Nambla

[Sil]

On the other side of your argument, I think it is entirely irrelevant whether homosexuality is a choice or not. This focus on choice is a ridiculous waste of time, homosexuality doesn't harm people and involves consenting individuals, end of story.

And you are right, homosexuality does not harm people. And neither does pedophilia. One's thoughts do no harm another person.

Okay, I'm just gonna dive right in here -

thoughts are expressions of desire, and desires will eventulaly become manifest. When you're talking about infringing on the rights of a person who is not emotionally mature enough to make decisions like these, you are imposing sex upon them and only taking what you desire in the name of 'love'. You may understand your reasoning for these actions, but the child or victim will not.

Children should not be having sex, of this we are clear, unless it is teenage experimentation with other children which is both healthy and natural to some extent. Society is clear on this. To justify a grown man or woman's impositions on a minor as being something that is misunderstood is completely false; healthy mature adults are aware of desire and its implications, of its emotional resonance and impact. Yet they would choose to override this knowledge because of a latent desire. You are taking the forbidden fruit because it is forbidden, then backing these ideas with a concept of 'mutual' love.

South Park put it best - "you f*ck children" .... not objects, or the same sex... innocent living things with naievety in almost aspect of their lives, and you are writing their childhood for them and ripping them away from it without their understanding because you cannot form a relationship with a mature adult. They suffer for your problem.

I find the comparison to homosexuality quite insulting, and hope this comparison is never made in further debate. Acceptance is a term that can be applied to ideas as moral viewpoints change through history, and no length of time will ever make sex with minors become morally or socially acceptable. Organisations like this (sadly) do have the right to exist under freedom of speech, but the distancing from reality in this organisation is quite frightening.