Somewhere deep in your soul you would think you know the answer to this question. It is wrong, who cares why or the why nots of it? Children are children, not sexual objects. While everyone develops at different rates, it is generally accepted that a 3 year old should not be seen as a sexualized individual because they lack the ability to understand and comprehend what sex is all about---you get the point?? For the most part, I believe that adults who wish sexual relations with children are fundamentally flawed and beyond social redemption regardless of the "why" and "what" made them that way. You cross certain social lines and you become a social threat and people who abuse children should be dealt with harshly and decisively.
Somewhere deep in your soul you would think you know the answer to this question. It is wrong, who cares why or the why nots of it? Children are children, not sexual objects. While everyone develops at different rates, it is generally accepted that a 3 year old should not be seen as a sexualized individual because they lack the ability to understand and comprehend what sex is all about---you get the point?? For the most part, I believe that adults who wish sexual relations with children are fundamentally flawed and beyond social redemption regardless of the "why" and "what" made them that way. You cross certain social lines and you become a social threat and people who abuse children should be dealt with harshly and decisively.
How should you prepare your kids to avoid the situation? Don't talk to strangers is a no brainer, but what if the person is not a stranger?
- Nov 12, 2008
- 14,153
- 1,334
- 0
- MBTI
- INFJ
- Enneagram
- 1w2 sx/so/sp
This. Further a child's brain is highly plastic and the events that occur in their early life drastically changes and effects how they develop into adults. Acts like this in which they do not understand, and further are unable to understand are very damaging.
agreed, the not being able to understand a situation is what causes the most damage, when the kid grows up they seem driven by the impulse to better understand what happened to them but without the mental clarity of the events that took place.
Its..... Really not that cut and dry.
The most perplexing part of the article was this statement:
"Deputies believe whoever is responsible may have committed crimes against children."
Really? I WOULD THINK SO. Shit.
Sex offenders make me sick.
Pedophiles/Child rapists make me murderous.
T
The Jester
What I personally believe is irrelevant. My original question was an attempt to clarify the source of outrage in this thread which is showing up as assertions of objective morality.
Do you think the socially sanctioned practice of pederasty in ancient Greece was also wrong? What about in tribal cultures where it is part of ritualistic initiation into manhood and is a source of pride?
Our culture is not another culture.
Children live different lives here.
The difference would be: How do those acts affect children's lives in those cultures compared to with how it affects children in our culture?
I don't know about those cultures.
Sexual molestation or rape of a child in our culture proves detrimental to children who are victims. It seems to benefit just one person, the perpetrator.
Intimacy is about mutuality, not power. Having sex with a child or molesting a child in our culture is inherently a power issue.
Children live different lives here.
The difference would be: How do those acts affect children's lives in those cultures compared to with how it affects children in our culture?
I don't know about those cultures.
Sexual molestation or rape of a child in our culture proves detrimental to children who are victims. It seems to benefit just one person, the perpetrator.
Intimacy is about mutuality, not power. Having sex with a child or molesting a child in our culture is inherently a power issue.
Last edited:
What Korg is touching upon here is the difference between a absolutist attitude and a relativist attitude as well as pluralism.
You might as well stop in your tracks because it's not the content you are arguing but the frame of mind.
Those who think that sexual relations with children is wrong have all gotten down to the point where they either assert
1. You know it's wrong, there is no way that it isn't wrong
or
2. Regardless of what other people in other countries think we think it is wrong here so it is wrong.
What you should now look at is the source of the belief that molesting children is wrong and compare that belief to other cultures. Why is molesting children wrong, because they cannot give consent, is that issue? Or when you boil down to the core is it more about taking the innocence from something? In other cultures honor killings are used to restore honor and pride back in the family on the same basis that by misbehaving a woman was losing her innocence, getting dirt on her dress and as a result spreading onto the family.
You can't deny that other cultures are entirely just as valid as our culture is, and why would you think Greece and these other cultures would have sexual relations with children? I bet when it all boils down to it you all would come to the conclusion that because back then people were stupid/didn't know better/ culture was corrupt. But how is that owning up to any possible flaws in your own logic? Honestly.
Inflexibility in opinions is absolutism and you need to consider that what is right here may or may not be right somewhere else...can you really declare universal rights or wrong? Absolutely not because there are always situational circumstances when you have moral dilemmas that make you question the rights or wrong; example, a kid who is religious who doesn't want to go get cancer treatment and may die because they aren't going to, and now we are faced with whether to take away their right to practice their religion or to instate the law and have the child taken care of medically.
So think about that for a moment. Really these arguments are silly, you all are not covering your bases well enough, it's on one moral framework and you can't argue two moral frameworks against each other, it's constant metal rubbing against one another and neither get worn down.
I guess you'd peg me as a case number 2.. though I think there's LOTS more to it than that..
I mean, I have reasons here, which I've stated above.. and I don't see you addressing those.
I acknowledged that I don't know the effects of it in the other cultures mentioned. I'm speaking within the context of our culture, and the effects it produces here. That is what concerns me. I won't pretend to know what is best for those of other cultures I admit I am ignorant of. But I also won't say that having sex with a child is ok to do because other people other places and in other times have done it.
I'm not even talking about other cultures. Frankly, I find your mention of it a cop out. This is not necessarily a theoretical discussion, as it produces real world effects.
The thing I'm saying is that within our culture--child molestation has been proven to have a negative affect on the child, a traumatizing affect, actually... which extends to our society as well..
