Pedophilia Is A Sexual Orientation Under CA Bill

[Underverse]

I really can't make this any easier.

The best part is how you contradict yourself with the next five words after.

The even bester part is how you can't read

[mikeakanice]

I don't do porn. I find it morally offensive.

ahhh cultural norms

Stop thinking you're witty with your "cultural norms" There is a difference between respecting other cultures and knowing that even if it's culturally accepted somewhere else it's wrong and shouldn't be tolerated.

[Rukentuts]

It makes no sense for why it's illegal for the same reason as to why it would be a useless control measure. The percentile increase of possible birth defects in a single generation is low, and incest is already quite rare. Combine the two, and you're looking at a highly unuseful measure for the stated purpose.

For parental->child relations, it is illegal as a parent has power over a child that compromises informed consent.

---------- Post added 2013-06-04 at 11:45 PM ----------

The even bester part is how you can't read

"An attack on character, and not on the argument." "I don't need an argument"

Kinda isn't an ad hominem without one.

Please learn definitions of terms you post.

[Underverse]

It makes no sense for why it's illegal for the same reason as to why it would be a useless control measure. The percentile increase of possible birth defects in a single generation is low, and incest is already quite rare. Combine the two, and you're looking at a highly unuseful measure for the stated purpose.

Effects add up over time. It's not a 1-generational plan.

We accrue negative mutations all the time. We don't notice, because before us have come millions of generations. But that doesn't mean the effects are meaningless, or useless. Evolution brought us from liposomes to humans, after all, with the very same mechanism

[Velaniz]

No, it's a fetish.

Maybe you could actually use words how they are defined instead of bullshitting random definitions.

This couldn't be any more ironic.

[Underverse]

Stop thinking you're witty with your "cultural norms" There is a difference between respecting other cultures and knowing that even if it's culturally accepted somewhere else it's wrong and shouldn't be tolerated.

Wasn't being witty. It's true, I really don't do porn because I find it morally reprehensible. The concept of sexual acts for no emotional attachment is startling.

And I don't give two fucks for culture. If it's baseless, I would like it to die. We're better than that, making up random shit so we can be controlled by those who make the rules.

[Grizzly Willy]

I don't do porn. I find it morally offensive.

ahhh cultural norms

Here we go. Pedophelia? Just fine. Porn? Morally offensive.

I'm sorry, I don't think I can reach an understanding here.

[Rukentuts]

This couldn't be any more ironic.

Especially since you didn't even read it.

If a sexual fetish causes significant psychosocial distress for the person or has detrimental effects on important areas of their life, it is diagnosable as a paraphilia in the DSM and the ICD.[2] Many people embrace their fetish rather than attempting treatment to rid themselves of it, especially in an age where they can easily find communities of like-minded people via the internet.

And from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paraphilia

Paraphilia (from Greek para παρά = beside and -philia φιλία = friendship, meaning love) describes the experience of intense sexual arousal to highly atypical objects, situations, or individuals.[1] Examples include sexual interests that can motivate committing sexual offences—such as pedophilia, zoophilia, sexual sadism, and exhibitionism—

Thanks for proving my original point.

So incredibly ironic.

[mikeakanice]

Wasn't being witty. It's true, I really don't do porn because I find it morally reprehensible. The concept of sexual acts for no emotional attachment is startling.

And I don't give two fucks for culture. If it's baseless, I would like it to die. We're better than that, making up random shit so we can be controlled by those who make the rules.

Making rules to protect children from sexual exploitation is not baseless or random. It's to protect them from monsters like you who have no moral compass, are incredibly selfish, lack compassion or any type of civil behavior whatsoever.

[Underverse]

Here we go. Pedophelia? Just fine. Porn? Morally offensive.

I'm sorry, I don't think I can reach an understanding here.

Pedophilia w/ benevolence assume = pleasure/happiness for both parties

Porn = lack of sociosexual contact

If anything is deviant from nature, it's the latter



Infracted.

[Sialanne]

Wasn't being witty. It's true, I really don't do porn because I find it morally reprehensible. The concept of sexual acts for no emotional attachment is startling.

And I don't give two fucks for culture. If it's baseless, I would like it to die. We're better than that, making up random shit so we can be controlled by those who make the rules.

