
because scans of the brain have shown minors can't make decisions as rationally as an adults fully formed brain.
because psychology shows that minors have sex with oldies screws them up badly over the long term.
it's not all about the present. the future negative dictate we have a moral obligation to prevent these deranged perverts from praying on children.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-01-2013, 08:59 PM
 
Location: Victoria TX
42,663 posts, read 74,111,513 times
Reputation: 36074
Quote:
Originally Posted by cislga View Post
What made me laugh was the previous poster who thanked god, he was agnostic. Thats pretty funny!

I wasn't laughing cause I was a victim. Is that how you read it? It was not my intent.
Of course not. I thought was remarkable that you could find a way to laugh in spite of your distress.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-01-2013, 09:16 PM
 
Location: Victoria TX
42,663 posts, read 74,111,513 times
Reputation: 36074
Quote:
Originally Posted by limbo24 View Post
because scans of the brain have shown minors can't make decisions as rationally as an adults fully formed brain.
because psychology shows that minors have sex with oldies screws them up badly over the long term.
it's not all about the present. the future negative dictate we have a moral obligation to prevent these deranged perverts from praying on children.
Yo mean they didn't know that until they did the brain scans, and had previously thought children were perfectly capable of making well-formed rational adult decisions? Had any of these brain scan researchers ever seen a child before?

But the distress doesn't appear until they find out how seriously adults take sex, and then impose upon the maturing children this huge guilt burden that our society loads onto even normal everyday adult sexuality. In societies where sexuality is more relaxed and accepted as just one of the casual parts of adult relationships, children who have been sexually involved have no way of ever knowing that they are supposed to be all bent out of shape and screwed up about it.

We have let our churches send us on this huge sexual guilt trip, and when children grow into it and have all the angst of sex inflicted on them, they project any sexual exposure in their childhood into the overall morass of sexual anxiety of their adulthood.

It is very common for children who have been sexually molested to report that the worst part of the experience was the way their lives were changed by the exaggerated reactions of the do-gooders to what the kids otherwise might not have thought was such a big deal at all.

These children whose brains cannot form rational decisions have all kinds of unpleasant things happen to them, like falling off their bike or being sent to bed without dessert or seeing movies that make them cry. They live through it and deal with it and grow up around it, unless somebody holds their an incident over them like a club and harangues them to twist their psychology into knots trying to cope with them, just because the adults they grow up with are carrying the emotional burdens of their own sexual hangups and don't know how to live with them.

Last edited by jtur88; 06-01-2013 at 09:28 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-02-2013, 01:45 AM
 
315 posts, read 600,388 times
Reputation: 541
A child is not legally allowed to enter into a contract. I consider this to be proper because a child cannot understand the full implications of the contract. I think most people would find it unscrupulous to make a contract with a child that provides him with something menial while requiring inordinate payment, with the child agreeing due to his lack of understanding. Sex is, in a sense, a contract, providing benefits and a return to each party, as well as risks such as infections, pregnancy, and emotional distress. Without knowledgeable consent, a contract is fraudulent, and a child cannot give knowledgeable consent. It is granted that the "age of consent" is arbitrary, which is demonstrated in the fact that there are so many different ages of consent in different places, but we need to have some standard by which to judge a child's qualification to enter in to a sex contract. There is no age that is perfect, but by setting a legal age we do at least try to keep this uncertain matter under consideration and protect children from the unscrupulous.

The fact that you want something is not reason or justification that you should have it. If you want sex with children, it does not mean that you have some natural or societal right to it. To disagree is to say that theft is justified by envy or that murder is justified by anger. Part of life is learning to live without things you want.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Philosophy
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:50 AM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top