English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I think all of us here will be on the same page in regards to pedophilia, it is a disgusting assault towards a child..NOW here comes the question who determines what is a child? We have laws that say you cannot drink alcohol until 21 you can be 18 to vote and you can emancipate at 16.

And who determines who is a Pedophile? On the Catch a Predator I was amazed how many men that were married active Military, Law Enforcement,
Homeland Security, Rabbis' were all coming to homes thinking they might have sex with someone underage, but these kids had been talking on-line with these people very sexually. The show Girls gone Wild show teens in basically in dog and pony sex shows and tapes are bought by men, I am sure some pedophile's and some not. If we don't set a Standard of Morality with Sexual behavior how can you ever define what's appropriate and what isn't

2007-06-08 05:51:33 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

9 answers

Exactly. Sex has become so mainstream nowadays that almost anything is acceptable. We need better standards of what is appropriate and what is not.

2007-06-08 05:56:16 · answer #1 · answered by Lauren. 4 · 2 2

The other aspect which should be considered is the mortality rate. When society had a mortality rate of 40 or under the idea of marriage at 12 was realistic to replenish the population. However there have been moral differences ( homosexuality in ancient Greece for example ) - society sets the boundaries NOW within the idiotic Marxist concept of human "rights" - but the sex / porn industry would remove all legal barriers were it possible. Your comments show why on line relationships are particularly dangerous. Even on YA no one knows who really is using the photograph of themselves or if it is some random pic from google. No one knows for sure who one is talking to, nor their gender in these so called chat rooms. I monitor my son's computer use for this reason. But the west is post Christian. Despite the natural revulsion towards people who prey on the young, the classic hypocrisy is evidenced in high street shops which sell pants and clothes for young girls which make them look like trainee prostitutes. And the people drive the market - they could refuse to buy clothes of that type and they could refuse to watch movies like Little Miss Sunshine which was appalling (saw on a plane and turned it off after ten minutes). The driving force in the US and the UK is money and the love of money is the root of all evil - including pederasty.

If you want to set a standard vote in decent men and women to elected office (whatever their faith or none) - but it is pretty difficult when the Roman Catholic Church will not deal with the problem. We are in the last days so there is not likely to be a solution other than to raise your children to respect their own bodies and those of other people.

2007-06-08 06:09:27 · answer #2 · answered by pwwatson8888 5 · 0 0

We have a standard of morality. It's called Law. By Law any adult who has sexual contact with a minor, especially under the age of 16 can be charged with a sexual crime against a child (pedophilia). Anyone 18 years and older is free to give it away to whomever they choose within the legal age. That's the law. That's the moral standard.

2007-06-08 05:59:12 · answer #3 · answered by square 4 · 0 0

Where I'm from the age of consent is 16. I think that's pretty fair. I lost my virginity at age 15 and he was 19. Technically he could have been charged for that, but in reality, I was perfectly capable of making an informed decision at that time. I think it really depends on the person though. Even some people at age 40 are not entirely capable of making a decision regarding consent. I think that over age 15 is perfectly reasonable in order to protect children. I know in Canada the AOC is 14 and I think that's probably a tad too low.

2007-06-08 05:57:42 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

Society sets the age of sexual consent.

In the Bible one was considered an adult of marriageable age at 13. Our society sets it around 18.

in periods of the Roman empire Pedophilia was not abnormal so the age of consent might have been 7 or 8.

2007-06-08 05:55:08 · answer #5 · answered by Gamla Joe 7 · 2 0

Technically, sex with a teenager is pederasty, not pedophilia, since they are at least past puberty.


Our laws about statutory rape exist because teenagers are on the wrong end of a power relationship when dealing with adults. If it were legal to have sexual relations with them, then adults could pressure them into it.

2007-06-08 05:56:06 · answer #6 · answered by Minh 6 · 3 0

threre needs to be a return to the bible
everytime the liberals force another deviant sexual lifestyle on society others waiting in line will demand their "rights and protection".
Yes,there needs to be strong laws (not wimpy PC laws and Judges).Need to put all convicted pedophiles on an Island at least 1000 miles from the nearest shore or school.

2007-06-08 09:03:22 · answer #7 · answered by robert p 7 · 0 0

Your question, and a great form of of the solutions given to it, replicate what some have observed as the disaster of reality for western civilization. i will in basic terms supply you the nutshell version. Morality is no longer considered as a count of reality, yet of emotions or consensus. This has had catastrophic consequences, because of the fact the dismal background of the final century documents in blood. mutually as the liberal democracies of the West have, possibly, prevented the excesses of those regimes, the essential ethical assumptions we make are actually not any distinctive than those of Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, and others. guy is considered because of the fact the degree of all issues, including issues ethical. we are Nietzsche's "supermen", growing to be a clean morality in keeping with no longer something yet our own resourcefulness and decision. The Christians you seek advice from march to the beat of a considerably distinctive drummer. they have faith that morality is an argument of reality. meaning that what's immoral for me is likewise so for you and everybody else. 2+2=4 in united statesa., Zimbabwe, and Antarctica. So too, ethical reality is considered as popular. There are some human beings attempting to tutor us a manner out of this quagmire, yet their efforts have not yet generated plenty replace. the genuine subject is that we don't comprehend there's a topic. We land up employing the language of ethical discourse, however the meanings we connect with our words are actually not shared accross the board. This, i think, in part explains why Christians of otherwise solid faith come to advise the flaws God of course prohibits. they are actually not evil or uncommitted. they're in basic terms reflecting the moral ambivalence of their way of existence. in short, the Church has replace into contaminated with the international. extremely than turning to God, we stick to our conduct of theory and subsequently do err.

2016-10-09 12:03:38 · answer #8 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

It is a difficult question. It varies with age. A person becomes a Pope at an advanced age. Can you say whether he ever seduced a girl or a woman in his former life while he was young, active and virile?

2007-06-08 05:58:52 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers