Why do we condemn pedophiles and accept homosexuals?

[Tastyfish]

Homosexuality was a paraphilia and included in the DSM of mental health disorders until recently . Checkmate.

It's always been 2 different things.
Clearly you don't get age based sexual attraction and same sex attraction are different.. lol

[Delekii]

This thread is utterly ridiculous and posts are being made that have no sense to them whatsoever. I can only believe that those that are defending pedophilia are in some sort of organised trolling ring, because no-one is stupid enough not to see how ridiculous their arguments are. turskanaattori's posts cannot possibly be taken at face value, because quite simply, anyone stupid enough to be saying these things cannot possibly be smart enough to operate a keyboard.

[Coraulten]

No, pedophiles are attracted to prepubescent children.

http://www.dsm5.org/Documents/Paraph...ct%20Sheet.pdf

It states unable to give legal consent as a paraphilic disorder.

[Mystrome]

Oh yes it is, whether you like it or not.

A thing for a 5 year old, or a thing for a pedophile?

[Tastyfish]

Ok, to all those defending pedophilia. What about bestiality? Is it ok if someone fantasizes about having sex with animals then?...

Fantasy is not action.
Do you put people on death row for thinking about killing their bosses, or ACTUALLY killing them?

[Coraulten]

This thread is utterly ridiculous and posts are being made that have no sense to them whatsoever. I can only believe that those that are defending pedophilia are in some sort of organised trolling ring, because no-one is stupid enough not to see how ridiculous their arguments are. turskanaattori's posts cannot possibly be taken at face value, because quite simply, anyone stupid enough to be saying these things cannot possibly be smart enough to operate a keyboard.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ad-hominem Please try again.

[Itisamuh]

Its not on the liberal agenda....give it time...eventually they will start making excuses for them and anyone that speaks out against them or disagrees with them is a complete bigot......<-------its how they started with the homo thing.

Pretty much. I'd say incest is next on the list though, before pedophilia. "I can't help that I'm in love with my sister!"

[Deleted]

http://www.dsm5.org/Documents/Paraph...ct%20Sheet.pdf

It states unable to give legal consent as a paraphilic disorder.

Which is, in fact, pretty stupid considering the arbitrary laws about age of consent, differing so wildly from country to country.

[Deleted]

You do know that there is quite a difference between showing off clothes and being used for something intimate that you hardly have any understanding of, right?

By porn modelling I mean posing for camera, in the nude, for the purpose of creating porn. Like Playboy.

[NineSpine]

If you have sex with a 17 year old and you are 18 you still get charged and treated like a pedophile.

No, you don't. First of all, that situation isn't even a crime in the vast majority of states. Second of all, having sex with someone under 13 is almost universally considered First Degree Rape, which is on par with forcible rape, while the situation you present would be a significantly lesser charge.

[Stelio Kontos]

I can just imagine the sleazers who go on forums to defend pedophilia as these creepy, oily, nasty men sitting around an internet cafe in Pattaya, Thailand, killing time being disgusting online while they wait for the go-go bars to open for the night.

Basically Gary Glitter.

[Xires]

"Gay pride marches affect children" - objective.

"Homosexuality is something that we don't want 'affecting' children" - subjective.

You might disagree with homosexuality, and unfortunately that is your right. It is not against the law. That you think it is "hurting" the child is your subjective opinion, which is not backed up by the law.

"You might disagree with homosexuality, and unfortunately that is your right." <-------its unfortunate that its his right to NOT agree with man on man relations? WOW... the same arguments the gays used to be "accepted" is the same argument pedophiles use. Give liberals time and pedophiles will be accepted and give an administration like the obama administration to one day make it "illegal" to disagree with homosexuality (which is perverse and not much better then a pedophile). These people are sick and simply need help....."accepting" them is NOT the way to go....western society is becoming nothing more then drug crazed sex starved people that FORCE there ways on other society's because there way is the "right" way and if you dont agree with it we will make you pay for it. Western society is like the Borg you could say...

[Toobad]

"Gay pride marches affect children" - objective.

"Homosexuality is something that we don't want 'affecting' children" - subjective.

You might disagree with homosexuality, and unfortunately that is your right. It is not against the law. That you think it is "hurting" the child is your subjective opinion, which is not backed up by the law.

I disagree with exploiting children and the logical phallacy of this whole argument where homosexuals "don't use non-consent people".

I never said homosexuality itself is wrong/bad. I just don't like those "tumblr" kind of homosexuals, if you know what I mean.

[Shinra1]

Sexual orientation is about what gender you're attracted to. Not the age of them.

I never used the word orientation in the post that stemmed this conversation about semantics. Put the ol' glasses on friend you and trawl back a few pages.

[Delekii]

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ad-hominem Please try again.

The arguments have already been rebutted, and continue to be restated. The only logical conclusion is that those making the arguments are trolls or are incapable of rational thought.

[Deleted]

I can't believe this is even a thread. This is unbelievable.

I'm sure some of you think you are being all free thinking and 'out there' by saying that peadophilia doesn't harm children but that's been shown to be not the case. There is a reason why it's illegal in so many countries. I know it's cool to be all individual and #smashthestate and to rebel against cultural norms but this isn't one of those things that is up for debate. It just DOES harm children, in most cases. I'm sure anyone can go and find a case somewhere in the world where there is a 10 year old married to a 40 year old who is perfectly happy, but in most cases it causes permanent damage to the child. Speak to anyone who was abused as a child and they will tell you the same thing. In many cases it can even cause physical damage (and even death, see the case of the child bride killed on her wedding night because she... ripped) to the child, not just permanent crippling emotional damage.

This is totally NOT okay, and sorry if you think it is, but no. You're just wrong and you need to stop trying to be so alternative, because it's really not cool when it comes to hurting kids.

=/

[Velaniz]

I stand corrected thanks for the info and it raises an interesting question, if one finds a 17 year old sexual attractive in a state that makes them a minor does that not make you a pedophile?

Lol. Frowning upon sex with 17 year olds, or worse, treating it as a crime, is also extremely backwards, yeah.

[NineSpine]

Which, is in fact, pretty stupid considering the arbitrary laws about age of consent, differing so wildly from country to country.

What characterizes a mental disorder is the effect of the condition on your ability to function normally in society, which ties directly to the legal status of certain acts.

[Deleted]

I never used the word orientation in the post that stemmed this conversation about semantics. Put the ol' glasses on friend you and trawl back a few pages.

So why mention homosexuality?

[Stir]

By porn modelling I mean posing for camera, in the nude, for the purpose of creating porn. Like Playboy.

I know what you meant, and I responded in kind. There is a huge difference between showing off clothes (normal modelling) and being used for something intimate that you hardly have any understanding of (porn modelling).