The Briefing Room
General Category => Editorial/Opinion/Blogs => Topic started by: SirLinksALot on February 22, 2017, 03:14:07 pm
-
SOURCE: CHARISMA
URL: http://www.charismanews.com/opinion/in-the-line-of-fire/52179-is-pedophilia-next (http://www.charismanews.com/opinion/in-the-line-of-fire/52179-is-pedophilia-next)
by Michael Brown
The same arguments about 'born this way' could be used to support pedophilia.
A shocking article posted on the salon.com website has many people asking, "Now that we have embraced homosexuality, is pedophilia next?"
The article, written by Todd Nickerson, was titled "I'm a pedophile, but not a monster," with the subtitle reading, "I'm attracted to children but unwilling to act on it. Before judging me harshly, would you be willing to listen?" SEE HERE: http://www.salon.com/2015/09/21/im_a_pedophile_but_not_a_monster/ (http://www.salon.com/2015/09/21/im_a_pedophile_but_not_a_monster/)
Nickerson even points to a website called Virtuous Pedophiles which states, "The goals of our organization are to reduce the stigma attached to pedophilia by letting people know that a substantial number of pedophiles do not molest children, and to provide peer support and information about available resources to help pedophiles lead happy, productive lives. Our highest priority is to help pedophiles never abuse children. We hope you will explore our website with an open mind."
What are we to make of this? And how does this tie in with gay activism?
As I pointed out in 2011, we shouldn't be surprised with the push for the acceptance of pedophilia, meaning both sympathy for the pedophile, who would doubtless say, "I didn't choose this. I'm born this way and cannot change," and recognition that "intergenerational intimacy" can often be consensual and beneficial—as disgusting as it is even to write those words.
I pointed out then that some psychiatric leaders who were instrumental in removing homosexuality from the American Psychiatric Association's list of mental disorders in 1973 have been fighting to remove pedophilia as a disorder as well, not to justify the abuse of children but rather to say that being sexually attracted to children is not a mental disorder.
Also in 2011, in my book A Queer Thing Happened to America, I documented in painstaking (and painful) detail that the principle arguments used to normalize homosexuality were virtually identical to the arguments used to normalize pedophilia. (To be totally clear, I am not comparing the rape of a child by an adult with a sexual act committed by two men or two women; I am comparing the arguments used by pederast activists and gay activists to gain social acceptance.)
Consider these eight arguments, all of which (in modified form) are commonly used in support of homosexual practice. Simply substitute the words and terms, and you'll see how real the parallels are.
Pedophilia is innate and immutable; people are born this way and cannot change.
Pederasty is richly attested in many different cultures throughout history.
The claim that adult-child sexual relationships cause harm is greatly overstated and often completely inaccurate.
Consensual adult-child sex can actually be beneficial to the child.
Pederasty should not be classified as a mental disorder, since it does not cause distress to the pederast to have these desires and since the pederast can function as a normal, contributing member of society.
Many of the illustrious homosexuals of the past were actually pedophiles.
People are against intergenerational intimacy because of antiquated social standards and puritanical sexual phobias.
This is all about love and equality and liberation.
To help flesh this out, let's picture a gay man making his case to a straight man:
My homosexuality is not a sexual preference but a sexual orientation, just as much as your heterosexuality is not a sexual preference but a sexual orientation.
My homosexuality is just as normal as your heterosexuality.
Since my behavior is genetically determined and is not a choice, it is intolerant and hateful to suggest that it is wrong. And to call my sexual behavior illegal or immoral, or to refuse to legitimize same-sex relationships, is to be a moral bigot of the highest order.
I deeply resent your attempts to identify areas of my upbringing and environment as alleged causes for my homosexuality.
I categorically reject the myth that someone can change his or her sexual orientation. Rather, such statements only add to the anguish and suffering of gays and lesbians, and attempts to change us often lead to catastrophic consequences, including depression and suicide.
Now, let's turn this around and have a pederast making his case to a gay man, substituting the words accordingly (thus, "My pederasty is not a sexual preference but a sexual orientation, just as much as your homosexuality is not a sexual preference but a sexual orientation.") The parallels are undeniable (again, not referring to the acts but to the arguments.)
To be sure, Nickerson is absolutely not arguing for the rightness of adult-child sex, calling instead for sympathy toward those who find themselves unavoidably attracted to children but refuse to act on it.
But if we accept his argument—and there is an increasing number of researchers who believe that pedophilia is innate and immutable—then the whole "born that way" argument used by gay activists goes out the window.
