Total Posts:250|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

In defense of pedophillia

NiqashMotawadi3
Posts: 1,895
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2014 6:15:50 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
There seems to be a repeated claim in the forums that pedophilia is immoral. I would like to argue that pedophilia could be morally justified in some exceptional cases.

It is essential to make a preemption before I begin arguing that some members here might go for name-calling and mud-throwing, much like journalists do, perhaps because that is an easy way to degrade the other person as that would put them in an uncomfortable position where they are expected to defend themselves after being called an "Islamophobe", "anti-semite" or even a "pedophile". Therefore, I would like to clarify that I'm not a "pedophile" or even pro-pedophile. However, I'm convinced that I can make a reasonable case that not all instances of pedophilia are immoral.

For instance, let us assume that a 12 year-old prodigy called Ethan exists. Ethan is much like all child prodigies, say Eliezer Yudkowsky, in the sense that he has Exceptionally High SAT and LSAT scores. In other words, he is an intelligent individual who is very knowledgeable in the fields of mathematics, logic, decision-making and advanced rationality.

Ethan is a part of an Ivy League institution and since he is a prodigy in Mathematics and Logic, he is being taught by a brilliant Mathematics teacher called Veronica who is 40 years old. Ethen has a secret crush on his teacher, and has decided that he wants her to be with him. He finds her intelligent, sweet, creative and interesting, as opposed to girls his age and slightly older who seem very mundane, naive and boring.

Ethan hates to be called "immature" and always tries to behave maturely. His father is his only parent but he is depressed and unemployed, and so he spends most of his time either drunk or sleeping, and so Ethan from a young age has taken upon himself all the house's responsibilities that do not just involve house chores, but also include taking care of his younger brother John, who he has basically raised after his mother's death. He even works in his uncle's farm to make enough money to buy anti-depressants and alcohol for his father.

Veronica has only had one boyfriend in her whole life; her childhood love when she was in the fourth grade, who she couldn't forget all those years, especially because he died of cancer although he promised that he would make it out of the hospital bed right before the fourth grade ended. She is a very self-preserved woman but something about Ethan makes him very charming. He does look like her childhood love, but she also finds him very intelligent, thought-provoking and innocent, as opposed to all the mature men she has met in life, who she finds revolting and vulgar.

That is to say, it is possible to have a 12 year-old kid who is very intelligent and mature(In Ethan's case, he has work experience and independence at a young age, in addition to a deep understanding of decision-making). He is rightfully more mature and intelligent than the majority of adult males Miss Veronica knows. If he lacks anything, it is general experience in relationships, but so do many virgin or anti-social adults who marry or get into relationships.

The only argument I see against a relationship between Miss Veronica (40 yrs old) and Ethan (12 yrs old), would be something like, "Eww. Imagine them in bed together." This is the same argument that was used against homosexuals, and simply an appeal to the social norms of the majority.

In summary, Ethan has the following qualifications to be in a relationship:

1- He is very intelligent and rational. (High SAT and LSAT scores)

2- He is very mature. He even takes care of his own father and his younger brother.

3- He has a genuine, romantic interest in Miss Veronica.

Now let us take Vic for an example. Vic is a 45 year-old backward hick who has never been responsible in his life. He has a low IQ, and he thinks that Miss Veronica should marry him.

I would like an argument from those against pedophilia why Veronica being with Ethan is immoral? And if so, if they would prefer if Veronica was with Vic over her being with Ethan, although that is clearly not the only alternative?

Moreover, if the objections are all arguments from lack of maturity, I would like to know what makes a person mature. Is it just age? And how is Ethan not mature?

Thanks for reading,
No TL:DRs Available.
YYW
Posts: 36,249
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2014 6:17:15 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Oh wow... this is fvcking brilliant. I guess DDO is now the place for this kind of sh!t.

Good job, Bluesteel!

*slow claps*
Tsar of DDO
YYW
Posts: 36,249
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2014 6:19:22 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/5/2014 6:17:20 AM, Zaradi wrote:
inb4 all hell breaks loose.

I just... can't even believe this. I can't even believe that someone posted this on the main page. But, I guess since he knows he's among people like BlueSteel who welcome it, why the hell not?
Tsar of DDO
YYW
Posts: 36,249
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2014 6:22:03 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/5/2014 6:17:20 AM, Zaradi wrote:
inb4 all hell breaks loose.

This is what you all wanted, right?
Tsar of DDO
Oromagi
Posts: 857
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2014 6:44:29 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
The only argument I see against a relationship between Miss Veronica (40 yrs old) and Ethan (12 yrs old), would be something like, "Eww. Imagine them in bed together." This is the same argument that was used against homosexuals, and simply an appeal to the social norms of the majority.

