PDA

View Full Version : Gawker: 'Pedophilia Is a Sexual Orientation'



Gina
09-11-2012, 07:09 PM
Link (http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2012/09/08/gawker-editor-pedophilia-sexual-orientation-and-illness-deserving-pub/?)

The following headline actually appeared at Gawker Friday: "Born This Way: Sympathy and Science for Those Who Want to Have Sex with Children."

The article (http://gawker.com/5941037), written by Gawker West Coast editor Cord Jefferson, was even worse (emphasis added throughout):

In an ABC News article (http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=90004#.UD6-WdBYtZ1) from 2003, a corrections officer from Los Angeles told reporter Michael S. James that imprisoned pedophiles "usually don't make it" without protective custody. Leslie Walker, a prisoner's rights activist, told James, "[Child sex offenders] are at risk of being murdered, having their food taken, having their cells defecated and urinated in. Their life is truly a living hell." Good, most people will say. But there is a growing number of researchers, many of them out of Canada, whose work suggests that pedophilia is an illness deserving of the public's sympathy the way any brain disorder is. Some of the scientists say pedophilia is a sexual orientation, meaning that it's unchangeable, regardless of how much jail time or beatings or therapy someone is dealt. Others have reason to believe that pedophiles are born that way, and that some of them will suffer through entire lives without hurting a single child. If this research proves to be correct, it should help shape both our public policy and our public attitude, so that we're protecting kids while also protecting pedophiles from angry mobs, cellmates, and themselves.
That bears repeating: "[P]edophilia is an illness deserving of the public's sympathy...pedophilia is a sexual orientation."

Scary stuff. But it got worse:

Currently, there is no significant longitudinal evidence that pedophiles can be made to not be attracted to children, and thus it can be defined as their orientation. And if pedophilia is a sexual orientation, that also means it's futile to send pedophiles to prison in an effort to alter their attractions. Doing so is akin to sending a homosexual child off to a religious-based institution that claims it can "pray the gay away."
Yes, the article really said "it's futile to send pedophiles to prison in an effort to alter their attractions."

But there was still more:

Imagine a world in which admitting your attraction to busty women or tall men led to alienation, jail time, or your murder. Older gay men can probably remember such an era, but nowadays most sexual appetites have been mainstreamed to the point of banality. Pedophiles, for obvious reasons, don't enjoy the same kind of tolerance, and thus it seems as if they may be locked forever in a sexual prison from the moment they're born.
Isn't it a shame that pedophiles "don't enjoy the same kind of tolerance?"

But the worst was still yet to come:

The old adage is that the true mark of a society is how it treats the weakest in its ranks. Blacks, women, Latinos, gays and lesbians, and others are still in no way on wholly equal footing in America. But they're also not nearly as lowly and cursed as men attracted to children. One imagines that if Jesus ever came to Earth, he'd embrace the poor, the blind, the lepers, and, yes, the pedophiles.


Jesus would embrace pedophiles? Not according to (http://poorrichardsnews.com/post/31124941800/deplorable-gawker-article-promotes-sympathy-for) Poor Richard's News:

[H]ow ignorent of the Bible can you be if you’re suggesting Jesus would “embrace the pedophiles”?

Matthew 18: 6: “But whoever causes the downfall of one of these little ones who believe in Me—it would be better for him if a heavy millstone were hung around his neck and he were drowned in the depths of the sea!"

Jesus died for the forgiveness of sin, not the embrace of it. The Bible is very clear that while all sins can be forgiven, Jesus never ever embraces the sin itself. He made no bones about the punishment for harming a child.
No matter how preposterous this Gawker editor's views, we learned in the very next sentence how someone could actually think this way.

"As a self-professed 'progressive.'"

That's all you needed to know, isn't it?
Reading this story was like watching a car wreck. I couldn't look away even though it was horrible.

m00
09-11-2012, 07:36 PM
This whole thing is a confused. Let me break it down...


You probably can't change the fact pedophiles will always be attracted to children. But last I checked we don't send people to jail for thought crimes.
You CAN correct behavior, and you CAN fairly punish behaviour. Last I checked what separates human beings from other animals is the ability to control our instincts.
Whether or not pedophilia is a sexual orientation is immaterial, other than the degree to which it helps society correct and prevent individuals from acting out their sexual urges.
All the above being said, we should probably do what we can to limit the abuse of all inmates at the hands of other inmates. If the goal is to correct the behaviour, this isn't helping.

Rockntractor
09-11-2012, 07:42 PM
This whole thing is a confused. Let me break it down...


You probably can't change the fact pedophiles will always be attracted to children. But last I checked we don't send people to jail for thought crimes.
You CAN correct behavior, and you CAN fairly punish behaviour. Last I checked what separates human beings from other animals is the ability to control our instincts.
Whether or not pedophilia is a sexual orientation is immaterial, other than the degree to which it helps society correct and prevent individuals from acting out their sexual urges.
All the above being said, we should probably do what we can to limit the abuse of all inmates at the hands of other inmates. If the goal is to correct the behaviour, this isn't helping.


The best way to correct a pedophiles behavior is a bullet between the eyes.

m00
09-11-2012, 07:51 PM
The best way to correct a pedophiles behavior is a bullet between the eyes.

So if you institute the death penalty for child molestation, won't that encourage molesters to kill children? Because it's DP either way? Same reason you don't want the DP for rape.

