Monday, June 4, 2012

Interracial Marriage, Homosexuality and Pedophilia...

"One obvious contradiction in the assimilationist position is that if homosexual identity is inborn, as they say, then why do they oppose freedom of sexual expression for minors? Assimilationists argue that sexual identity is fixed by age six, but they deny young people the right to enjoy sexual pleasure with the person of their own choice. For them, "protection" is the key word, not "liberation"; they call on the state to "protect" young people from expressing and exploring their own sexual behavior. They want to "protect" young people from "dirty old men" (I, incidentally, am speaking as a "dirty [gay] old man" - something I take as a positive goal), but in reality are protecting them from themselves. They support criminalization of young people's sexuality, especially if it involves sex with an adult man. They condemn any adult who helps a young person to explore his or her sexuality. They are like parents - only worse, because they pretend to offer a guide to the gay future." - David Thornstad 

This was taken from the NAMBLA website. For those of you who don't know what NAMBLA is, they are The North American Man/Boy Love Association...essentially they're an organization of Pedophiles who seek to make pedophilia legal. The quote above is a VERY interesting part of an article I read that Christians have been saying for AGES however, Homosexuals and Gay Supporters alike have all but ignored the obvious implications of their position and leave it to a Pedophile to address them. So I figured seeing it directly from the horse's mouth would persuade them into realizing just how badly they screwed up.

The opening question is an obvious one. Why is it okay for Homosexuals to have this inborn homosexuality and it's PERFECTLY okay for them to act on it, but a Pedophile has to suppress his inborn inclination? And from a Homosexual perspective he's 100% right. Granted, I don't agree with either but Homosexuals are faced with a real problem. I'd like to preamble this by saying that I am NOT saying ALL Homosexuals are Pedophiles, I know for a fact that this is not true and I am NOT saying that ALL Pedophiles are Homosexuals, that is not true either. Just so we're clear. Anyways here might be their reasoning for why Pedophilia is not allowed:

1) Because a child can't consent to having sexual relations.
Says who ? Psychological studies ? Because I'm 100% sure that you can find some other psychological study that'll say they can. Furthermore there are people engaged in pedophile relationships in other countries and both parties seem happy. Are you gonna paint all pedophiles with a broad brush because of a few bad apples who molest kids who DON'T consent as opposed to the ones who genuinely love their underaged significant other?

2) Because it's disgusting and it's child abuse.
Disgusting ? That's an invalid complaint, mushrooms are disgusting to me, doesn't mean I'm gonna stop someone from eating them. Furthermore, if you find pedophilia personally disgusting, well Lucky you because you're not engaging in it are you ? Child abuse? It can't be abuse if the child consents to it, which brings us back to my previous point, WHO'S TO SAY THEY CAN'T?!

3) It's Immoral and wrong.
What are you basing that on ? Society ? Because during the Roman Empire murdering people for entertainment was PERFECTLY acceptable and then just a few hundred years later all of a sudden it's wrong? Based on what ? Killing Jews was PERFECTLY acceptable in Germany during WWII, but we all agree that's wrong, but The Germans didn't. So if Pedophilia is wrong is it just wrong for you and not for them, or is it wrong completely and if so what are you basing that on?

In the comparison of saying Interracial Marriage is equal to Same Sex Marriage is a BEYOND foolish statement; Because for starters there is NO MORAL reason why people of two different ethnic groups cannot marry. Any reason presented for prohibiting interracial marriage is PURELY arbitrary and not based on anything other than the bigoted minds of the person that holds the idea. Furthermore interracial marriage preserves the species just as well as marriage that is not interracial. Same Sex Marriage however does nothing but fulfill the physical and emotional needs of the individuals in said relationship.  Emotions and physical fulfillment is NOT the prime reason why marriage exists.

Marriage exists to:
1) Contain the sexual encounters between people.
2) Establish progeny for future generations.
3) Generate a population

If I may go off on a tangent here, WHY is marriage even important in this day and age? Seriously? As much as we have people living together and children out of wed-lock, Do we SERIOUSLY need marriage? When you can make a commit to someone WITHOUT all the paperwork and stuff that follows. When you can just shack up with your partner and not have to worry? I digress.Emotions are NOT a valid bases for anything not even marriage. It's true that emotions make marriage better but leaving emotions out, marriage is STILL a great thing.

We as human beings are bred with a desire to engage in sexual intercourse, this is a truth we cannot deny. Marriage limits who we have sex with. Emotions makes sex much better, but if your sex is solely based on emotions then your foundation is shakey because emotions change.

We're at this point in time when simply saying I disagree with homosexuality is looked upon as hate speech and evil. However disagreement with Christianity is looked up favorably and with thunderous applause. Being offended by 2 girls making out on "Glee" is seen as close-minded and stupid, but if a character says the name Jesus on TV all of a sudden religion is being shoved down the throats of non-believers. What is up with the double standard?

Addendum: This was an exchange I had with an individual about this article. Please make note of the individual's REFUSAL to not only address the topic but his continuous construction of straw-man arguments and invalid responses. 


The Reginator said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
The Reginator said...

Were you intending to argue against paedophilia because I think you argued for it.

Ugo Strange said...

I was arguing for pedophilia in an attempt to play Devil's Advocate to show that the same logic used for homosexuality can be used for pedophilia as well...I thought I made that clear in the article and several others that I am against pedophilia.