Yuck and as a gay man may I say on behalf of gays everywhere please don't rape any 12 years olds.

There are no exceptionally mature 12 year olds who might benefit by being in the presence of your boner, however you care to rationalize your predatory instincts.

Adults (18+) who fantasize about or even commit sex acts on 12 yr olds are always people who feel incapable of normal sexual relationships within an appropriate age group. You're not good at relating with a partner who can express their opinions out loud, who requires you to share power and control in the relationship. 12 year olds don't do that. They don't know how to assert control in a relationship and they usually aren't physically powerful enough to resist adult restraint/abuse. There are no 12 years olds in the world that are capable of having an equal, adult relationship with an 18+ year old, so every adult who rapes or fantasizes about raping a 12 year old is admitting that they are incapable of a normal social-sexual relationship.

This post reads to me as, at best, an admission to a mental health problem, for which I strongly urge OP to seek psychiatric counseling. In the meantime, please don't rape any 12 year olds. You will always hurt them forever and gain nothing for yourself.
rross
Posts: 2,772
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2014 6:56:26 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
O.O

Well, she's his teacher and he's a vulnerable child. She's the only one to take an interest in him, of course he's influenced by her. She has a duty of care a moral duty to act in his best interests. She also has a duty to his parents who place him in her care. Having sex with him would be totally immoral.
NiqashMotawadi3
Posts: 1,895
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2014 7:08:05 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/5/2014 6:44:29 AM, Oromagi wrote:
The only argument I see against a relationship between Miss Veronica (40 yrs old) and Ethan (12 yrs old), would be something like, "Eww. Imagine them in bed together." This is the same argument that was used against homosexuals, and simply an appeal to the social norms of the majority.

Yuck and as a gay man may I say on behalf of gays everywhere please don't rape any 12 years olds.

There are no exceptionally mature 12 year olds who might benefit by being in the presence of your boner, however you care to rationalize your predatory instincts.

Adults (18+) who fantasize about or even commit sex acts on 12 yr olds are always people who feel incapable of normal sexual relationships within an appropriate age group. You're not good at relating with a partner who can express their opinions out loud, who requires you to share power and control in the relationship. 12 year olds don't do that. They don't know how to assert control in a relationship and they usually aren't physically powerful enough to resist adult restraint/abuse. There are no 12 years olds in the world that are capable of having an equal, adult relationship with an 18+ year old, so every adult who rapes or fantasizes about raping a 12 year old is admitting that they are incapable of a normal social-sexual relationship.

This post reads to me as, at best, an admission to a mental health problem, for which I strongly urge OP to seek psychiatric counseling. In the meantime, please don't rape any 12 year olds. You will always hurt them forever and gain nothing for yourself.

Reported for personal insults.

Moreover, pedophilia and "rape" are not the same thing. Pedophilia is only an attraction to someone who is considered a minor. Thanks for your equivocation fallacy.
NiqashMotawadi3
Posts: 1,895
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2014 7:12:11 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/5/2014 6:56:26 AM, rross wrote:
O.O

Well, she's his teacher and he's a vulnerable child. She's the only one to take an interest in him, of course he's influenced by her. She has a duty of care a moral duty to act in his best interests. She also has a duty to his parents who place him in her care. Having sex with him would be totally immoral.

Thanks for having the only reasonable reply,

I never said anything about "sex." What I mean "by wanting to be with him" is simply having a relationship which can involve no acts of sex whatsoever.

Pedophilia here is simply meant as an attraction to a minor, who happens here to be pubescent.
rross
Posts: 2,772
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2014 7:19:40 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/5/2014 7:12:11 AM, NiqashMotawadi3 wrote:
At 3/5/2014 6:56:26 AM, rross wrote:

I never said anything about "sex." What I mean "by wanting to be with him" is simply having a relationship which can involve no acts of sex whatsoever.

Pedophilia here is simply meant as an attraction to a minor, who happens here to be pubescent.

You said they were in a relationship together involving sexual attraction. Presumably this relationship is over and above their relationship of child and teacher. There's an immediate conflict of interest, see? And the power differential.
NiqashMotawadi3
Posts: 1,895
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2014 7:21:27 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/5/2014 6:22:03 AM, YYW wrote:
At 3/5/2014 6:17:20 AM, Zaradi wrote:
inb4 all hell breaks loose.

This is what you all wanted, right?

Pardon me, but I do believe that some of us would want open discussions where people can discuss controversial topics that deal with morality, as opposed to "BURN THE HERETIC" rants and "no he didn't" lectures about other members, posted in a series of forums with almost the same topic.

If you put money in your own words, let's debate your philosophy...

First of, let us debate whether you can establish moral realism, and say something is absolutely wrong...

