Joe, are you ignoring me? I'd like an answer to my last two posts to you (432 and 436).
I didn't find anything worth replying to. Just re-hashing the same arguments.
Did I say that adult-child sex is always harmful? No. But such sexual abuse is highly likely to be harmful, which is sufficient reason that it should never be permitted.
You've already said that. I've already disagreed. Nothing new to add.
Appeal to popularity? Really? Doesn't work when Christians use it, doesn't work on me either.It was a simple statement of fact. And where the Law is concerned, numbers do matter; that's how democracy works.
Do you think I don't know how laws are made? What's your point? It sure looks like you're saying the law must be just because a majority of people support it. You're defending your appeal to popularity with an appeal to popularity. The fact that a majority of people voted for a law doesn't make it a just law. If you put 'death to homosexuals' up for a vote, it would pass in some states. That's one of the major flaws of democracy, the majority can oppress the minority legally.
You can have all the impure thoughts you like, Joe, and you won't be breaking the law and you won't be arrested. But possesing child porn is an action, not a thought.
They can't punish thoughts because they don't know who's thinking them. But when the thoughts are made known through related actions, they can punish the actions. It is not the action that is being punished, it is the thought, via
the action. Another example would be anti-sodomy laws. That is obviously a way of persecuting homosexuals for their thoughts, via
If it is not thought crime, then why are pornographic drawings and stories of children also illegal when there is no child involved in the production? Who is the victim?
Would you keep other teenage boys away from your daughter?No. I'd keep her away from self-confessed paedophiles. So you don't have a point.
My point is that you don't mind your daughter having sex, you just don't want her having sex with someone older. It's pretty arbitrary in my opinion.
Well, you've spent a lot of time on this thread trying to justify adult-child sexual behaviour in some circumstances, and that's what I'm arguing against.
I was asked, and whenever I thought a question wasn't worth my time to answer I was accused of dodging. If you want me to stop talking about it, stop asking me to talk about it.
But as I just said, I agree with you that the punishments for possession are too high; nobody should go to prison for possession.
Then it's just an academic argument now. I'm a practical man. As long as you agree that jail is not an appropriate punishment I don't care to debate the minutia of it's morality any further.
I'm suggesting you get help regarding your delusional thinking about child sexual abuse.
I'm not deluded at all. I'm being reasonable. Your use of the word abuse here tells me that you have completely ignored something I have said twice now...
If you really want to force an answer out of me, I would say that if and only if, you could determine with 100% certainty that it was completely consensual, and that she understood what she was doing and both the short and long term ramifications of her actions, I think it should be legal. If there is no coercion, manipulation, threat, deception, malice, or abuse, how can it be called rape?
The fact that you are referring to it as 'child sexual abuse' and not 'adult-child sexual relations' indicates that you have concluded that every case is abusive, and that the very definition of 'adult-child sexual relations' equates to 'abuse' in your mind. My point is simply that there are cases where it is not abuse. I've already said that in most cases it is, so I don't see what you're harping on here.
It is never OK for a 31-year-old to groom an 11-year-old into a sexual relationship, because there is a high probability that the child will suffer pervasive harm. If you disagree with that, you are deluded.
I would agree that a 31 year old should not "groom an 11-year-old into a sexual relationship" but I think there are situations where it just happens unintentionally, and it is not always harmful. Teachers working with students may form a friendship that develops into something more, and find themselves in a sexual relationship that neither one intended.
There have been many cases where the 'victim' did not want to press charges, and when the 'abuser' was released from jail many years later, they resumed their relationship. Careers and families were destroyed, reputations ruined, for nothing.
You call me deluded, but I think your black-and-white thinking is very childish and ignores a pretty damn big grey area.