After all, if it's wrong to justify pedophilia because some people are allegedly born that way, then it's wrong to justify homosexuality because some people are allegedly born that way.
You might say, "That's nonsense. We're talking about two adults in a loving consensual relationship, and you can't possibly compare that to a sexual or romantic relationship between an adult and a child."
But that only proves my point, since the "born that way" argument adds nothing to the equation at all, and allegedly being born with a certain propensity does not that make propensity right.
Of course, there are famous gay activists like Larry Kramer and Allen Ginsburg who sang the praises of adult-child (or, young-teen) relationships, some of them even saying that being sexually abused as children was very positive in their own lives (again, as sickening as this is, I document it in the Queer Thing book).
In the end, though, the simple point is this: If gay activists do not want to justify pedophilia because people are allegedly born that way and can't change, then they'll have to throw out the same argument when it comes to homosexual practice, which greatly undermines one of the pillars of gay activism.
You can't have it both ways. Either "born that way" determines morality or it does not—and clearly, it does not.
Michael Brown is the host of the nationally syndicated talk radio show The Line of Fire and is the president of FIRE School of Ministry. His newest book is Outlasting the Gay Revolution: Where Homosexual Activism Is Really Going and How to Turn the Tide.
-
(http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a319/fladj11/Anti%20Lib%20Signs%20and%20Toons/GayMarriageBouquet.jpg)
-
"We", who?
-
REMEMBER THESE HEADLINES?
Soldier Punished for Interfering in Child Assault by Afghan
9/23/2015, 9:17:05 AM
The New York Times ^ | 09/22/2015 | By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2015/09/21/us/politics/ap-us-united-states-afghanistan-child-abuse.html (http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2015/09/21/us/politics/ap-us-united-states-afghanistan-child-abuse.html)
US General Denies Existence of Policy Directing US Troops to Ignore Abuse of Afghan Boys
Washington Free Beacon ^ | 9/22/15 | Morgan Chalfant
http://freebeacon.com/national-security/us-general-denies-existence-of-policy-directing-us-troops-to-ignore-abuse-of-afghan-boys/ (http://freebeacon.com/national-security/us-general-denies-existence-of-policy-directing-us-troops-to-ignore-abuse-of-afghan-boys/)
Army rejects appeal from soldier discharged after confronting accused Afghan rapist
Fox News ^ | September 22, 2015 | Judsen Burger
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/09/22/army-rejects-appeal-from-soldier-kicked-out-after-confronting-accused-afghan/?intcmp=hpbt2 (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/09/22/army-rejects-appeal-from-soldier-kicked-out-after-confronting-accused-afghan/?intcmp=hpbt2)
-
"We", who?
You know "we" as in the government we elect, who appoints the judges who imposed this on us. That "we".
The same government that celebrated a pedophile named Harvey Milk ( who was ELECTED to office by the way ). This is the same guy who has a SCHOOL in New York named after him, who has his image on the postage stamp and who has a US Navy ship named after him. ALL courtesy of the government the American people elected.
Jerry Sandusky wasn’t wrong. He was just early. /sarc
-
(http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a319/fladj11/Anti%20Lib%20Signs%20and%20Toons/GayMarriageBouquet.jpg)
That cartoon so nailed it.
-
Yep and inadvertedly, Milo may have knocked down the edifice they were trying to build by the media trying to destroy him with his comments.
-
Halting leftism does a lot to halt the next round of this radicalism. I realize the SCOTUS is the one that ruled on it but they certainly had a WH in full support besides the EO, etc. issued.
I'd think Polygamy would be next. Pedophilia, 20, 30 years down the road, IF we let down our guard.
-
Pederasty first probably
-
Pederasty first probably
Sitting on a park bench....
Eying little girls with bad intent..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UCMS-NJ7VxU (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UCMS-NJ7VxU)
-
Halting leftism does a lot to halt the next round of this radicalism. I realize the SCOTUS is the one that ruled on it but they certainly had a WH in full support besides the EO, etc. issued.
I'd think Polygamy would be next. Pedophilia, 20, 30 years down the road, IF we let down our guard.
Agreed. What happen in UT will not stay in UT.
-
No, I think the latest thing is a throuple.
-
I'd think Polygamy would be next. Pedophilia, 20, 30 years down the road, IF we let down our guard.
I agree with this. Bestiality will probably happen in between.
-
I'd think Polygamy would be next. Pedophilia, 20, 30 years down the road, IF we let down our guard.
