People may be born pedophiles, but that does not mean that a pederastic relationship would be between two individuals who are qualified to consent to such a relationship. By definition, a child is not able to give consent to a relationship like that, so it would be wrong.
Child pornography is wrong for the same reason.
Same with an animal.
When the actions of consenting adults do not take advantage of or harm others, there is no moral reason to prevent those actions.
2007-01-25 07:16:22
·
answer #1
·
answered by mullah robertson 4
·
3⤊
0⤋
"If you believe that people can be born homosexual and cannot change it"
Do you truly think they can change it? Tell me doug, can you change your sexual preference and switch to homosexuality? Do you find the idea distasteful? There you go. This is what you are asking of homosexuals.
As many other people have remarked and common sense should tell you, consenting adults is the theme here, which is why one is OK and the others are no go.
The fact that you implicitly equal homosexuality with pedophiles and animal sex in your question says quite a lot about your underlying thoughts and feelings. I won't stoop to jokingly implying how homophobia is often a denial of underlying desires and thoughts... ooops, I just did.
2007-01-25 18:03:00
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Pedophilia is most likely the result of trauma in childhood or similar environmental factors, so I don't believe it is innate in general. However, chemical imbalances also cause these types of disorders, so it could have been genetic.
A child does not have the capacity to make that kind of determination. A child does not have the capacity to consent.
...Which is the problem with child porn as it exploits a child, even if some of them think they want to be doing what they are doing. They don't have the capacity to make that decision. Children begin to develop this capacity in the mid to late teenage years, so 16-18 would be the age at which they become capable to consent, depending on the child.
As for animals, they are likewise unable to consent.
These issues generally hinge on development of emotional maturity and capacity to understand the world. Homosexuality is far more complex than our black and white labels. Gender is more than sex organs and sexual attraction is quite a complex combination of chemicals and environmental signals. I feel that to even label people homo, hetero, bi is quite ridiculous, given things like the fact that you can have XY chromosomes and still develop as a female. To even begin to factor morality into this issue, we would first have to dissect much about what physically makes a person male or female.
2007-01-25 15:20:04
·
answer #3
·
answered by Phoenix, Wise Guru 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
You know, I get sick of people comparing homosexuality to pedophilia and bestiality.
Pedophilia and bestiality are wrong for the simple reason that neither a child or a animal can consent and both actions are harmful, particularly in the case of pedophilia. Why is that so hard to understand?
And I might also add that pedophilia and bestiality are NOT sexual orientations. People are not born with a desire to rape children or animals. (Or commit rape period)
2007-01-25 15:29:24
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
how is being a pedophile the same as a homosexual? neither can change their behavior but one group is harming children and the other is harming no one
it's very simple, behavior that impacts the rights of others is wrong, behavior that hurts no one is okay, are you telling me that you are incapable of distinguishing between a person who harms others and one who does not?
2007-01-25 15:13:22
·
answer #5
·
answered by Nick F 6
·
3⤊
0⤋