Then we can later debate whether pedophilia could be justified in exceptional cases based on your moral realism.
NiqashMotawadi3
Posts: 1,895
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2014 7:24:08 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/5/2014 7:19:40 AM, rross wrote:
At 3/5/2014 7:12:11 AM, NiqashMotawadi3 wrote:
At 3/5/2014 6:56:26 AM, rross wrote:

I never said anything about "sex." What I mean "by wanting to be with him" is simply having a relationship which can involve no acts of sex whatsoever.

Pedophilia here is simply meant as an attraction to a minor, who happens here to be pubescent.

You said they were in a relationship together involving sexual attraction. Presumably this relationship is over and above their relationship of child and teacher. There's an immediate conflict of interest, see? And the power differential.

The teacher could decide not to have sex with him until he is 18 years old, but yet love him from all her heart and treat him as her ideal partner.

Sex here, shouldn't be an issue, as I never never explicitly said that they must have sex together.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2014 7:24:55 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/5/2014 7:12:11 AM, NiqashMotawadi3 wrote:
At 3/5/2014 6:56:26 AM, rross wrote:
O.O

Well, she's his teacher and he's a vulnerable child. She's the only one to take an interest in him, of course he's influenced by her. She has a duty of care a moral duty to act in his best interests. She also has a duty to his parents who place him in her care. Having sex with him would be totally immoral.

Thanks for having the only reasonable reply,

I never said anything about "sex." What I mean "by wanting to be with him" is simply having a relationship which can involve no acts of sex whatsoever.

Pedophilia here is simply meant as an attraction to a minor, who happens here to be pubescent.

If you want to avoid confusion, then don't use words that have established meanings.
Pedophilia is sexual attraction to prepubescents.
Changing the definition to fit your example bastardizes the word, and does nothing to alleviate the issue.

Further, if sex isn't involved, there is nothing illegal about this relationship.
My work here is, finally, done.
NiqashMotawadi3
Posts: 1,895
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2014 7:29:17 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
I'm not changing any definitions, but simply following a rather non-literal definition of pedophilia. And as you notice, some people here even find my example with a pubescent kid to be morally reprehensible, so if I change that view, I'll be happy and fuzzy from the inside.

Further, if sex isn't involved, there is nothing illegal about this relationship.

This is a strawman fallacy. I never talked about legality, it was always a question of morality if you read carefully. I'm debating whether this is moral or not, and I said it could be "morally justified in some exceptional cases." How did you understand that as a case of legalization is beyond me.
rross
Posts: 2,772
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2014 7:29:30 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/5/2014 7:24:55 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/5/2014 7:12:11 AM, NiqashMotawadi3 wrote:

Further, if sex isn't involved, there is nothing illegal about this relationship.

Moral and legal are quite different concepts for a lot of people. You often seem to stress the legal side when it comes to sex with minors. Why is that?
NiqashMotawadi3
Posts: 1,895
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2014 7:46:04 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Upon further study, I think the best objection against what I provided above would be the fact that adults feel a sense of adulthood although they could be either immature or mature, which won't be found in mature children, even if they hold many responsibilities and are considerably intelligent.

Nevertheless, my purpose was to simply to say that what we know about morality is not definite, and that such controversial topics should be discussed here and debated.

I therefore reject YVW's proposal to consider such topics obscene, and I think have made a few people think about such a topic, which is enough for me, as my intention is that we should always reason, even about things that seem controversial based on our preconceptions and social norms.

.
kbub
Posts: 1,377
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2014 7:47:41 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/5/2014 6:15:50 AM, NiqashMotawadi3 wrote:
There seems to be a repeated claim in the forums that pedophilia is immoral. I would like to argue that pedophilia could be morally justified in some exceptional cases.

It is essential to make a preemption before I begin arguing that some members here might go for name-calling and mud-throwing, much like journalists do, perhaps because that is an easy way to degrade the other person as that would put them in an uncomfortable position where they are expected to defend themselves after being called an "Islamophobe", "anti-semite" or even a "pedophile". Therefore, I would like to clarify that I'm not a "pedophile" or even pro-pedophile. However, I'm convinced that I can make a reasonable case that not all instances of pedophilia are immoral.

For instance, let us assume that a 12 year-old prodigy called Ethan exists. Ethan is much like all child prodigies, say Eliezer Yudkowsky, in the sense that he has Exceptionally High SAT and LSAT scores. In other words, he is an intelligent individual who is very knowledgeable in the fields of mathematics, logic, decision-making and advanced rationality.


Ethan is a part of an Ivy League institution and since he is a prodigy in Mathematics and Logic, he is being taught by a brilliant Mathematics teacher called Veronica who is 40 years old. Ethen has a secret crush on his teacher, and has decided that he wants her to be with him. He finds her intelligent, sweet, creative and interesting, as opposed to girls his age and slightly older who seem very mundane, naive and boring.