Polygamy will never take off due to something that affects everyone-white, black, rich, poor, straight or gay-that being JEALOUSY.
@TomSea
-
Polygamy will never take off due to something that affects everyone-white, black, rich, poor, straight or gay-that being JEALOUSY.
@TomSea
You make a good point. I think we're more likely to see silly stuff, like in Japan where you can marry yourself or an Anime cartoon character.
-
"Now that we have embraced homosexuality, is pedophilia next?"
In a word, no. This is a phony slippery-slope argument. Marriage equality became a right under an equal protection argument, based on the government's traditional provision of valuable benefits and protections to adult heterosexual marriages. Government can and does proscribe pedophilia and polygamy without regard to sexual orientation. There is simply no comparable equal protection argument.
-
While not pedophilia I remember so many guys in college dating HS girls younger than 18. My fraternity brother in our Sophmore year was still dating his HS sweetheart. Her older sister would drop her off at the fraternity house for a weekend she was probably 17 he would have been 20.. I think he was a Senior in HS and she a Freshman when they started dating. No one gave a crap back then. Thought nothing about it. This was late 70's-early 80's.
When I was a freshman in college remember lots of guys going home to take out their HS gals-going to Homecoming or Prom. Today that is looked upon as strange.
Weird that a 17 year old gal who is one day prior to age 18 = jailbait and one day later ok. People need to lighten up as long as ages are close. In no way am I endorsing a 30 year old guy dating a 16-17 year old girl-that is weird and sick.
No before you all jump me as a pro pedo I'm not I'm talking a male age 18-20 dating a 16-18 year old HS gal.
My friend was 15 when he started dating his 20year old GF who was in college. Been married now 35-37 years.
Remember all the 60's and 70's songs about 16 year old chicks? No one blew a gasket.
Kiss-Christine 16, Dr Hook she's only 16, Your 16, Your beautiful and you are mine, Neil Sedaka Happy Birthday sweet 16, age 16 sog Gene Plucket and the Union gap. and plenty more.
No one gave a crap back then . Today people are offended.
.
-
In a word, no. This is a phony slippery-slope argument. Marriage equality became a right under an equal protection argument, based on the government's traditional provision of valuable benefits and protections to adult heterosexual marriages. Government can and does proscribe pedophilia and polygamy without regard to sexual orientation. There is simply no comparable equal protection argument.
We'll have to wait and see. I think you are wrong, and there is no way to know for awhile.
-
No one gave a crap back then . Today people are offended.
.
People are looking for ways to break other peoples balls. I don't think it's a matter of "taking offense" but simply "Hey, I can burn this guy for life just by turning him in. Coolio!" Leftists are like that.
-
I agree it'll be polygamy before pedophilia. And the door for it will be opened by Christians. Not lefties, though they'll happily dive on through the open door.
-
This is a phony slippery-slope argument.
So was same-sex marriage about 20 years ago.
-
While not pedophilia I remember so many guys in college dating HS girls younger than 18. My fraternity brother in our Sophmore year was still dating his HS sweetheart. Her older sister would drop her off at the fraternity house for a weekend she was probably 17 he would have been 20.. I think he was a Senior in HS and she a Freshman when they started dating. No one gave a crap back then. Thought nothing about it. This was late 70's-early 80's.
When I was a freshman in college remember lots of guys going home to take out their HS gals-going to Homecoming or Prom. Today that is looked upon as strange.
Weird that a 17 year old gal who is one day prior to age 18 = jailbait and one day later ok. People need to lighten up as long as ages are close. In no way am I endorsing a 30 year old guy dating a 16-17 year old girl-that is weird and sick.
No before you all jump me as a pro pedo I'm not I'm talking a male age 18-20 dating a 16-18 year old HS gal.
My friend was 15 when he started dating his 20year old GF who was in college. Been married now 35-37 years.
Remember all the 60's and 70's songs about 16 year old chicks? No one blew a gasket.
Kiss-Christine 16, Dr Hook she's only 16, Your 16, Your beautiful and you are mine, Neil Sedaka Happy Birthday sweet 16, age 16 sog Gene Plucket and the Union gap. and plenty more.
No one gave a crap back then . Today people are offended.
.
Many of the sexual abuse statutes take that approach. For example, in NY the age of consent is 17, not 18. Also, provided both are above 13, there is an exception for people who are close in age. So a college sophomore dating a 17 y.o. would be fine, and a 17 y.o. dating a 15 y.o. would also be fine.
-
So was same-sex marriage about 20 years ago.