Can you argue otherwise?
Can you argue that molestation and child rape has produced better adjusted children or at least not made any difference on a child's wellbeing??
Let's talk about HOW sexual relations with a child within our culture is good. After all, the book was written to our culture. Let's weigh the pros and cons of it for all those involved.
There are things that produce destructive results within a society and from what I can see, child rape and molestation produces more destruction in our society than not. So I'm against it.
I'm not necessarily saying that it's wrong because it feels wrong and it feels wrong cuz everyone else says so.. That's not what's going on... and I'm certainly not opposed to thinking globally....
I'm looking at the effect that it produces.
Reality justifies that within our culture at least, child rape and molestation hurts children. The rapist/molestor may enjoy it. Sure. I'll bet they see all the positives of it.. Now whose rights are more important? The rapist/molestor's/"child lovers" or the child's? Should we allow one group to have their way because they enjoy it?
Or should we protect those negatively affected?
I think it is in the best interests of society to protect those who would be harmed by someone else's whims.
And not to mention the vast differences in a child vs. adult's cognitive abilities.. or can you argue against those? Can you argue that children are just as mentally capable as adults in comprehension, foresight, and decision making? Children are readily and easily pliable to an adults demands, sure.. which goes back to coercion.
Is sex by coercion wrong, Slant? Can you argue that sex with a child does not take coercion?
That there are no mental developmental differences between adults and children?
***
It's not that I'm inflexible, I'm just thinking of all these reasons I've given you and the context in which they are given..and I have yet to be swayed in the slightest by any one arguing against these points. Far as I can tell and in the simplest terms my simple mind can muster: All cons outweigh the pros in the real world.
So, if you can address the points I brought up in this post instead of accusing me of being inflexible in my opinion--I think we can have a real discussion and I'd like that... because I'm all about analyzing morality and stuff like that. So offer me something different to chew on. Pick my points apart and tell me to stick that in my pipe and smoke it. Show me where I'm wrong (besides y'know, being inflexible!).
I mean, I have reasons here, which I've stated above.. and I don't see you addressing those.
I acknowledged that I don't know the effects of it in the other cultures mentioned. I'm speaking within the context of our culture, and the effects it produces here. That is what concerns me. I won't pretend to know what is best for those of other cultures I admit I am ignorant of. But I also won't say that having sex with a child is ok to do because other people other places and in other times have done it.
I'm not even talking about other cultures. Frankly, I find your mention of it a cop out. This is not necessarily a theoretical discussion, as it produces real world effects.
The thing I'm saying is that within our culture--child molestation has been proven to have a negative affect on the child, a traumatizing affect, actually... which extends to our society as well..
Can you argue otherwise?
Can you argue that molestation and child rape has produced better adjusted children or at least not made any difference on a child's wellbeing??
Let's talk about HOW sexual relations with a child within our culture is good. After all, the book was written to our culture. Let's weigh the pros and cons of it for all those involved.
There are things that produce destructive results within a society and from what I can see, child rape and molestation produces more destruction in our society than not. So I'm against it.
I'm not necessarily saying that it's wrong because it feels wrong and it feels wrong cuz everyone else says so.. That's not what's going on... and I'm certainly not opposed to thinking globally....
I'm looking at the effect that it produces.
Reality justifies that within our culture at least, child rape and molestation hurts children. The rapist/molestor may enjoy it. Sure. I'll bet they see all the positives of it.. Now whose rights are more important? The rapist/molestor's/"child lovers" or the child's? Should we allow one group to have their way because they enjoy it?
Or should we protect those negatively affected?
I think it is in the best interests of society to protect those who would be harmed by someone else's whims.
And not to mention the vast differences in a child vs. adult's cognitive abilities.. or can you argue against those? Can you argue that children are just as mentally capable as adults in comprehension, foresight, and decision making? Children are readily and easily pliable to an adults demands, sure.. which goes back to coercion.
Is sex by coercion wrong, Slant? Can you argue that sex with a child does not take coercion?
That there are no mental developmental differences between adults and children?
***
It's not that I'm inflexible, I'm just thinking of all these reasons I've given you and the context in which they are given..and I have yet to be swayed in the slightest by any one arguing against these points. Far as I can tell and in the simplest terms my simple mind can muster: All cons outweigh the pros in the real world.
So, if you can address the points I brought up in this post instead of accusing me of being inflexible in my opinion--I think we can have a real discussion and I'd like that... because I'm all about analyzing morality and stuff like that. So offer me something different to chew on. Pick my points apart and tell me to stick that in my pipe and smoke it. Show me where I'm wrong (besides y'know, being inflexible!).
Last edited:
Forgive me, but it's like, the philosophical arguments involved seem kind of moot. How can anyone agree that doing this to a child would be conducive to its developing respectful and healthy attitudes to others, and to the society it belongs to, rather than just teaching it to take whatever it wants for its own gratification? How would this institutionalised disrespect of the consenting individual selves of others assist the culture to grow, to diversify, to consider within itself alternative points of view that may be beneficial to its growth and development, and so on? Why is it that a cultural practice should be protected from criticism, simply by the fact of existing within an alien culture? Doesn't that imply a sort of condescending judgment of the other culture as incapable of argumentatively defending itself against criticisms? Why should we even consider these other child molesting cultures at all, when doing so runs so contrary to their own value that it is not necessary to consider the position and needs of others, but only of the self?
