Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

Gilda · 07-26-2005, 11:41 PM

There's so much wrong with comparing homosexuals to pedophiles that I don't know where to begin.

The moral and practical equivilent to consensual homosexual sex among adults or sexually mature teens is consensual heterosexual sex among adults or sexually mature teens.

The moral and practical equivilent to sex between an adult and a child of the same sex is sex between an adult and a child of the opposite sex.

Pedophilia and homosexuality are not in parallel. Even in the absense of an argument about morality, it breaks down on a strictly logical level at the surface.

Laws against child molestation exist to protect children from being harmed by sexual predators. They fall into the same category as laws against rape and other forms of sexual assault, all activities that cause harm to the victim.

Laws against consensual sex between adults for whatever reason--adultery, sodomy, miscegenation, homosexuality--are bans on behavior that causes no harm to the individuals involved.

Homosexual acts harm nobody; child molestation directly harms the child involved.

Society is protecting innocents with laws against child molestation--one of the parties in the activity is being protected by the law. It is protecting nobody with laws against consensual homosexual sex, such laws only do harm to both participants.

People have every right to believe that slavery, or genocide, or sex with children, is acceptible behavior, and to advocate in favor of that activity and for laws that support or decriminilze that behavior. As much as I find those activities repellant, I believe that if we are to have freedom of speech for anyone, that same freedom must apply to everyone. In that way, those who advocate in favor of these things are the same as advocates of homoesexual rights--people should have the right to defend their belief system, regarldess of what that belief system is.

This does not, however, make the actions advocated by those belief systems, and by extension, the belief systems themeselves, equivilent.

It is a society's duty, through enacting laws and enforcing laws, to protect innocents from harm and not to harm innocents.

Laws against pedophilia, when duly enforced, protect innocents from being harmed, while laws against homosexuality harm innocents.

They're nowhere near the same thing.

07-26-2005, 11:41 PM	#38 (permalink)
Gilda 32 flavors and then some Location: Out on a wire.	There's so much wrong with comparing homosexuals to pedophiles that I don't know where to begin. The moral and practical equivilent to consensual homosexual sex among adults or sexually mature teens is consensual heterosexual sex among adults or sexually mature teens. The moral and practical equivilent to sex between an adult and a child of the same sex is sex between an adult and a child of the opposite sex. Pedophilia and homosexuality are not in parallel. Even in the absense of an argument about morality, it breaks down on a strictly logical level at the surface. Laws against child molestation exist to protect children from being harmed by sexual predators. They fall into the same category as laws against rape and other forms of sexual assault, all activities that cause harm to the victim. Laws against consensual sex between adults for whatever reason--adultery, sodomy, miscegenation, homosexuality--are bans on behavior that causes no harm to the individuals involved. Homosexual acts harm nobody; child molestation directly harms the child involved. Society is protecting innocents with laws against child molestation--one of the parties in the activity is being protected by the law. It is protecting nobody with laws against consensual homosexual sex, such laws only do harm to both participants. People have every right to believe that slavery, or genocide, or sex with children, is acceptible behavior, and to advocate in favor of that activity and for laws that support or decriminilze that behavior. As much as I find those activities repellant, I believe that if we are to have freedom of speech for anyone, that same freedom must apply to everyone. In that way, those who advocate in favor of these things are the same as advocates of homoesexual rights--people should have the right to defend their belief system, regarldess of what that belief system is. This does not, however, make the actions advocated by those belief systems, and by extension, the belief systems themeselves, equivilent. It is a society's duty, through enacting laws and enforcing laws, to protect innocents from harm and not to harm innocents. Laws against pedophilia, when duly enforced, protect innocents from being harmed, while laws against homosexuality harm innocents. They're nowhere near the same thing. __________________ I'm against ending blackness. I believe that everyone has a right to be black, it's a choice, and I support that. ~Steven Colbert