Apache
09-11-2012, 07:52 PM
I don't think that this...
Matthew 18: 6: “But whoever causes the downfall of one of these little ones who believe in Me—it would be better for him if a heavy millstone were hung around his neck and he were drowned in the depths of the sea!"

is taken in the right context, as to the real meaning, of the verse. What I was taught, was that was meant to be the newborn in Christ, not literal children... (FlaGator?)


Don't anyone even think, for a second, that I accept, condone, or agree with pedophilia... I DO NOT, PERIOD!
As far as I'm concerned, let the sick bastards rot in a cesspool :livid:



So Nova, is what we've been saying sinking in yet? Or are you STILL in denial, that "gay-rights" are not a slippery slope?

Apache
09-11-2012, 07:53 PM
The best way to correct a pedophiles behavior is a bullet between the eyes.

I can agree with that...

Apache
09-11-2012, 08:00 PM
So if you institute the death penalty for child molestation, won't that encourage molesters to kill children? Because it's DP either way? Same reason you don't want the DP for rape.

As a victim of that... You have no idea of the pain that we go through, the possibilities stripped away, the life destroyed...Would death be prefferable(sp?)? Even to this day I ask myself that.....

Rockntractor
09-11-2012, 08:00 PM
So if you institute the death penalty for child molestation, won't that encourage molesters to kill children? Because it's DP either way? Same reason you don't want the DP for rape.

I'm for banning any sick fucker who comes over here wanting to some how justify pedophilia.

m00
09-11-2012, 08:03 PM
I'm for banning any sick fucker who comes over here wanting to some how justify pedophilia.

:rolleyes:

Right... because asking whether as a matter of policy we should institute the death penalty for non-murder crimes (rape, molestation, etc), because it will drastically lower the survival rate of the victims is EXACTLY THE SAME as justifying pedophilia. Way to fail reading comprehension.

Rockntractor
09-11-2012, 08:05 PM
:rolleyes:

Right... because asking whether as a matter of policy we should institute the death penalty for non-murder crimes (rape, molestation, etc), because it will drastically lower the survival rate of the victims is EXACTLY THE SAME as justifying pedophilia. Way to fail reading comprehension.

I'm not putting up with your crap today!

Hawkgirl
09-11-2012, 08:23 PM
This whole thing is a confused. Let me break it down...



You CAN correct behavior, and you CAN fairly punish behaviour. Last I checked what separates human beings from other animals is the ability to control our instincts.
.


Sorry for the bluntness, but you're an idiot if you believe that. Pedophiles themselves say the urge never goes away, no matter how long he is in prison. Nothing short of castration, or as Rock suggested, a bullet to the head (by firing squad) will make the desire (to have sex with children) go away. Ask a Nambla member, they believe it is LOVE, so if it is indeed LOVE in their sick belief system, it can't be cured.

Apache
09-11-2012, 08:31 PM
:rolleyes:

Right... because asking whether as a matter of policy we should institute the death penalty for non-murder crimes (rape, molestation, etc), because it will drastically lower the survival rate of the victims is EXACTLY THE SAME as justifying pedophilia. Way to fail reading comprehension.

Check up-thread asshole, before you comment!

m00
09-11-2012, 08:56 PM
Hawkgirl, taking to PMs if you don't mind.

Hawkgirl
09-11-2012, 09:02 PM
Hawkgirl, taking to PMs if you don't mind.

I'm not taking this discussion in PM's, feel free to defend your position right here, in public, for everyone to read.

I am firm in my belief and disdain for pedophiles.

Apache
09-11-2012, 09:03 PM
Hawkgirl, taking to PMs if you don't mind.

Why? Because you can't defend what you've posted?

Apache
09-11-2012, 09:04 PM
I'm not taking this discussion in PM's, feel free to defend your position right here, in public, for everyone to read.

I am firm in my belief and disdain for pedophiles.

Thank you!

Apache
09-11-2012, 09:09 PM
Hawkgirl, taking to PMs if you don't mind.

C'mon m00... let's hear you out! Let me see how YOU defend these bastards! You let me know how I'm supposed to feel now!



Go ahead....

m00
09-11-2012, 09:10 PM
Why? Because you can't defend what you've posted?


C'mon m00... let's hear you out! Let me see how YOU defend these bastards! You let me know how I'm supposed to feel now!

Because I am in an awkward position where Rock threatened me with a ban if I continued posting, when I CLEARLY wasn't saying the thing he claimed I was. But lets be honest, people talk past each other in internet debates all the time.

If he doesn't want me to post in this thread, under threat of ban, fine. But then don't call me out to defend my position.

Apache
09-11-2012, 09:35 PM
Because I am in an awkward position where Rock threatened me with a ban if I continued posting, when I CLEARLY wasn't saying the thing he claimed I was. But lets be honest, people talk past each other in internet debates all the time.

If he doesn't want me to post in this thread, under threat of ban, fine. But then don't call me out to defend my position.

Fair enough! Rock, please, don't ban him.... for this discussion...please?



OKAY m00, you let me know why I have had to suffer through decades of shame and and guilt and what if's and shoulda beens...wondering how others view me...

