Pedophilia - The Next Taboo To Fall?

[Terraceth]

From a web-site with an agenda.

The website with the agenda is merely reporting on the paper.

OTOH: most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation"... according to the APA and related bodies around the world.

Okay. How is that in contradiction from the conclusions of the paper at all? In the first paragraph of Section One (Sexual Orientation) from it:

though sexual orientation is not a choice, neither is there scientific evidence for the view that sexual orientation is a fixed and innate biological property.

I know the thing is long so I can understand someone not wanting to read the whole thing, as it's rather lengthy, but at least read the first paragraph of the relevant section before dismissing the whole thing for supposedly contradicting a claim it doesn't actually contradict.

[Cow Poke]

The website with the agenda is merely reporting on the paper.

But, with liberals, if Fox News actual plays a recording of Hillary saying "I'm dying of cancer" (God forbid) the liberals would say "from a web-site with an agenda "

[Starlight]

The website with the agenda is merely reporting on the paper.

The paper itself is published by a conservative think tank with an agenda, seemingly by a person with an agenda, and it has not been peer-reviewed.

We hope to show here that, though sexual orientation is not a choice, neither is there scientific evidence for the view that sexual orientation is a fixed and innate biological property.

As a scientist I'd have zero problem with nuance if that is what I thought they were going for. But in practice this article was funded by a conservative think tank for propaganda purposes. I judge that a little bit of nuance within the article itself is just part of their larger strategy to then simply cite the headline of the article in news articles and on discussion forums and attempt to ignore any nuance within.

Historically we've seen religious conservatives having three main motivations for arguing that sexual orientation is not innate:

1) They want to believe that being gay is morally wrong, and they feel an element of choice needs to be involved in any wrong action, so they want being gay to be a choice in order to feel justified in their condemnations of it.

2) They want to endorse sexual orientation change therapy. So they make up a theory out of whole cloth like "boys who grow up with a poor relationship with their fathers become gay". A therapist can then be brought in to treat the gay men and help them cope with the childhood trauma that caused them to be gay - and in the usual cases where the gay man grew up with a perfectly healthy relationship with his father the therapist can help the man to re-conceptualize and reinterpret that relationship in creative ways and help the gay man come to the realization that deep down he must have been holding a latent hatred of his father or that something fundamental was in fact missing from their relationship etc.

3) To endorse particular conservative parenting styles. e.g. that the father and mother need model their social gender roles to their children in the early years so that the child grows up knowing the difference between a man and a woman.

None of these motivations have proven to be justified over the last few decades. Nearly all gay people report having no sense of choice in their sexual orientation. Most sexual orientation change therapies have closed down due to their failures to achieve any results. And no parenting style has been successfully linked to homosexuality.

[seer]

[Starlight]

Seer you're conflating actions and attractions. People's sexual attraction to children is outside of their conscious choice, but their decision to act on it is clearly a choice they are responsible for.

[seer]

Seer you're conflating actions and attractions. People's sexual attraction to children is outside of their conscious choice, but their decision to act on it is clearly a choice they are responsible for.

Was Tass speaking of attraction or action?

[Starlight]

Was Tass speaking of attraction or action?

Attraction.

He said "If you have made no conscious choice to be gay". The word "gay" refers to sexual orientation - i.e. attraction - not actions. And he's talking about it not being a conscious choice - obviously all actions not done while under the influence of alcohol/drugs are conscious choices.

[Tassman]

then you can hardly be held responsible for being a child molester.

[Leonhard]

Conflation of attraction and action.

[seer]

Except we used to hold homosexuals responsible for their actions too because it was morally damaging to the social fabric of society.

[seer]

Conflation of attraction and action.

Leonhard do you believe that homosexuals should abstain from sex?

[Leonhard]

Leonhard do you believe that homosexuals should abstain from sex?

I believe anyone not in a committed marriage should abstain from sex.

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/sh...n-for-Leonhard

[seer]

I believe anyone not in a committed marriage should abstain from sex.

http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/sh...n-for-Leonhard

OK, and I see by your link that you don't support gay marriage either. So it is life long abstinence.

[Leonhard]

OK, and I see by your link that you don't support gay marriage either. So it is life long abstinence.

Technically speaking its life-long continence.

Abstinence is where you're voluntarily avoiding something as a penance or to mortify your senses, such as the eating of meat on fridays. And you ain't taking my grilled chicken from me.

[Starlight]

Except we used to hold homosexuals responsible for their actions too because it was morally damaging to the social fabric of society.

And then people realized that it wasn't at all damaging to the social fabric, and realized in fact that preventing Fred and George getting married to each other was damaging to Fred and George, and any kids they might have, and any women that we forced to them to marry instead.

A few months ago I talked to a gay guy in his mid 30s who'd been religiously encouraged into a heterosexual marriage at a young age as part of a cure for his gayness. Now he has 4 children and his marriage has (unsurprisingly) fallen apart. It breaks my heart to see what conservatives have been doing to the lives of these people.

One of the first openly gay guys I ever met had fled here from South America after his family's church had performed an exorcism on him after discovering he was gay.

But I'm sure you can creatively explain how causing children to flee their parents, encouraging marriages between people who don't love each other, or parents kicking their gay children out of their homes, is actually all part of having a good social fabric in society.