10-13-2013, 10:11 AM
There is a difference between claiming a teenager of 16 or 17 can consent (which is up for discussion) and claiming a 10 year old can (which is not). NAMBLA attempts to do the latter, which is wrong.
Yes, a body will respond to sexual stimulus whether the mind is ready to deal with it or not. Children experimenting with eachother is normal. Adults exploiting that is not. And what NAMBLA advocates is exploitation--nothing more.
I don't think it's as simple as the "let's grab our pitchforks and go after them" mentality, though. As someone upthread suggested, these are mentally ill people who need help. Giving them access to that help could spare a lot of them from acting on their desires, and ultimately protect more children.
That being said, once they act on it, I support the idea of them being chemically castrated.
Yes, a body will respond to sexual stimulus whether the mind is ready to deal with it or not. Children experimenting with eachother is normal. Adults exploiting that is not. And what NAMBLA advocates is exploitation--nothing more.
I don't think it's as simple as the "let's grab our pitchforks and go after them" mentality, though. As someone upthread suggested, these are mentally ill people who need help. Giving them access to that help could spare a lot of them from acting on their desires, and ultimately protect more children.
That being said, once they act on it, I support the idea of them being chemically castrated.
![[-]](https://gayspeak.com/images/duende_v3_local/collapse.png)