YOU TELL me why 5 minutes of oral sex is worth my standing, in society... YOU tell me why, I had adults GRILL me for MONTHS, for something I should've felt "lucky" about... the trial was 2 weeks! She got 2 YEARS! I WAS 8! 8! DO YOU GET THAT? 8 YEARS OLD!!!!!!


MY LIFE WAS CUT OFF!

I went from 8 to 32 in the blink-of-an-eye!

And here you are talking about the Death Penalty!


Who suffered more m00?


Me, or her?!

Hawkgirl
09-11-2012, 09:52 PM
Apache, he has no defense, he has a theory, a flawed, naive theory.

Moo, you can copy and paste your PM to me here if you so wish to explain your thinking and be done with it. I suspect you won't find any tolerance or acceptance to your view on this board. You can't compare it to acting on impulse. It's deliberate and manipulative. It's taking advantage of an innocent, UNCONSENTING child. IT's a mental illness. There is no use or benefit of these types of individuals in society.

Apache
09-11-2012, 10:02 PM
Apache, he has no defense, he has a theory, a flawed, naive theory.

....

I know!


I still have so much touble, asking for a "servant's heart" when it comes to this!
This is NO JOKE!My life has been set back... yet I still try!


Hawkers...

Thanks :adoration:

Gina
09-11-2012, 10:28 PM
Apache you're absolutely correct that the verse quoted doesn't literally mean children, it means young Christians.

In a couple of places (I Cor and Romans) Paul talks about causing a brother to sin or stumble, that would have been more appropriate here (because using sex for evil is obviously a sin and any unwilling partner is being forced into something sinful).

I'm sorry for what happened to you. :cold::frown-new:

noonwitch
09-12-2012, 09:30 AM
I think the original article is wrong to state that pedophelia is a sexual orientation. It is a psychological disorder, but not one that is wholly a genetic condition.

Although the vast majority of children who were sexually abused grow up to not be pedophiles, pretty much every pedophile was molested as a child. So there's one contributing factor, that perhaps put the idea in the person's head to begin with. There are other factors that affect impulse control, both physical and psychological, like a head injury, or a personality disorder.

Modern psychologists will tell you that there is no way to treat pedophelia. Some tried in the 60s and 70s to no avail, but there is hope that if you catch a sex offender (you can't label someone a pedophile when they are raping children in their own age range) before puberty and treat him or her, you can change the behavior. Incarceration for life is the only way to deal with it short of the death penalty. Whoever came up with the idea that pedophelia is just another sexual orientation is trying to normalize it, which is sick. Or else they are trying to tie pedophelia to actual sexual orientation by gender to connect GLBT people with pedophiles, but in this case, I suspect the former.

m00
09-12-2012, 10:28 AM
Apache, he has no defense, he has a theory, a flawed, naive theory.

Moo, you can copy and paste your PM to me here if you so wish to explain your thinking and be done with it. I suspect you won't find any tolerance or acceptance to your view on this board. You can't compare it to acting on impulse. It's deliberate and manipulative. It's taking advantage of an innocent, UNCONSENTING child. IT's a mental illness. There is no use or benefit of these types of individuals in society.

What everyone seems to be jumping on is merely the point that if you institute the DP for sexual crimes (no matter how heinous) as a matter of policy, as opposed to LWOP, fewer of the victims will live. If molesting a child carries the same punishment as murder, molesters will start killing children because its harder to prosecute a crime with no witness. That's the argument for making it LWOP as opposed to a "bullet between the eyes."

It's insane and dishonest to somehow equate this with "defending" pedophilia. It's about protecting the victims from being murdered on top of everything else.

FlaGator
09-12-2012, 11:53 AM
I don't think that this...
is taken in the right context, as to the real meaning, of the verse. What I was taught, was that was meant to be the newborn in Christ, not literal children... (FlaGator?)


Don't anyone even think, for a second, that I accept, condone, or agree with pedophilia... I DO NOT, PERIOD!
As far as I'm concerned, let the sick bastards rot in a cesspool :livid:



So Nova, is what we've been saying sinking in yet? Or are you STILL in denial, that "gay-rights" are not a slippery slope?

Since Christ was using a child as the example I believe He was talking about literal children, but it could be applied to both.

Also you are correct about the slippery slope. Once one deviant behavior has been redefined as morally acceptable then the door has been opened for all of them. Each can make the case that they have been born with these desires and cannot defile their nature by ignoring their feelings

It is a sham and a lie.

FlaGator
09-12-2012, 11:59 AM
What everyone seems to be jumping on is merely the point that if you institute the DP for sexual crimes (no matter how heinous) as a matter of policy, as opposed to LWOP, fewer of the victims will live. If molesting a child carries the same punishment as murder, molesters will start killing children because its harder to prosecute a crime with no witness. That's the argument for making it LWOP as opposed to a "bullet between the eyes."

It's insane and dishonest to somehow equate this with "defending" pedophilia. It's about protecting the victims from being murdered on top of everything else.

While I don't agree with the death penalty for pedophiles (live in prison works for me), the same argument that you are making as been made for abolishing the life in prison as a punishment. In reality it does not affect the crime rate. People generally don't consider the consequences of their crime when they are committing them.

Hawkgirl
09-12-2012, 12:06 PM
What everyone seems to be jumping on is merely the point that if you institute the DP for sexual crimes (no matter how heinous) as a matter of policy, as opposed to LWOP, fewer of the victims will live. If molesting a child carries the same punishment as murder, molesters will start killing children because its harder to prosecute a crime with no witness. That's the argument for making it LWOP as opposed to a "bullet between the eyes."