What's morally reprehensible is you defending pedophilia. There is no opinion nestled in my statement. It's a fact.

[Grizzly Willy]

Pedophilia w/ benevolence assume = pleasure/happiness for both parties

Porn = lack of sociosexual contact

If anything is deviant from nature, it's the latter

Because there isn't any amount of pleasure or happiness between people having sex in porn?

[Underverse]

Making rules to protect children from sexual exploitation is not baseless or random. It's to protect them from monsters like you who have no moral compass, are incredibly selfish, lack compassion or any type of civil behavior whatsoever.

Selfish? Lacking compassion? You suddenly know me? You suddenly know what I want, who I am, and how I feel about this topic?

I argue for logic. Not for my opinion. The world would be a better place if others could do the same.



As for your point, assuming benevolence the only exploitation that's happening is exploitation of the older individual. A trade of immaterial goods for material goods. Sex for resources and protection. A fair trade, only when human emotion mediates it. Otherwise, the child is stealing.

---------- Post added 2013-06-05 at 12:58 AM ----------

Because there isn't any amount of pleasure or happiness between people having sex in porn?

I would not consider the pleasure gained from porn to be equivalent to the happiness gained from social interaction and belonging.

If you were to make that argument, you would be assuming that the benefits of porn are equivalent to the benefits of a relationship with a significant other.

[mikeakanice]

Selfish? Lacking compassion? You suddenly know me? You suddenly know what I want, who I am, and how I feel about this topic?

I argue for logic. Not for my opinion. The world would be a better place if others could do the same.


As for your point, assuming benevolence the only exploitation that's happening is exploitation of the older individual. A trade of immaterial goods for material goods. Sex for resources and protection. A fair trade, only when human emotion mediates it. Otherwise, the child is stealing.

You aren't arguing for logic when you state you'd be willing to allow a 40 year old to bang your 7 year old daughter. You've gone past the line of logic. So yes, Knowing that tells me all I need to know about you.

[Rukentuts]

I argue for logic.

And yet the logic of informed consent escapes you.

Better go back to "sheep".

[Underverse]

What's morally reprehensible is you defending pedophilia. There is no opinion nestled in my statement. It's a fact.

And what evidence backs this fact? I'm always willing to let people change my mind.

---------- Post added 2013-06-05 at 01:00 AM ----------

And yet the logic of informed consent escapes you.

Better go back to "sheep".

I already explained that, and you had no response.

You're better than this, Ruke. At least, I thought you were. But resorting to snide side-comments without even attempting to address my argument looks pretty bad.

[Velaniz]

Especially since you didn't even read it.



And from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paraphilia



Thanks for proving my original point.

So incredibly ironic.

The point is you can't define pedophilia under a fetish based on that first link I gave you. That pretty much crumbles your original point.

As for the rest, yeah sure, all the A=B, B=C, C=D, therefore A=D probably makes you feel pretty clever. You haven't even considered the sheer range of subjects something as vague as Paraphilia encompasses.

" There is no consensus for any precise border between unusual personal sexual tastes and paraphilic ones, and multiple, overlapping definitions exist."

[Underverse]

You aren't arguing for logic when you state you'd be willing to allow a 40 year old to bang your 7 year old daughter. You've gone past the line of logic. So yes, Knowing that tells me all I need to know about you.

And what logic do you have to back your argument? You're saying 'no, because I say so'. Not very convincing.

[mikeakanice]

And what logic do you have to back your argument? You're saying 'no, because I say so'. Not very convincing.

I'm saying no because there should be some moral compass in you saying this is disgusting and is wrong. That should be enough for anyone. I'm done even talking to you about this. You're a disturbed person and tbh I'm disgusted you are even allowed on this site.

[Rukentuts]

And what evidence backs this fact? I'm always willing to let people change my mind.

---------- Post added 2013-06-05 at 01:00 AM ----------



I already explained that, and you had no response.

You're better than this, Ruke. At least, I thought you were. But resorting to snide side-comments without even attempting to address my argument looks pretty bad.

http://web.archive.org/web/199910100...ses/delay.html

I thought you actually used logic.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_sexual_abuse