Is having sex with children necessarily wrong? (2 Viewers)

[philphie]

But that would apply to almost everything a child does; from choosing a school, a sport, friends ect. In all these cases adults have a large role in deciding things for children, and perhaps adults will decide wrongly.

Why do we only consider it a problem that children may not fully understand their choices or may be influenced by adults when it comes to sex? Could it be part of western culture's general hysteria about sex?

who has the higher chance of being right? an adult, or a child?

 

[Lukybear]

But also strictly reasoning, we all shoudl accept that a majority of under 18s are unable to make decisions. It is better therefore for the economy, for goverment to stereotype that all under 18ths are unable to make rational decisions via a legislation then consider who is actually adult with case by case exammination.

But that being said, there are something inherently wrong. Despite cultulre murder is innately wrong. And it was outlawed so, in the ancient times, before any considerations of its rationality existed. We just knew, through our conscience.

 

[A High Way Man]

I am so fucking bored with all the hypothetical libertarian threads.

Can the mods please make one giant hypothetical libertarian sticky.

 

[Cazic]

The will to protect children is pretty damn innate, and I'd wager that will, as opposed to hard scientific evidence, is the source of paedophilia laws (and likely of the majority of responses in this thread so far). Evidence of that is the fact that paedophilia has been looked down upon to some degree for much of recorded history, and the fact that people rarely hold up scientific studies when discussing it today. Please note, I don't think all societies have always looked down upon it, in fact I think it's been far from universal for most of recorded history, and I don't think any society has ever looked down upon it to the degree that most western societies look down upon it today.

I don't think the words "right" or "wrong" can be used with respect to sex with children, though I think the words can be used to describe the circumstances surrounding the act. Do I think sex with children is ok when it's two fifteen year olds involved in the act? Sure. Do I think sex with children is not ok when a 60-year-old guy lathers his dick up with jelly and convinces some kid there is a cream filling inside if they suck good enough? Sure. So where do we draw the line? The hell if I know, but I think the consequences of being wrong about it are serious enough that I'm happy with the status quo until such time that scientific evidence shows no serious effect in certain circumstances, as opposed to waiting for scientific evidence to show there is a serious effect in certain circumstance before we get legal about those circumstances.

 

[Lukybear]

The will to protect children is pretty damn innate, and I'd wager that will, as opposed to hard scientific evidence, is the source of paedophilia laws (and likely of the majority of responses in this thread so far). Evidence of that is the fact that paedophilia has been looked down upon to some degree for much of recorded history, and the fact that people rarely hold up scientific studies when discussing it today. Please note, I don't think all societies have always looked down upon it, in fact I think it's been far from universal for most of recorded history, and I don't think any society has ever looked down upon it to the degree that most western societies look down upon it today.

Its true tho, there needs to be socialiogical studies of the effects of sex before marriage, pedophilia, etc...

Otherwise, we are merely discussing hypothetical events, a construction of the mind.

 

[Riet]

Sex before marriage is healthy and normal.

 

[John McCain]

It's not inconceivable it could be entirely initiated by, and beneficial for, a child. Many pre-teen children explore consensual sexual interaction, especially with siblings.

 

[incentivation]

Why do we only consider it a problem that children may not fully understand their choices or may be influenced by adults when it comes to sex? Could it be part of western culture's general hysteria about sex?

I think it has a lot to do with, as you mentioned, the potential for psychological and emotional harm from incorrect decision making with regard to sexual activity.

Nature itself delimits a time frame from which sexual activity is feasible through our sexual development. This of course varies from child to child. Some are not capable until 14 years of age, others are as young as 10. As human beings, the general consensus of the innocence of the child is derived through developmental immaturity; emotionally, mentally, physically and sexually. Ultimately, these natural phenomena have defined the very notion 'childhood'.

The question is more contentious in considering children of the age of 10 upwards, during the ages when their sexual desires start to come to fruition. However, I would say that the harm principle is the guiding factor during this period; and rightfully so. An adult can decide about the education, diet and sporting habits of their child. However these are generally decisions made to assist in the development of the child, and are made with the best interests of the child in mind.

Foisting sexual activity on a child incapable of making the decision of their own accord is particularly self serving on the part of the adult. It does nothing to benefit the child, and is generally undertaken to satisfy the urges of the adult.

 

[aussie-boy]

Many married Ancient Greek men had young boys/teens to screw in addition to their wives.

It wouldn't have physically hurt the boys badly, and as the boys became men they would get their own boys to screw.

I don't see how a bit of physical pain at first could lead to massive mental problems when the behaviour would have been accepted by all.

 

[Planck]

Its true tho, there needs to be socialiogical studies of the effects of sex before marriage, pedophilia, etc...

Sex before marriage, say, anything that happened before marriage was invented?

 

[strasiotto]

It's not inconceivable it could be entirely initiated by, and beneficial for, a child. Many pre-teen children explore consensual sexual interaction, especially with siblings.

Lol, just reminds me of some themes in brave new world.

It depends on the classification of 'child'. As said before a child is basically when a person is not fully devloped physically, mentally or emotionally. Its easy enough to tell when a person is physically mature, but mentally or emotionally are harder to gauge, which is why we lable an 'adult' as someone above the age of 18, which is a point when a majority of people are supposed to be mature. Of course some people may be compeltely mature at 14, or may take until 30, but you go for the large majority.

And, as said before, a person without a full mental and emotional capacity is unlikely to make the 'right' decision as to what they do. This is why , until a person is of a sufficent age, we have parents and guardians to take care of us and make the decisions which could effect our lives most. By this reasoning the only case in which it is acceptable to have sexual relations with a child is with parental consent- but as, said before, humans have a massive desire to protect their children, this is unlikely to happen. And if a parent would consent, under most circumstances they would not be protecting their children, causing them possible harm, especially if a child does not wish for the act to happen. A parent, in most of these cases is unsuited to the role of caring for children.

Personally, my belief is that sexual relations with children is wrong, the only exception I would take to that is that of two kids of roughly the same age and decelopement.

Are these just ideas forced on me by society? Maybe. But does this mean that these ideas are wrong just because I've been taught them? Probably not. Its true that some social conventions are not right, but I'm willing to bet in most cases they are.

 

[sombrero]

while the child's mind isn't developed fully (i.e. Mentally and emotionally) they can not properly give consent to someone who has a fully developed mind.

+1

 

[Lukybear]

Sex before marriage is healthy and normal.

Wheres the rigiours scientific treatment of this hypothesis. I see increased divorce rates, adultery aglore and the becoming of putrid fetishes (necrophilia). Not that there is a direct linkage between sex before marriages and these things.

All of which are hypothics, nothing concrete.

 

[Lukybear]

Personally, my belief is that sexual relations with children is wrong, the only exception I would take to that is that of two kids of roughly the same age and decelopement.

Thats such a cop out. The rationality for the illegalisation of sex underage was due to undeveloped mind of teens as so forth, leading to irrational and consequently harmful descisions.

If theres two kids, of underage, and assumed undermaturity, there is TWICE, the change of damage occuring. That dosent make underage sex between teens ok.

All of your contempt for underage sex with adults, or pedophilia, comes alone from disgust. And that stems for the deep innate sense of conscience that exist within all of us.

 

[Israel No1]

Well Muhammad was sexually assaulting a 6 year old child. So if you approve of such vile acts then one must assume that you approve of Muhammad teaching and sympathize with the terrorist.

 

[ClockworkSoldier]

People wouldn't be posting downright "No" if they had been socially conditioned in another way.

 

[Israel No1]

People wouldn't be posting downright "No" if they had been socially conditioned in another way.

The Talmud specifically says NO to having sex with children. This is not being conditioned but being enlightened.

 

[Lukybear]

No one here is actually promoting such acts. The hypocrisy here however, is staggering. No one can be truly free of their innate conscience. And its disgusting how these people, are using liberty to devaste our innate nature.

 

[ClockworkSoldier]

The Talmud specifically says NO to having sex with children. This is not being conditioned but being enlightened.

Religion is a facet of social conditioning. Religion is what dictated the taboo of having sex with children.

 

[Ms. BRIGHTSIDE]

Wheres the rigiours scientific treatment of this hypothesis. I see increased divorce rates, adultery aglore and the becoming of putrid fetishes (necrophilia). Not that there is a direct linkage between sex before marriages and these things.

All of which are hypothics, nothing concrete.

So you're asking him for evidence.
Then stating something.
Then saying there is no evidence supporting this statement.
Is this right?