It's insane and dishonest to somehow equate this with "defending" pedophilia. It's about protecting the victims from being murdered on top of everything else.


Your premise is flawed for one simple reason. Pedophiles are not in it for murder. I don't have the statistics, but I would say the vast majority of sexual crimes against children do not result in a murder. You saying that they would murder because of the punishment is absurd because their impulse is sexual sadism not homicide.

noonwitch
09-12-2012, 12:16 PM
What everyone seems to be jumping on is merely the point that if you institute the DP for sexual crimes (no matter how heinous) as a matter of policy, as opposed to LWOP, fewer of the victims will live. If molesting a child carries the same punishment as murder, molesters will start killing children because its harder to prosecute a crime with no witness. That's the argument for making it LWOP as opposed to a "bullet between the eyes."

It's insane and dishonest to somehow equate this with "defending" pedophilia. It's about protecting the victims from being murdered on top of everything else.


I don't think you are defending pedophiliac scumbags. I personally don't support the death penalty for any crime, including this. I think the better argument against it is that children will be more afraid to identify family members who abuse them because they are afraid that person will face the death penalty-they have mixed feelings for people who are also their fathers, uncles or cousins. Families will sometimes shun the victimized child for the perp, especially if the victim is a female and the perp is someone who is employed, or has some kind of "beloved" status within the family. We aren't talking about normal family dynamics here.


Additionally, there always have been and always will be some offenders who are more violent, and/or more sociopathic than others. Both have tended to kill their victims, whether to avoid identification (a sociopathic move) or during the course of the abuse (impulsive violence against a child who is fighting back, or ruptured internal organs from the abuse itself). The possibility of facing the death penalty for murder has never stopped them from killing their victims.

NJCardFan
09-12-2012, 12:22 PM
This whole thing is a confused. Let me break it down...


You probably can't change the fact pedophiles will always be attracted to children. But last I checked we don't send people to jail for thought crimes.


I take it your unfamiliar of something that is called Hate Crime legislation?

FlaGator
09-12-2012, 01:50 PM
Apache you're absolutely correct that the verse quoted doesn't literally mean children, it means young Christians.

In a couple of places (I Cor and Romans) Paul talks about causing a brother to sin or stumble, that would have been more appropriate here (because using sex for evil is obviously a sin and any unwilling partner is being forced into something sinful).

I'm sorry for what happened to you. :cold::frown-new:

In context


Mat 18:1 At that time the disciples came to Jesus, saying, "Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?"
Mat 18:2 And calling to him a child, he put him in the midst of them
Mat 18:3 and said, "Truly, I say to you, unless you turn and become like children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.
Mat 18:4 Whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven.
Mat 18:5 "Whoever receives one such child in my name receives me,
Mat 18:6 but whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone fastened around his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea.
Mat 18:7 "Woe to the world for temptations to sin! For it is necessary that temptations come, but woe to the one by whom the temptation comes!

At the time there were no young Christians for this to reference. However, Christ was speaking both literally about children and about those seeking the Kingdom of God (new and long time believers)and he demonstrated parallels between how they approach the sacred. Christ is telling us to be child like but not childish in our approach to God and that those who lure either a child or a believer to sin is condemning him or her self. There is no difference whether a person forces some to sin or lures (tempts) them in to sinning, they are still self condemned. Rape a child or talk them in to sex it makes no difference.

FlaGator
09-12-2012, 01:52 PM
Your premise is flawed for one simple reason. Pedophiles are not in it for murder. I don't have the statistics, but I would say the vast majority of sexual crimes against children do not result in a murder. You saying that they would murder because of the punishment is absurd because their impulse is sexual sadism not homicide.

What he is saying is that the pedophile would turn to murder in order to escape detection where as without the death penalty they would be hesitant to commit murder.

wasp69
09-12-2012, 02:14 PM
What everyone seems to be jumping on is merely the point that if you institute the DP for sexual crimes (no matter how heinous) as a matter of policy, as opposed to LWOP, fewer of the victims will live. If molesting a child carries the same punishment as murder, molesters will start killing children because its harder to prosecute a crime with no witness. That's the argument for making it LWOP as opposed to a "bullet between the eyes."

It's insane and dishonest to somehow equate this with "defending" pedophilia. It's about protecting the victims from being murdered on top of everything else.

Why don't you answer Apache?

txradioguy
09-12-2012, 02:22 PM
I take it your unfamiliar of something that is called Hate Crime legislation?

He is...but in his Liberaltarian mind...what we see as stopping a predator...m00 views as us intruding and impeding on a person's personal sex life.

wasp69
09-12-2012, 02:23 PM
I think the original article is wrong to state that pedophelia is a sexual orientation. It is a psychological disorder, but not one that is wholly a genetic condition.

Although the vast majority of children who were sexually abused grow up to not be pedophiles, pretty much every pedophile was molested as a child. So there's one contributing factor, that perhaps put the idea in the person's head to begin with. There are other factors that affect impulse control, both physical and psychological, like a head injury, or a personality disorder.

Modern psychologists will tell you that there is no way to treat pedophelia. Some tried in the 60s and 70s to no avail, but there is hope that if you catch a sex offender ... before puberty and treat him or her, you can change the behavior. Whoever came up with the idea that pedophelia is just another sexual orientation is trying to normalize it, which is sick.