That one believes the law will be what he says it is 5-10 years down the road. He has what he likes now, without a shred of concern that the sands our law rests upon will shift again. I find the arrogance of liberals astounding.
-
I find the arrogance of liberals astounding.
How is understanding the legal basis behind civil marriage equality and recognizing that such basis doesn't support the expansion of equal protection to include polygamy or pedophilia "arrogance"? Slippery slope arguments are just that - slippery, and usually dishonest (especially where, as with the OP here, the argument is used to gin up animus toward homosexuals.)
-
How is understanding the legal basis behind civil marriage equality and recognizing that such basis doesn't support the expansion of equal protection to include polygamy or pedophilia "arrogance"? Slippery slope arguments are just that - slippery, and usually dishonest (especially where, as with the OP here, the argument is used to gin up animus toward homosexuals.)
I've been betting on that slippery slope for some time, and it's been a winner. But, as I said, you won't recognize the proof until it happens, and that's a few years off. I'm not willing to engage in circular arguments with you over the meaning of the law when that meaning will shift over time. I'm just predicting it will shift enough for me to marry Team Rocket from Pokemon if I want to, and my wife agrees, in a few years.
And yes, "arrogance" is the correct word for what I am thinking. It's arrogant to believe you know how courts will rule in the future.
-
I know many schoolteachers and they are telling me the up coming Generation Z is ultra conservative. They want zero gov't in their lives. Millenials are also very conservative or conservative/libertarian. You see the radical left millenials at protest or on tv but they are a small portion of society.
My many nieces and nephews in college tell me the conservative millenials are a silent majority, receive their degree and move on.
The country has been getting more conservative every decade.
Moral always switch back. Teen pregnancy is at 1960 levels. Divorce rates are dropping and marriage rates (heteros is rising)
-
I know many schoolteachers and they are telling me the up coming Generation Z is ultra conservative. They want zero gov't in their lives. Millenials are also very conservative or conservative/libertarian. You see the radical left at protest or on tv but they are a small portion.
My many nieces and nephews in college tell me the conservative millenials are a silent majority, receive their degree and move on.
The country has been getting more conservative every decade.
Moral always switch back. Teen pregnancy is at 1960 levels.
Conservative or libertarian? This is one of those cases it makes a difference, and the generation you're describing sounds more libertarian to me. SoCons are being left in the dust.
-
Sitting on a park bench....
Eying little girls with bad intent.
Pit-Stop at Pederasty - let's home it is not the name of a rock band
-
Halting leftism does a lot to halt the next round of this radicalism. I realize the SCOTUS is the one that ruled on it but they certainly had a WH in full support besides the EO, etc. issued.
I'd think Polygamy would be next. Pedophilia, 20, 30 years down the road, IF we let down our guard.
With all the emphasis on children being sexualized at an early age and the BS about treating them just like "little adults"--not to mention the whole gender confusion thing, I think they'll be after kids long before they want two mothers in law.
The only thing I see pushing Polygamy is the Muslims.
-
Pit-Stop at Pederasty - let's home it is not the name of a rock band
Jethro Tull from about 1970, describing a wino pervert. Now? who knows how those lyrics would be taken?
-
Polygamy will never take off due to something that affects everyone-white, black, rich, poor, straight or gay-that being JEALOUSY.
@TomSea
Maybe. But where jealousy does not appear to be a factor among the practitioners of polygamy, renegade Mormon groups.
Now, for the common public maybe they would be jealous.
Islam also seems to like polygamy but as of now, since we are not on a leftist course with a Democratic government, these things will not happen as of now.
@mirraflake
-
In a word, no. This is a phony slippery-slope argument. Marriage equality became a right under an equal protection argument, based on the government's traditional provision of valuable benefits and protections to adult heterosexual marriages. Government can and does proscribe pedophilia and polygamy without regard to sexual orientation. There is simply no comparable equal protection argument.
We no more accepted homo marriage then transgenderism fell into place. It can and will go there, and they are already trying.
-
We no more accepted homo marriage then transgenderism fell into place. It can and will go there, and they are already trying.
Yep. Think about it ... change does not usually come in one big bang but slowly and surely. It will start in a few liberal states and then suddenly, accelerate.
As I wrote before --- California already celebrates a known Pederast -- Harvey Milk. A man who was not only elected to office, but has a school in New York named after him, his face on the US postage stamp, and a Navy Ship named after him.
And he was celebrated in a Hollywood biopic with Sean Penn starring and winning an Oscar for playing him.