Ethan hates to be called "immature" and always tries to behave maturely. His father is his only parent but he is depressed and unemployed, and so he spends most of his time either drunk or sleeping, and so Ethan from a young age has taken upon himself all the house's responsibilities that do not just involve house chores, but also include taking care of his younger brother John, who he has basically raised after his mother's death. He even works in his uncle's farm to make enough money to buy anti-depressants and alcohol for his father.

Veronica has only had one boyfriend in her whole life; her childhood love when she was in the fourth grade, who she couldn't forget all those years, especially because he died of cancer although he promised that he would make it out of the hospital bed right before the fourth grade ended. She is a very self-preserved woman but something about Ethan makes him very charming. He does look like her childhood love, but she also finds him very intelligent, thought-provoking and innocent, as opposed to all the mature men she has met in life, who she finds revolting and vulgar.

That is to say, it is possible to have a 12 year-old kid who is very intelligent and mature(In Ethan's case, he has work experience and independence at a young age, in addition to a deep understanding of decision-making). He is rightfully more mature and intelligent than the majority of adult males Miss Veronica knows. If he lacks anything, it is general experience in relationships, but so do many virgin or anti-social adults who marry or get into relationships.

The only argument I see against a relationship between Miss Veronica (40 yrs old) and Ethan (12 yrs old), would be something like, "Eww. Imagine them in bed together." This is the same argument that was used against homosexuals, and simply an appeal to the social norms of the majority.

In summary, Ethan has the following qualifications to be in a relationship:

1- He is very intelligent and rational. (High SAT and LSAT scores)

2- He is very mature. He even takes care of his own father and his younger brother.

3- He has a genuine, romantic interest in Miss Veronica.

Now let us take Vic for an example. Vic is a 45 year-old backward hick who has never been responsible in his life. He has a low IQ, and he thinks that Miss Veronica should marry him.

I would like an argument from those against pedophilia why Veronica being with Ethan is immoral? And if so, if they would prefer if Veronica was with Vic over her being with Ethan, although that is clearly not the only alternative?

Moreover, if the objections are all arguments from lack of maturity, I would like to know what makes a person mature. Is it just age? And how is Ethan not mature?

Thanks for reading,
No TL:DRs Available.

GET OUT. !!!!!!
I am so angry.
bluesteel
Posts: 12,301
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2014 7:48:48 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
I have an easier defense. YYW (citing Wikipedia) defines pedophilia as "a psychiatric disorder in which an adult or older adolescent experiences a primary or exclusive sexual attraction to prepubescent children." Pedophilia should be legal because it's unfair to criminalize a psychiatric disorder. Our criminal law requires a "bad act" in order for something to be illegal, not a mere "bad thought." It's unfair to criminalize the mere thought of someone being attracted to a child, if the person never acts on it. We can't go around having "thought police" to go along with DDO's brand new morality police.

Boom.
You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into - Jonathan Swift (paraphrase)
NiqashMotawadi3
Posts: 1,895
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2014 7:49:35 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/5/2014 7:47:41 AM, kbub wrote:
At 3/5/2014 6:15:50 AM, NiqashMotawadi3 wrote:
There seems to be a repeated claim in the forums that pedophilia is immoral. I would like to argue that pedophilia could be morally justified in some exceptional cases.

It is essential to make a preemption before I begin arguing that some members here might go for name-calling and mud-throwing, much like journalists do, perhaps because that is an easy way to degrade the other person as that would put them in an uncomfortable position where they are expected to defend themselves after being called an "Islamophobe", "anti-semite" or even a "pedophile". Therefore, I would like to clarify that I'm not a "pedophile" or even pro-pedophile. However, I'm convinced that I can make a reasonable case that not all instances of pedophilia are immoral.

For instance, let us assume that a 12 year-old prodigy called Ethan exists. Ethan is much like all child prodigies, say Eliezer Yudkowsky, in the sense that he has Exceptionally High SAT and LSAT scores. In other words, he is an intelligent individual who is very knowledgeable in the fields of mathematics, logic, decision-making and advanced rationality.






Ethan is a part of an Ivy League institution and since he is a prodigy in Mathematics and Logic, he is being taught by a brilliant Mathematics teacher called Veronica who is 40 years old. Ethen has a secret crush on his teacher, and has decided that he wants her to be with him. He finds her intelligent, sweet, creative and interesting, as opposed to girls his age and slightly older who seem very mundane, naive and boring.

Ethan hates to be called "immature" and always tries to behave maturely. His father is his only parent but he is depressed and unemployed, and so he spends most of his time either drunk or sleeping, and so Ethan from a young age has taken upon himself all the house's responsibilities that do not just involve house chores, but also include taking care of his younger brother John, who he has basically raised after his mother's death. He even works in his uncle's farm to make enough money to buy anti-depressants and alcohol for his father.

Veronica has only had one boyfriend in her whole life; her childhood love when she was in the fourth grade, who she couldn't forget all those years, especially because he died of cancer although he promised that he would make it out of the hospital bed right before the fourth grade ended. She is a very self-preserved woman but something about Ethan makes him very charming. He does look like her childhood love, but she also finds him very intelligent, thought-provoking and innocent, as opposed to all the mature men she has met in life, who she finds revolting and vulgar.

That is to say, it is possible to have a 12 year-old kid who is very intelligent and mature(In Ethan's case, he has work experience and independence at a young age, in addition to a deep understanding of decision-making). He is rightfully more mature and intelligent than the majority of adult males Miss Veronica knows. If he lacks anything, it is general experience in relationships, but so do many virgin or anti-social adults who marry or get into relationships.

The only argument I see against a relationship between Miss Veronica (40 yrs old) and Ethan (12 yrs old), would be something like, "Eww. Imagine them in bed together." This is the same argument that was used against homosexuals, and simply an appeal to the social norms of the majority.

In summary, Ethan has the following qualifications to be in a relationship:

1- He is very intelligent and rational. (High SAT and LSAT scores)

2- He is very mature. He even takes care of his own father and his younger brother.

3- He has a genuine, romantic interest in Miss Veronica.

Now let us take Vic for an example. Vic is a 45 year-old backward hick who has never been responsible in his life. He has a low IQ, and he thinks that Miss Veronica should marry him.

I would like an argument from those against pedophilia why Veronica being with Ethan is immoral? And if so, if they would prefer if Veronica was with Vic over her being with Ethan, although that is clearly not the only alternative?

Moreover, if the objections are all arguments from lack of maturity, I would like to know what makes a person mature. Is it just age? And how is Ethan not mature?

Thanks for reading,
No TL:DRs Available.



GET OUT. !!!!!!
I am so angry.

Think of it as a "cognitive dissonance" exercise.
kbub
Posts: 1,377
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2014 7:55:24 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/5/2014 7:49:35 AM, NiqashMotawadi3 wrote:
At 3/5/2014 7:47:41 AM, kbub wrote:
At 3/5/2014 6:15:50 AM, NiqashMotawadi3 wrote:
There seems to be a repeated claim in the forums that pedophilia is immoral. I would like to argue that pedophilia could be morally justified in some exceptional cases.

It is essential to make a preemption before I begin arguing that some members here might go for name-calling and mud-throwing, much like journalists do, perhaps because that is an easy way to degrade the other person as that would put them in an uncomfortable position where they are expected to defend themselves after being called an "Islamophobe", "anti-semite" or even a "pedophile". Therefore, I would like to clarify that I'm not a "pedophile" or even pro-pedophile. However, I'm convinced that I can make a reasonable case that not all instances of pedophilia are immoral.

For instance, let us assume that a 12 year-old prodigy called Ethan exists. Ethan is much like all child prodigies, say Eliezer Yudkowsky, in the sense that he has Exceptionally High SAT and LSAT scores. In other words, he is an intelligent individual who is very knowledgeable in the fields of mathematics, logic, decision-making and advanced rationality.






Ethan is a part of an Ivy League institution and since he is a prodigy in Mathematics and Logic, he is being taught by a brilliant Mathematics teacher called Veronica who is 40 years old. Ethen has a secret crush on his teacher, and has decided that he wants her to be with him. He finds her intelligent, sweet, creative and interesting, as opposed to girls his age and slightly older who seem very mundane, naive and boring.

Ethan hates to be called "immature" and always tries to behave maturely. His father is his only parent but he is depressed and unemployed, and so he spends most of his time either drunk or sleeping, and so Ethan from a young age has taken upon himself all the house's responsibilities that do not just involve house chores, but also include taking care of his younger brother John, who he has basically raised after his mother's death. He even works in his uncle's farm to make enough money to buy anti-depressants and alcohol for his father.

Veronica has only had one boyfriend in her whole life; her childhood love when she was in the fourth grade, who she couldn't forget all those years, especially because he died of cancer although he promised that he would make it out of the hospital bed right before the fourth grade ended. She is a very self-preserved woman but something about Ethan makes him very charming. He does look like her childhood love, but she also finds him very intelligent, thought-provoking and innocent, as opposed to all the mature men she has met in life, who she finds revolting and vulgar.

That is to say, it is possible to have a 12 year-old kid who is very intelligent and mature(In Ethan's case, he has work experience and independence at a young age, in addition to a deep understanding of decision-making). He is rightfully more mature and intelligent than the majority of adult males Miss Veronica knows. If he lacks anything, it is general experience in relationships, but so do many virgin or anti-social adults who marry or get into relationships.

The only argument I see against a relationship between Miss Veronica (40 yrs old) and Ethan (12 yrs old), would be something like, "Eww. Imagine them in bed together." This is the same argument that was used against homosexuals, and simply an appeal to the social norms of the majority.

In summary, Ethan has the following qualifications to be in a relationship:

1- He is very intelligent and rational. (High SAT and LSAT scores)

2- He is very mature. He even takes care of his own father and his younger brother.

3- He has a genuine, romantic interest in Miss Veronica.

Now let us take Vic for an example. Vic is a 45 year-old backward hick who has never been responsible in his life. He has a low IQ, and he thinks that Miss Veronica should marry him.

I would like an argument from those against pedophilia why Veronica being with Ethan is immoral? And if so, if they would prefer if Veronica was with Vic over her being with Ethan, although that is clearly not the only alternative?

Moreover, if the objections are all arguments from lack of maturity, I would like to know what makes a person mature. Is it just age? And how is Ethan not mature?

Thanks for reading,
No TL:DRs Available.



GET OUT. !!!!!!
I am so angry.

Think of it as a "cognitive dissonance" exercise.

Sure. I like to think humans try to be good to one another. When someone says something that obviously does the opposite, I am conflicted--congitive dis. I might be missing your point.
NiqashMotawadi3
Posts: 1,895
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2014 7:57:47 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/5/2014 7:48:48 AM, bluesteel wrote:
I have an easier defense. YYW (citing Wikipedia) defines pedophilia as "a psychiatric disorder in which an adult or older adolescent experiences a primary or exclusive sexual attraction to prepubescent children." Pedophilia should be legal because it's unfair to criminalize a psychiatric disorder. Our criminal law requires a "bad act" in order for something to be illegal, not a mere "bad thought." It's unfair to criminalize the mere thought of someone being attracted to a child, if the person never acts on it. We can't go around having "thought police" to go along with DDO's brand new morality police.

Boom.

I am the least concerned with what YYW saying, but more thinking if this attraction to children could be morally justified based on moral realism. Moreover, generally the usage of the word doesn't just involve pre-pubescent children so I just went with the common usage of the word in this forum post, as opposed to the clinical definition.

The psychiatric disorder part is interesting. Do they have actual empirical reasons to make this claim or do they just say that as they used to say it against homosexuality?
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2014 8:01:37 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/5/2014 7:29:30 AM, rross wrote:
At 3/5/2014 7:24:55 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 3/5/2014 7:12:11 AM, NiqashMotawadi3 wrote:

Further, if sex isn't involved, there is nothing illegal about this relationship.

Moral and legal are quite different concepts for a lot of people. You often seem to stress the legal side when it comes to sex with minors. Why is that?

Two reasons:
1. I don't understand what morals are. I understand what the law is, I further understand why laws are laws... in America.
2. To my understanding, morals are dependent upon other factors. In other words, what is moral to some is immoral to others as morals are derived from something else (values?).
My work here is, finally, done.
bluesteel
Posts: 12,301
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2014 8:02:58 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/5/2014 7:57:47 AM, NiqashMotawadi3 wrote:
At 3/5/2014 7:48:48 AM, bluesteel wrote:
I have an easier defense. YYW (citing Wikipedia) defines pedophilia as "a psychiatric disorder in which an adult or older adolescent experiences a primary or exclusive sexual attraction to prepubescent children." Pedophilia should be legal because it's unfair to criminalize a psychiatric disorder. Our criminal law requires a "bad act" in order for something to be illegal, not a mere "bad thought." It's unfair to criminalize the mere thought of someone being attracted to a child, if the person never acts on it. We can't go around having "thought police" to go along with DDO's brand new morality police.

Boom.

I am the least concerned with what YYW saying, but more thinking if this attraction to children could be morally justified based on moral realism. Moreover, generally the usage of the word doesn't just involve pre-pubescent children so I just went with the common usage of the word in this forum post, as opposed to the clinical definition.

I don't think you need to morally justify a mental thought that you have very little control over. I had assumed you were arguing that sex with an extreme minor can be morally justified in the hypothetical scenario of a super-rational minor, assuming the only moral consideration is the ability to give consent and consent is solely influenced by rationality.


The psychiatric disorder part is interesting. Do they have actual empirical reasons to make this claim or do they just say that as they used to say it against homosexuality?

The entire DSM (diagnostics manual) for psychological disorders is inherently normative, in that any psychiatric disorder is defined by symptoms that deviate from the norm.
You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into - Jonathan Swift (paraphrase)
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2014 8:05:07 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/5/2014 7:29:17 AM, NiqashMotawadi3 wrote:
I'm not changing any definitions, but simply following a rather non-literal definition of pedophilia. And as you notice, some people here even find my example with a pubescent kid to be morally reprehensible, so if I change that view, I'll be happy and fuzzy from the inside.
So, without sexual desire or occurance, is your question why the can't be friends?


Further, if sex isn't involved, there is nothing illegal about this relationship.

This is a strawman fallacy. I never talked about legality, it was always a question of morality if you read carefully. I'm debating whether this is moral or not, and I said it could be "morally justified in some exceptional cases." How did you understand that as a case of legalization is beyond me.

It's not a straw man, since I don't understand what morals are, and they seem to be dependent on the prism one looks through.
As far as I can tell, if there is no sex, it is a case of friendship. It is creepy, and I would be concerned for my child/teen.
My work here is, finally, done.
Oromagi
Posts: 857
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2014 8:10:44 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
The teacher could decide not to have sex with him until he is 18 years old, but yet love him from all her heart and treat him as her ideal partner.

Sex here, shouldn't be an issue, as I never never explicitly said that they must have sex together.

Clearly backpedaling. The original post was a defense of a romantic realtionship between Miss Veronica and Ethan.

"The only argument I see against a relationship between Miss Veronica (40 yrs old) and Ethan (12 yrs old), would be something like, "Eww. Imagine them in bed together." This is the same argument that was used against homosexuals, and simply an appeal to the social norms of the majority."

Clearly, Nishaq intends to imply a sexual relationship in the OP. There is no such thing as a genuine romantic entanglement between a 40 year old and a 12 year old. Any such romance is use and abuse. OP may not call it rape but I am frankly unconvinced.

Consider that parts of the original post are unnecessarily vivid. We are supposed to be considering the general scenario, right? Why would it be relevant to know Ethan's SAT scores? Are test scores presented as an argument for maturity?

Other unnecessary details are even more revealing-

*The 12 year old boy's mother is dead. His father is an alcoholic. So the 12 year old is essentially unprotected and unadvised by adults and therefore more vulnerable prey.

*Miss Veronica's only prior romance was with a fourth-grader who Ethan resembles.
Miss Veronica has therefore never had a normal adult social-sexual relationship.

Obviously, we wouldn't need such storytelling to consider the morality or advisability of 40 years olds romancing 12 year olds. I assume the value of all the romantic detail is exclusively for the satisfaction of the poster, it certainly doesn't edify the audience in any way.

Nishaq can make all the nice distinctions he wishes between attraction and rape. Any reading of the scenario provided suggests a 40 year old considering the abuse of a 12 year old, conduct which Nishaq explicitly defends.
NiqashMotawadi3
Posts: 1,895
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2014 8:16:15 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
I don't think you need to morally justify a mental thought that you have very little control over. I had assumed you were arguing that sex with an extreme minor can be morally justified in the hypothetical scenario of a super-rational minor, assuming the only moral consideration is the ability to give consent and consent is solely influenced by rationality.

No, not at all. This is a lack of clarification on my behalf. I don't mean "sex" at all but if the attraction itself is moral or immoral. I'm not sure if you can't at all control such attraction. It could be that you could have some power over it. For instance, you can get yourself attracted to other things that preoccupy you most of the time.

The entire DSM (diagnostics manual) for psychological disorders is inherently normative, in that any psychiatric disorder is defined by symptoms that deviate from the norm.

I'm inclined to investigate that more, but yes, I have this preconception that it's another standardization that goes along with dominant social norms.
NiqashMotawadi3
Posts: 1,895
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2014 8:29:53 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/5/2014 8:10:44 AM, Oromagi wrote:
The teacher could decide not to have sex with him until he is 18 years old, but yet love him from all her heart and treat him as her ideal partner.

Sex here, shouldn't be an issue, as I never never explicitly said that they must have sex together.

Clearly backpedaling. The original post was a defense of a romantic realtionship between Miss Veronica and Ethan.

Romantic relationships do not need to include sex.


"The only argument I see against a relationship between Miss Veronica (40 yrs old) and Ethan (12 yrs old), would be something like, "Eww. Imagine them in bed together." This is the same argument that was used against homosexuals, and simply an appeal to the social norms of the majority."

Yes, people like you would take things sexually, and that's why I included that counterargument. I never said directly said they should have sex together.

Clearly, Nishaq intends to imply a sexual relationship in the OP.

Uhm, no.

"There is no such thing as a genuine romantic entanglement between a 40 year old and a 12 year old.

Why not? This really seems like an over-generalization fallacy on your behalf.