Replace the bolded pedophile/pedophilia with homosexual/homosexuality and you will see where we were 30/40 years ago. Considering those that used your exact same words were right back then, it should be obvious that those same principles apply today.

Do you see the slippery slope that granting deviant behavior normality will lead to more of it?

m00
09-12-2012, 02:23 PM
Why don't you answer Apache?

What part didn't I answer? "Why are you defending these bastards?" Clearly, I'm not. I'm defending the position that punishment should be LWOP rather than DP, and this is specifically to protect the victim against being murdered.

m00
09-12-2012, 02:24 PM
What he is saying is that the pedophile would turn to murder in order to escape detection where as without the death penalty they would be hesitant to commit murder.

Thank you. Maybe I'm just horrible at explaining this.

wasp69
09-12-2012, 02:47 PM
What part didn't I answer? "Why are you defending these bastards?" Clearly, I'm not. I'm defending the position that punishment should be LWOP rather than DP, and this is specifically to protect the victim against being murdered.



Fair enough! Rock, please, don't ban him.... for this discussion...please?



OKAY m00, you let me know why I have had to suffer through decades of shame and and guilt and what if's and shoulda beens...wondering how others view me...

YOU TELL me why 5 minutes of oral sex is worth my standing, in society... YOU tell me why, I had adults GRILL me for MONTHS, for something I should've felt "lucky" about... the trial was 2 weeks! She got 2 YEARS! I WAS 8! 8! DO YOU GET THAT? 8 YEARS OLD!!!!!!


MY LIFE WAS CUT OFF!

I went from 8 to 32 in the blink-of-an-eye!

And here you are talking about the Death Penalty!


Who suffered more m00?


Me, or her?!

http://www.conservativeunderground.com/forum505/showthread.php?52009-Gawker-Pedophilia-Is-a-Sexual-Orientation&p=526145&viewfull=1#post526145

FlaGator
09-12-2012, 03:38 PM
Thank you. Maybe I'm just horrible at explaining this.

I am against the death penalty for most things. Really heinous murders and crimes against humanity. Generally I believe that life behind bars with no parole is a valid punishment for most crimes. I believe that the Lord gave us the right to take another person's life in cases of murder but He didn't say we had to use it. When Cain killed Abel the Lord could have given him the death penalty but He instead gave him permanent exile.

It's strange but justice seems to have a way of happening all by itself.

I have some inside information about the fate of child rapist and murderer John Cooey and I can tell you that what he experienced in prison was far worse than the death penalty. He is said to have died of rectal cancer but I have it from good sources that he died from bodily trauma focused particularly in the rectal area. I'm not saying that I agree with what happened to him but the Lord has a way of making sure that justice is served... some times in this live but always in the life beyond.

noonwitch
09-12-2012, 04:04 PM
Replace the bolded pedophile/pedophilia with homosexual/homosexuality and you will see where we were 30/40 years ago. Considering those that used your exact same words were right back then, it should be obvious that those same principles apply today.

Do you see the slippery slope that granting deviant behavior normality will lead to more of it?


When consenting adults of the same gender have sex with each other, there is no victim.

When a pedophile acts on his desire to have sex with children, the child is always victimized. There's no slippery slope. The laws in the US are very clear about this, and the sentencing guidelines in place in most states reflect how seriously we as a society are about this type of crime.

The term sexual orientation was created to describe gender-related sexual preferences, and to remove homosexuality from the DSM as a mental disorder. You may still think it is a disorder, but the American Psychiatric Association does not share your view.

wasp69
09-12-2012, 04:25 PM
When consenting adults of the same gender have sex with each other, there is no victim.

When a pedophile acts on his desire to have sex with children, the child is always victimized. There's no slippery slope. The laws in the US are very clear about this, and the sentencing guidelines in place in most states reflect how seriously we as a society are about this type of crime.

The term sexual orientation was created to describe gender-related sexual preferences, and to remove homosexuality from the DSM as a mental disorder. You may still think it is a disorder, but the American Psychiatric Association does not share your view.

You completely missed the point, didn't you?

Unreconstructed Reb
09-12-2012, 05:16 PM
There's no slippery slope.

The slippery slope is the acceptance of deviant behaviour which is, quite frankly, the 'progressive' goal.

Hawkgirl
09-12-2012, 06:38 PM
What he is saying is that the pedophile would turn to murder in order to escape detection where as without the death penalty they would be hesitant to commit murder.


I understand exactly what he is saying, but kids are still murdered regardless of the DP by pedophiles or prostitution/porn traffickers.

Hawkgirl
09-12-2012, 06:47 PM
This whole thing is a confused. Let me break it down...


You probably can't change the fact pedophiles will always be attracted to children. But last I checked we don't send people to jail for thought crimes.
You CAN correct behavior, and you CAN fairly punish behaviour. Last I checked what separates human beings from other animals is the ability to control our instincts.
Whether or not pedophilia is a sexual orientation is immaterial, other than the degree to which it helps society correct and prevent individuals from acting out their sexual urges.
All the above being said, we should probably do what we can to limit the abuse of all inmates at the hands of other inmates. If the goal is to correct the behaviour, this isn't helping.



m00, clarify this post and leave the death penalty out of it.

wasp69
09-13-2012, 10:40 AM
Let's give this proper juxtaposition with the history of the queer movement.