If he can be celebrated, there's no stopping another "respected" pederast from being celebrated in California. And when it starts in America's biggest state, you know what comes next....
As I warned -- Jerry Sandusky was not wrong, he was just early.
NAMBLA will hire its lawyers ...
-
Scripture already warns us that a little leaven, leavens the entire lump.
Once sin and evil is permitted encouraged in a society - it will grow to encompass the entire society - by force if it must be imposed.
-
The libs aren't going to stop till they have full legal right to bugger our kids on demand with no reprecussions, and publicly smirk, mock, and rub our faces in it. That's after they get polygamy, bestality, incest and all the other deviant behavior approved.
And that's when the shooting will start.
-
We no more accepted homo marriage then transgenderism fell into place. It can and will go there, and they are already trying.
Lines are being blurred all over the place. Used to be that Transgender was a specific thing but now it includes people like Bruce Jenner who like to pretend to be women but have no interest in swapping out the equipment.
I may as well continue to live as a man and declare myself to be a woman who demands to be treated equal to men.
-
Been thinking about this a bit. I'll tell you what I think we can use as a weather vane. One of the leading factors of the normalization of the gay movement was Hollywood and television. The gay character became almost a requirement for sitcoms and the like. If the media begins to embrace nonsense watch out and expect it to gain traction.
-
In a word, no. This is a phony slippery-slope argument. Marriage equality became a right under an equal protection argument, based on the government's traditional provision of valuable benefits and protections to adult heterosexual marriages. Government can and does proscribe pedophilia and polygamy without regard to sexual orientation. There is simply no comparable equal protection argument.
We are already going down the slippery slope and there's no stopping it. Heck...people now regard their dogs/cats as children. How much longer before you can marry your dog?
We are a fallen society and it won't be long before God strikes us down.
-
Lines are being blurred all over the place. Used to be that Transgender was a specific thing but now it includes people like Bruce Jenner who like to pretend to be women but have no interest in swapping out the equipment.
I may as well continue to live as a man and declare myself to be a woman who demands to be treated equal to men.
Men's bathrooms....Women's bathrooms...Trans bathrooms. Heck...I feel like a bird today...give me a birdbath. Insanity........
-
Been thinking about this a bit. I'll tell you what I think we can use as a weather vane. One of the leading factors of the normalization of the gay movement was Hollywood and television. The gay character became almost a requirement for sitcoms and the like. If the media begins to embrace nonsense watch out and expect it to gain traction.
THat also alters perceptions of what is normal, and the amount of it present.
According to my TV, one in five people is GLBTQ, one is black, one hispanic, one asian, and the wimpy idiot male or the really smart-ish Liberal chick is white. Such distortions of demographics and capabilities are why I refuse to watch most of what is on the thing, and any show exhibiting faggotry not essential to the plot will not be watched again under my roof.
"Fear the Walking Dead", a show I liked at first for the display of normalcy bias, and found intriguing that the person who led the least "normal" life (the addict) figured out the zombie apocalypse first, died in one unnecessary homosexual kiss. I never tuned in again.
It wasn't necessary. Those guys could have been just good friends without anything sexual and it would not have hurt the plot line. Instead, the show never was watched again under my roof.
Unless and until we are not consumers of such media garbage, we will be fed it, and the only way to fight is to just turn it off.
-
THat also alters perceptions of what is normal, and the amount of it present.
According to my TV, one in five people is GLBTQ, one is black, one hispanic, one asian, and the wimpy idiot male or the really smart-ish Liberal chick is white. Such distortions of demographics and capabilities are why I refuse to watch most of what is on the thing, and any show exhibiting faggotry not essential to the plot will not be watched again under my roof.
"Fear the Walking Dead", a show I liked at first for the display of normalcy bias, and found intriguing that the person who led the least "normal" life (the addict) figured out the zombie apocalypse first, died in one unnecessary homosexual kiss. I never tuned in again.
It wasn't necessary. Those guys could have been just good friends without anything sexual and it would not have hurt the plot line. Instead, the show never was watched again under my roof.
Unless and until we are not consumers of such media garbage, we will be fed it, and the only way to fight is to just turn it off.
I agree @Smokin Joe ...I haven't had TV cable in over 10 years and haven't missed it at all.
-
I agree @Smokin Joe ...I haven't had TV cable in over 10 years and haven't missed it at all.
I have cable TV, and I use it to watch old shows. :shrug:
The most popular thing at my house this past week has been on my Fire Stick. We've been watching the fireplace video we found Christmas.