Heterosexuality and the heterosexual lifestyle.

[Drake Tungsten]

Or an uncontrollable attraction to the opposite gender?

Yes, but the similarities between heterosexual and pedophilic attractions aren't as great as those between homosexual and pedophilic attractions, given that heterosexuality is the socially accepted norm whilst both pedophilia and homosexuality are seen as abnormal attractions.

As Boris already alluded to, use heterosexual relationships as a parallel to homosexual relationships if you want to discuss "uncontrollable attraction."

See above.

[Flip McWho]

BK yeah i'm not gonna argue with you. Quite frankly i'm too high at the moment but i'm looking forward to getting into a good old debate with you.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
Yes, but the similarities between heterosexual and pedophilic attractions aren't as great as those between homosexual and pedophilic attractions, given that heterosexuality is the socially accepted norm whilst both pedophilia and homosexuality are seen as abnormal attractions.

You are not talking about the attractions by themselves, but the social acceptance of these attractions. Those are completely different.

BTW, I have read a very interesting site about the state of research on pedophilia (mhamic.org, which is sadly dedicated only to men attracted to boys, and no other form of pedophilia), which indicates many pedophiles choose not to act on their attraction, while many child-molesters aren't pedophiles (aren't specifically attracted to children), but do it for the feeling of power that can be usually found in rapists.

However, don't get me wrong. Unlike homosexuality or heterosexuality, there are very good reasons not to support pedophilia. Pedophilia can seriously mess up the development of the child. The child cannot give an informed consent to the sexual act/relationship (the child can, and often will, give an uninformed consent it has been lured into giving). And in the cases of extremely young children, the sexual act can hurt the victim as hell.

Homosexuality or heterosexuality between adults is based on informed consent. And that's the whole difference between a pedophilic relationship and an adult one: adults are supposed to be emotionally solid and knowledgeable enough to know what they are entering to.
Children are extremely likely to enter a child-adult relationship that will mess them up only out of respect for their superior, out of fear, out of dependance, or out of ignorance of what is next.

[Agathon]

As I've often said, there should be as many gay men as possible. It should be actively encouraged. It means more skirt for us real blokes!!!

Lesbianism should definitely out though, unless they agree to be filmed.

Sexism just can't be beat.

[Last Conformist]

Originally posted by Agathon
As I've often said, there should be as many gay men as possible. It should be actively encouraged. It means more skirt for us real blokes!!!

Amen to that!

Lesbianism should definitely out though, unless they agree to be filmed.

Lesbianism is out, period. They can use bisexuals for the porn flicks.

[Agathon]

Yeah!!! I'm convinced by your impeccable logic.

[Drake Tungsten]

You are not talking about the attractions by themselves, but the social acceptance of these attractions.

Yeah. So what? All attractions are uncontrollable, so why dwell on that issue. The lack of social acceptance for both pedophilia and homosexuality is what sets them apart from heterosexuality and makes certain analogies between the two useful, which is why I brought it up. I never claimed to be dealing solely with the attractions themselves with no regard to how society views them.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


Right to conscience?

That's a bizarre application.

How is the desire to **** have anything to do with conscience?

There you go again -- you're obsessed with the sex act, and thus dehumanizing gays as if they cannot be capable of relationships in which sex is only a part of those relationships.

Right to conscience, as in the right to affirm part of what you are (gay) and right of conscience as in the right to choose to enter a relationship with another adult of the same gender.

[dojoboy]

No. I don't recall any concious decision to be heterosexual. I'm just hardwired that way.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
So how then are 'theological laws' preventing the right to conscience?

First of all, theological-based laws are unconstitutional because we are supposed to be separating government from religion in United States.

Secondly, theological-based laws are unconstitutional, because they deny people the right to conscience, which I explained to in my immediate above post already.

Thirdly, theological-based laws also deny a person's right to intimate life, or right to freedom of contract with others.

Fourth, theological-based laws are wrong because they apply rules differently and unequally between gays and straights. It's ok for heterosexuals to engage in un-reproductive relationships, but it's suppose to heretical for gays to do the same thing.

Fifth, as I have already said before, theological-based laws also dehumanize gays -- see previous posts.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
Yes, but the similarities between heterosexual and pedophilic attractions aren't as great as those between homosexual and pedophilic attractions, given that heterosexuality is the socially accepted norm whilst both pedophilia and homosexuality are seen as abnormal attractions.

What's the point? Beyond saying neither are socially accepted, what other correlation is there to make? Being attracted to someone of a different race wasn't (and often still isn't) socially accepted. What relation could we make between interracial attraction and paedophilia? I don't see any more "useful analogies" there than I do with homosexuality.

Plus, this does ignore the majority opinion in psychology that paedophilia is not a sexual orientation or even a true sexual attraction per se, but rather a mental disorder largely based on a power dynamic. Paedophiles aren't, as far as modern psychology has determined, exclusively attracted to children. On the contrary, they more often than not carry on normal sexual relations with adults as well.

[Drake Tungsten]

Some people try to use the fact that homosexuals are "born that way" as some sort of proof that homosexuality is a moral behavior. At such times, bringing up the fact that pedophiles (who almost everyone would agree are not moral individuals) are also probably "born that way" is a pretty effective means of ending a silly argument, ie. that the fact that homosexuals are born gay has any sort of bearing on the morality of their behavior.

Not that I'm saying homosexuality is immoral...

[Mercator]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
You don't get to choose the attractions.

Whether you act on the attractions or not is an entirely different matter.

Oh that's nice! So heterosexuals can have the pleasure of getting married to someone they're attracted to, while gays just have to deal with that horrible "defect" God put them up with? They can either become celibate or marry someone they're not attracted to? Would you marry someone you're not attracted to? Even if you could just as well be together with someone you ARE attracted to, if it weren't for the fact that your family would disown you in that case?

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
I think the argument can be made that an uncontrollable attraction to children is similar to an uncontrollable attraction to members of one's own gender...

I really don't think paedophilia and homosexuality can be compared at all. Homosexuality has to do with gender, but paedophilia has nothing to do with gender, but with age.

I think homosexuality is something people are born with, being genetic or whatever. But I don't think paedophilia even can be. I'd say paedophilia often has more to do with childhood trauma. Or "nurture" rather than "nature" in any case, more like how I'm more attracted to brunettes than blondes. Not how I'm attracted to women rather than men.

Then again, I have nothing to back this up...

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
At such times, bringing up the fact that pedophiles (who almost everyone would agree are not moral individuals) are also probably "born that way" is a pretty effective means of ending a silly argument,

Only if one provides evidence that paedophiles are such. AFAIK, there is no psychological consensus that paedophiles are "born that way." The same does not hold true wrt to homosexuality. In fact, the consensus among psychologists is that paedophiles are made, not born, through childhood trauma and a cycle of sexual abuse.

Usually, the "born that way" argument is used to counter the claim that homosexuality isn't "natural," which is in and of itself a ****e argument that is based on a totally subjective opinion of what is "natural" and what isn't.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Mercatore Uno
I think homosexuality is something people are born with, being genetic or whatever. But I don't think paedophilia even can be. I'd say paedophilia often has more to do with childhood trauma. Or "nurture" rather than "nature" in any case, more like how I'm more attracted to brunettes than blondes. Not how I'm attracted to women rather than men.

Then again, I have nothing to back this up...

Read the pscyhological literature on the subject, and you'll find backup, as this is indeed the consensus wrt to paedophillic behavior.