The term sexual orientation was created to describe gender-related sexual preferences, and to remove homosexuality from the DSM as a mental disorder.

There's no slippery slope.


So, the American Psychiatric Association made a political decision to remove homosexuality as a mental disorder, normalize sexual deviancy, and you don't see the slippery slope.

Wow...

Where does it end, noonwitch? It really doesn't take that much of a leap to use history and manipulation to add pedophilia as "sexual orientation". Just like homosexuals, pedophiles cannot be made to not be attracted to children and all it will take is another group of "Young Turk" psychiatrists, sympathetic to "social issues of the day", who decide they need to reform the APA from the inside just like they did in the early 1970s. Articles like this are just the start.

Liberalism fucked up the APA in the 1970s, noonwitch, just like it fucked everything else up in this country since then. If the grey haired liberals aren't shoved out and replaced with people who are more interested in actual science than politics and social reform, you can bet your lib ass that the next bunch who get the blessing from the APA will be the child molesters. There is, after all, historical precedence.

Stoic
09-13-2012, 10:59 AM
Unless we stop it, the time will come when pedophilia is "okay." And when that happens, just like with homosexuality, anyone who speaks out against it will be charged with hate crimes. Once again, we will have let the justice system itself be perverted to serve evil.

Also, interestingly enough, look at the correlations between homosexuality and pedophilia. In A LOT of cases, they go hand-in-hand.

noonwitch
09-13-2012, 01:48 PM
Let's give this proper juxtaposition with the history of the queer movement.



So, the American Psychiatric Association made a political decision to remove homosexuality as a mental disorder, normalize sexual deviancy, and you don't see the slippery slope.

Wow...

Where does it end, noonwitch? It really doesn't take that much of a leap to use history and manipulation to add pedophilia as "sexual orientation". Just like homosexuals, pedophiles cannot be made to not be attracted to children and all it will take is another group of "Young Turk" psychiatrists, sympathetic to "social issues of the day", who decide they need to reform the APA from the inside just like they did in the early 1970s. Articles like this are just the start.

Liberalism fucked up the APA in the 1970s, noonwitch, just like it fucked everything else up in this country since then. If the grey haired liberals aren't shoved out and replaced with people who are more interested in actual science than politics and social reform, you can bet your lib ass that the next bunch who get the blessing from the APA will be the child molesters. There is, after all, historical precedence.


You never addressed my point about the difference between a gender issue sexual orientation and pedophelia being that the latter leaves victims in it's wake.

The APA did not remove homosexuality from the DSM for political reasons, they removed it because it does not meet the modern criteria for a psychological disorder. It was legalized by the courts because sexual relations between consenting adults, regardless of the genders involved, is not an act that leaves victims in it's wake.

You don't like it because you are prejudiced agains gays, and you want a reason to demonize them to the degree that pedophiles are rightfully demonized. But pedophiles are also sociopaths-anti social personality disorder, to use the DSM diagnosistic terminology. Do you think that all people who are gay are sociopaths? Most people, professionals and lay people, do not believe that. It would be irrational and just plain hateful to believe that.

TVDOC
09-13-2012, 02:18 PM
The APA did not remove homosexuality from the DSM for political reasons, they removed it because it does not meet the modern criteria for a psychological disorder. It was legalized by the courts because sexual relations between consenting adults, regardless of the genders involved, is not an act that leaves victims in it's wake.


Bullshit.......A member of my family is a psychiatrist, and sat on the DSM 4 committee, when the document was drafted......the exclusion of homosexuality from the list of emotional disorders was purely politics. A good portion of the perceived role (among the members) of the APA at the time was to "mainstream" certain behaviors deemed relatively harmless to society, and difficult to treat, in order to minimize the "social stigma" attached to them, which the majority of them believed was "within acceptable behavioral limits".......a purely arbitrary criteria, with no scientific studies or evidence to back up the decision.

CAVEAT: I don't consider psychiatry to be a "science".......it is a psuedo-science.

There were no theraputic considerations at all at that time.......it's also interesting to note that a significant porportion of the committee members were homosexuals themselves.......talk about conflict of interest.

This entire effort is tantamount to the AMA forming a committee, and announcing that breast cancer is no risk to women, in order to lighten their patient load, and leave a few more days open during the week for golf.

Homosexuality is, and always be deviant behavior, regardless of what the DSM states........it's abnormal, and we can certainly debate whether it has genetic or life-experience roots (or both), and whether it can be successfully treated, but it cannot, by any stretch of the imagination be categorized as "normal". To the extent that both homosexuality and pedophilia are deviant (sexual) behaviors, they have similiar psychological roots.

ADDITIONAL CAVEAT: I have no personal axe to grind with homosexuals, so long as they keep their activities personal, live productive lives, and don't attempt to redefine societies institutions, or publicly establish their entire identities by their sexual preference.

doc

FlaGator
09-13-2012, 02:59 PM
I understand exactly what he is saying, but kids are still murdered regardless of the DP by pedophiles or prostitution/porn traffickers.

That is what I replied when I address his view.

wasp69
09-13-2012, 03:28 PM
You never addressed my point about the difference between a gender issue sexual orientation and pedophelia being that the latter leaves victims in it's wake.


