reiniat Posted May 29, 2015 Share Posted May 29, 2015 I was expecting a milestone topic but instead i got a bunch of people that agreed with each other but ended up fighting because of bad use of sarcasm. Priceless Alexander 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beautiful Disaster Posted May 29, 2015 Share Posted May 29, 2015 Excuse you, the sarcasm was used beautifully. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reiniat Posted May 29, 2015 Share Posted May 29, 2015 Excuse you, the sarcasm was used beautifully. Yeah youre right, i just finished reading the page. I dont like a 20CharactersUsername point of view, you have to drawn the line somewhere, the lines of mental illness will always be blurred, so my very own approach would be to find them with trial and error. Ultimately of course theres a medicine approach to: if you can cure a man from getting an erection looking at a child, then you can cure a man from getting an erection from looking at another man. Which is called chemical castration, and its not funny at all, but some pedophiles can choose to take it in order to fit better in society, so youre all guys having a non-debate here, theres already a clinical process that fixes sexual desire for any kind of thing, and no one is very much concerned by it, and its an alternative for pedophiles and no one is making a big fuss about it, or forcing gay people to take it anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a20characterusername Posted May 29, 2015 Share Posted May 29, 2015 (edited) Yeah youre right, i just finished reading the page. I dont like a 20CharactersUsername point of view, you have to draw the line somewhere That is my point of view. I even said it twice. "What would the implications be, where is the line?" "For me, the line of acceptance gets drawn at consent, and I don't believe prepubescent children can consent. Not just legally, but biologically as well." Edited May 29, 2015 by a20characterusername Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Theodore93 Posted May 29, 2015 Share Posted May 29, 2015 (edited) I hate it when homosexuality is brought into the topic of paedophilia, it is not comparable in the slightest. Neither are mental illnesses for that matter, because (in general) those with them aren't criminals; you treat them for their own wellbeing, not for the sake of others even if they can be affected. I don't see why they shouldn't be comparable, they're both sexual orientations. I don't imagine people choose to be attracted to children any more than people choose to be attracted to their own sex. The only real difference is that paedophilia can't be consented to and is therefore (probably) harmful. I don't understand your argument about neither being a mental illness either. Firstly, what's being a criminal got to do with mental illness? Secondly, if anything I'd argue that both homosexuality and paedophilia could be interpreted as mental illnesses. Generally speaking, neither are normal ways of thinking or behaving and they both should (biologically not morally) render the individuals unable to reproduce (notwithstanding surrogates, science and whatnot). The definition of mental illness seems to be extremely vague anyway so it seems very much to open to interpretation. I don't however, think whether it's politcally correct or not should come into it. The problem I see is that while the so called progressives are calling for the LGBT folks to be loud and proud, they are as quick as anyone else to condemn paedophiles as the scum of the earth. Sure, there'll be some pedos that are genuinely nasty pieces of work, but generally they should be treated like anyone else is mentally ill who is potentially a danger to others. I'm not suggesting homosexuality is wrong, or that paedophilia is to be excused, simply that there is a bit more common ground than it seems to be socially acceptable to admit and that the latter should should be treated with a bit more fairness and understanding. Lastly, let's say there was a hypothetical cure for homosexuality. Why would that be so bad? Certainly if it was being forced upon people then that would be inexcusable, but say someone wanted the cure for themselves, why should they be denied it just because some people don't like it? Way I see it, if someone can choose to have the a sex change then they should be able to choose their orientation too. Edited May 29, 2015 by Waldie a20characterusername 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beautiful Disaster Posted May 29, 2015 Share Posted May 29, 2015 Chemical castration is an option, and many pedophiles go that route. Or even physical castration. But it would be nice if they were left with an option to have a normal, healthy life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reiniat Posted May 29, 2015 Share Posted May 29, 2015 snip Waldie's right, except people will go bananas if you call it a "cure", just call it a procedure and everyone will be fine with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirsty Posted May 29, 2015 Share Posted May 29, 2015 And that's where we have to draw a line in the sand between our opinions, I don't agree it is a sexual orientation. Yes it is sexually driven and not by choice, but that's where any kind of similarity ends. Paedophilia is a psychiatric disorder because of the impulse to do something that causes a great deal of harm and that person becomes their victim. There can never, ever, be consent with a child. A straight, gay or bisexual person doesn't have to fight themselves not to molest a person, a paedophile does. The fact they can't consent is part of the attraction, because their innocence is what they desire. You simply cannot compare that to the love between consenting adults of any orientation. I'm sure there are many people out there who have to fight every day with this and you can feel for them, and if there is help for them they certainly should receive it I never denied that, but perhaps it isn't talked more openly about because they won't come forward to confess, and that is out of choice. They wouldn't be arrested and locked up immediately or flayed in the streets, so by keeping hidden and not seeking help they are valuing their own arousal over treatment even if it doesn't clearly exist, or feel they are in a situation where losing their job or partner is more important than not molesting their child. Being conflicted with such an illness isn't what makes them scumbags, you can't give fault to something you can't help feeling, but it's their actions in dealing with it, or should I say not dealing with it, and at the very worst scenario acting upon their urges without regret and trying to keep it covered. Beautiful Disaster, Fonz and Static 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beautiful Disaster Posted May 29, 2015 Share Posted May 29, 2015 very well said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blitz Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 This family creeps the hell out of me. The dad has some hillbilly redneck name like Jimmy Bob or something and nobody's even talking about the victims???? This dude molested a bunch of girls and some of them were his sisters and all the parents are talking about are his well being? No one seems to care at all about how the girls he fondled are pulling along. Like what the actual f*ck kind of show is this? Beautiful Disaster, Gay Tony and Fonz 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
universetwisters Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 No one seems to care at all about how the girls he fondled are pulling along They're saving that for the spinoff series, the rate TLC is going. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now