Any such romance is use and abuse.

Slippery Slope fallacy.

OP may not call it rape but I am frankly unconvinced.

It is not rape, so if you are convinced or not, it doesn't make a difference.

Why would it be relevant to know Ethan's SAT scores? Are test scores presented as an argument for maturity?

Intelligence and decision-making. I argued he was mature by how we took care of responsibilities at home.


Other unnecessary details are even more revealing-

They are all necessary. You just lack reading skills.


*The 12 year old boy's mother is dead. His father is an alcoholic. So the 12 year old is essentially unprotected and unadvised by adults and therefore more vulnerable prey.

He is a person who has a higher IQ than you, so how is he more vulnerable? He can outsmart most adults, he has advice from other adults (his uncle is alive, he is an IVY league with amazing teachers, etc)

*Miss Veronica's only prior romance was with a fourth-grader who Ethan resembles.
Miss Veronica has therefore never had a normal adult social-sexual relationship.

It's not a requirement to have a a normal adult social-sexual relationship to be in a normal relationship (without sex), otherwise everyone would be single.

Obviously, we wouldn't need such storytelling to consider the morality or advisability of 40 years olds romancing 12 year olds.

Yeah. Well, duh. It's obvious. Right? I like your "well, duh" arguments.

Nishaq can make all the nice distinctions he wishes between attraction and rape. Any reading of the scenario provided suggests a 40 year old considering the abuse of a 12 year old, conduct which Nishaq explicitly defends.

It's not my problem you can't imagine a relationship like that with rape and abuse, but one is impossible, unless you can prove it is logically impossible like a married bachelor or a squared circle. Otherwise, either in this possible world or another, such relationship between adult and child without abuse is logically possible.

Advice: Learn logic and read carefully before you criticize.
NiqashMotawadi3
Posts: 1,895
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/5/2014 8:31:48 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 3/5/2014 8:29:53 AM, NiqashMotawadi3 wrote:
At 3/5/2014 8:10:44 AM, Oromagi wrote:
The teacher could decide not to have sex with him until he is 18 years old, but yet love him from all her heart and treat him as her ideal partner.

Sex here, shouldn't be an issue, as I never never explicitly said that they must have sex together.

Clearly backpedaling. The original post was a defense of a romantic realtionship between Miss Veronica and Ethan.

Romantic relationships do not need to include sex.


"The only argument I see against a relationship between Miss Veronica (40 yrs old) and Ethan (12 yrs old), would be something like, "Eww. Imagine them in bed together." This is the same argument that was used against homosexuals, and simply an appeal to the social norms of the majority."

Yes, people like you would take things sexually, and that's why I included that counterargument. I never said directly said they should have sex together.


Clearly, Nishaq intends to imply a sexual relationship in the OP.

Uhm, no.

"There is no such thing as a genuine romantic entanglement between a 40 year old and a 12 year old.

Why not? This really seems like an over-generalization fallacy on your behalf.


Any such romance is use and abuse.

Slippery Slope fallacy.

OP may not call it rape but I am frankly unconvinced.

It is not rape, so if you are convinced or not, it doesn't make a difference.

Why would it be relevant to know Ethan's SAT scores? Are test scores presented as an argument for maturity?

Intelligence and decision-making. I argued he was mature by how we took care of responsibilities at home.


Other unnecessary details are even more revealing-

They are all necessary. You just lack reading skills.


*The 12 year old boy's mother is dead. His father is an alcoholic. So the 12 year old is essentially unprotected and unadvised by adults and therefore more vulnerable prey.

He is a person who has a higher IQ than you, so how is he more vulnerable? He can outsmart most adults, he has advice from other adults (his uncle is alive, he is an IVY league with amazing teachers, etc)

*Miss Veronica's only prior romance was with a fourth-grader who Ethan resembles.
Miss Veronica has therefore never had a normal adult social-sexual relationship.

It's not a requirement to have a a normal adult social-sexual relationship to be in a normal relationship (without sex), otherwise everyone would be single.

Obviously, we wouldn't need such storytelling to consider the morality or advisability of 40 years olds romancing 12 year olds.

Yeah. Well, duh. It's obvious. Right? I like your "well, duh" arguments.

Nishaq can make all the nice distinctions he wishes between attraction and rape. Any reading of the scenario provided suggests a 40 year old considering the abuse of a 12 year old, conduct which Nishaq explicitly defends.

It's not my problem you can't imagine a relationship like that with rape and abuse, but one is impossible, unless you can prove it is logically impossible like a married bachelor or a squared circle. Otherwise, either in this possible world or another, such relationship between adult and child without abuse is logically possible.

Advice: Learn logic and read carefully before you criticize.

But one is possible**