Because it was irrelevant.



The APA did not remove homosexuality from the DSM for political reasons, they removed it because it does not meet the modern criteria for a psychological disorder.


Really?



The young turks were all psychiatrists, all members of the APA and all liberal-minded easterners who had decided to reform the American Psychiatric Association from the inside. Specifically they had decided to replace all the grey-haired conservatives who ran the organization with a new breed of psychiatrist; more sensitive to the social issues of the day with liberal opinions on Kent State, Vietnam, feminism. They figured that once they got this new breed into office they could fundamentally transform American psychiatry. And one of the things this group was keen to transform was American psychiatry’s approach to homosexuality.

http://www.mindofmodernity.com/not-sick-the-1973-removal-of-homosexuality-from-the-dsm

Guess it didn't hurt that the president elect of the APA at the time the DSM was changed, Dr John Spiegel, was a homosexual, either, huh? Or that there had been activist agitation by the homosexuals in the APA prior to 1973, would there?



You don't like it because you are prejudiced agains gays, and you want a reason to demonize them to the degree that pedophiles are rightfully demonized. Most people, professionals and lay people, do not believe that. It would be irrational and just plain hateful to believe that.


What is it with you libs and your lack of rational thinking? You make a ton of assumptions based on your own pre programmed, knee jerk responses to anything that does not jibe with your feelings. I don't "hate" anyone nor do I seek to demonize those that do a damned good job of it on their own when they decide to flaunt and argue in favor of it in public.

Despite your attempts to drag this off of the original premise of the thread, I'll try and break the context down for you:

1. Those who pushed normalization of homosexuality as a sexual orientation were able to make the change through agitation and political pressure. The fact that it is not natural and is deviant behavior was rejected in favor of "social issues of the day".

2. Because of the history of activists seeking change through agitation/infiltration and the determination that their particular deviancy cannot be "cured", there is precedence for pedophiles to start seeking their particular perversion as a sexual orientation.

3. There is a slippery slope and we are on it. The line should have been drawn and not crossed in 1973 so we don't have to hear this bullshit that has been pointed out in the OP. Once we accepted one type of deviant behavior as "normal", the door is open for others to try and run through.

Get it now?

I will never look at biologically deviant behavior as natural and I will not accept it being put in front of children as natural. My wife and I having sex is natural - do you think it's a good idea to display that in front of my children?




But pedophiles are also sociopaths-anti social personality disorder, to use the DSM diagnosistic terminology. Do you think that all people who are gay are sociopaths?


Spare me this "when did you stop beating your wife" crap, huh? It doesn't work on me.

noonwitch
09-13-2012, 04:54 PM
Because it was irrelevant.



Really?


http://www.mindofmodernity.com/not-sick-the-1973-removal-of-homosexuality-from-the-dsm

Guess it didn't hurt that the president elect of the APA at the time the DSM was changed, Dr John Spiegel, was a homosexual, either, huh? Or that there had been activist agitation by the homosexuals in the APA prior to 1973, would there?



What is it with you libs and your lack of rational thinking? You make a ton of assumptions based on your own pre programmed, knee jerk responses to anything that does not jibe with your feelings. I don't "hate" anyone nor do I seek to demonize those that do a damned good job of it on their own when they decide to flaunt and argue in favor of it in public.

Despite your attempts to drag this off of the original premise of the thread, I'll try and break the context down for you:

1. Those who pushed normalization of homosexuality as a sexual orientation were able to make the change through agitation and political pressure. The fact that it is not natural and is deviant behavior was rejected in favor of "social issues of the day".

2. Because of the history of activists seeking change through agitation/infiltration and the determination that their particular deviancy cannot be "cured", there is precedence for pedophiles to start seeking their particular perversion as a sexual orientation.

3. There is a slippery slope and we are on it. The line should have been drawn and not crossed in 1973 so we don't have to hear this bullshit that has been pointed out in the OP. Once we accepted one type of deviant behavior as "normal", the door is open for others to try and run through.

Get it now?

I will never look at biologically deviant behavior as natural and I will not accept it being put in front of children as natural. My wife and I having sex is natural - do you think it's a good idea to display that in front of my children?




Spare me this "when did you stop beating your wife" crap, huh? It doesn't work on me.


How is the question of victimization irrelevant when the original discussion was about pedophelia being considered just another sexual orientation? Deviant behavior is not necessarily a psychological disorder. It just means "abnormal" which isn't any more of a diagnosis, it's a description based on the assumption that there is such a thing as "normal", whether it's describing sexuality or other issues.

Pedophelia is not a sexual orientation, it is a sexual attraction to children. To act on it is criminal, as it should be.

noonwitch
09-13-2012, 05:01 PM
Bullshit.......A member of my family is a psychiatrist, and sat on the DSM 4 committee, when the document was drafted......the exclusion of homosexuality from the list of emotional disorders was purely politics. A good portion of the perceived role (among the members) of the APA at the time was to "mainstream" certain behaviors deemed relatively harmless to society, and difficult to treat, in order to minimize the "social stigma" attached to them, which the majority of them believed was "within acceptable behavioral limits".......a purely arbitrary criteria, with no scientific studies or evidence to back up the decision.

CAVEAT: I don't consider psychiatry to be a "science".......it is a psuedo-science.

There were no theraputic considerations at all at that time.......it's also interesting to note that a significant porportion of the committee members were homosexuals themselves.......talk about conflict of interest.

This entire effort is tantamount to the AMA forming a committee, and announcing that breast cancer is no risk to women, in order to lighten their patient load, and leave a few more days open during the week for golf.

Homosexuality is, and always be deviant behavior, regardless of what the DSM states........it's abnormal, and we can certainly debate whether it has genetic or life-experience roots (or both), and whether it can be successfully treated, but it cannot, by any stretch of the imagination be categorized as "normal". To the extent that both homosexuality and pedophilia are deviant (sexual) behaviors, they have similiar psychological roots.

ADDITIONAL CAVEAT: I have no personal axe to grind with homosexuals, so long as they keep their activities personal, live productive lives, and don't attempt to redefine societies institutions, or publicly establish their entire identities by their sexual preference.

doc


Bouncy, bouncy.

Your relative who allegedly sat on the DSM IV committee had nothing to do with removing homosexuality from the manual. It was removed long before that edition was
published. I have a DSM III-R, published in the mid-80s, and homosexuality is not listed in that one as a psychological disorder.

TVDOC
09-13-2012, 06:03 PM
Bouncy, bouncy.

Your relative who allegedly sat on the DSM IV committee had nothing to do with removing homosexuality from the manual. It was removed long before that edition was
published. I have a DSM III-R, published in the mid-80s, and homosexuality is not listed in that one as a psychological disorder.

Again bullshit.....nowhere in my remarks did I state that my relative was responsible for removing it from the DSM 4, only that he participated, and that its removal was purely politics, and there is still (to this day) heated debate about it, there have been firm concerted efforts on behalf of many of the committee to reinstate that diagnosis since it was removed. Political correctness has always prevailed.

Political correctness is not medicine......

doc

Gina
09-13-2012, 06:36 PM
Bouncy, bouncy.



Oh no you di'int!

http://static4.fjcdn.com/comments/oh+_247c7e6cac17bcc3c74c8b5466306ddd.jpg

Hawkgirl
09-13-2012, 08:57 PM
I will admit it, I know gays who are conservative...and they don't bother me as much as libs do. Except for someone I know very well, who has been a conservative all her life, but has recently started voting for Liberals because of the one single issue that affects her, which is gay marriage. She has been with her partner for 30 years, so I can sympathize with her view. But that doesn't stop me from urging her not the be single issue voter...but I know she will vote for Obama, especially since he recently came out in favor of gay "marriage". If they want the same rights as married couples, I don't see why they can't be satisfied with civil unions. Why the need to be married (a religious sacrament) is beyond me when you can receive the same benefits with civil unions.

Saying that, I don't believe it is normal behavior. It IS still deviant no matter how you slice it, it is an evolutionary dead end, it goes against human nature and multiplication of the species. When gays can figure out how to procreate without taking the parts of the opposite sex, then I will perhaps consider it normal behavior. But honestly, I don't care what people do in their sex lives, my issue is their "look at me, I'm GAY, and you have to LIKE it" that's hard to swallow, no pun.

Apache
09-13-2012, 10:38 PM
m00, you have ignored the subject... Thank you for showing the confidence of your convictions. Also...thank you for facing a victim of such relations... COWARD!

Gina
09-13-2012, 11:10 PM
But honestly, I don't care what people do in their sex lives, my issue is their "look at me, I'm GAY, and you have to LIKE it" that's hard to swallow, no pun.

Well said!

wasp69
09-14-2012, 09:48 AM
How is the question of victimization irrelevant when the original discussion was about pedophelia being considered just another sexual orientation?


Easy, see below.



Despite your attempts to drag this off of the original premise of the thread, I'll try and break the context down for you:

1. Those who pushed normalization of homosexuality as a sexual orientation were able to make the change through agitation and political pressure. The fact that it is not natural and is deviant behavior was rejected in favor of "social issues of the day".

2. Because of the history of activists seeking change through agitation/infiltration and the determination that their particular deviancy cannot be "cured", there is precedence for pedophiles to start seeking their particular perversion as a sexual orientation.

3. There is a slippery slope and we are on it. The line should have been drawn and not crossed in 1973 so we don't have to hear this bullshit that has been pointed out in the OP. Once we accepted one type of deviant behavior as "normal", the door is open for others to try and run through.

Get it now?




Deviant behavior is not necessarily a psychological disorder.


Deviant behavior is not a psychological disorder? Noonwitch, why are you allowed anywhere near children? Seriously, if you can't see the utter absurdity of that statement, I question your ability to make rational decisions.



It just means "abnormal" which isn't any more of a diagnosis, it's a description based on the assumption that there is such a thing as "normal", whether it's describing sexuality or other issues.


So there are no standards for civilization and society, just whatever you want it to mean? You're kidding, right? Isn't this the kind of thinking that has us in a place where child molesters feel they have a justifiable complaint that their perversion is "natural"? Do you not see this? Has liberalism so blinded you that you can't make rational, reasoned connections when they have been put right in front of you?

Incidentally, it's not "abnormal", it's "unnatural". Many things not considered "normal" are perfectly rational while unnatural is, well, unnatural.



Pedophelia is not a sexual orientation, it is a sexual attraction to children.


Neither is homosexuality. Homosexuality is a sexual attraction to members of the same sex, not a sexual orientation.