Pedophiles are born that way

[Swizzik]

My opinion on that is yes. Homosexuality and pedophilia, as well as necrophilia and all forms of disturbing sexual conduct, is a choice.

I don't think homosexuality is a choice because that's like saying Heterosexuality is a choice as well. I mean i like women I don't think I debated whether or not I should sleep with a man or a woman today.

[Unbiased]

My opinion on that is yes. Homosexuality and pedophilia, as well as necrophilia and all forms of disturbing sexual conduct, is a choice.

I originally thought the same way. However i speak on whether theyre born that way. Anyone can control their urges.

[Jack Spicer]

My opinion on that is yes. Homosexuality and pedophilia, as well as necrophilia and all forms of disturbing sexual conduct, is a choice.

Not to go off topic, but how is homosexuality a disturbing sexual conduct?

[Germanicus]

I meant do you sorry im on a typo. Dont you think everyone deserves equality? Im getting a general opinion i already said i dont support them.

*sigh* You're asking a tough question. One, it would be wrong to persecute them if they were born that way and they legitimately could not help it. On the other hand, the practice is disturbing and makes me ill to think about. I suppose, for this one, my own morals could not possibly allow me to accept this as a practice we should allow...HOWEVER. As society itself, democratic society at the least, cannot afford to be biased based upon factors such as these...jeesh, this is the ultimate conflict between my political beliefs and my moral standards. It's the abortion debate all over again.

[leggomynecro]

To those that believe they are "born that way" or insert genetic excuse here because a scientist said so, you are wrong. You have absolute control over 100% of your actions. Because otherwise this means there are people who are living that have zero control over their actions similar to a dog with rabies. You are on the same level as an animal. You know what happens to dog with rabies.....they get put down. Because they are not in control anymore and are a threat to everyone around them. So if people are not in control and are a threat to our children because they have "rabies" they should be put down. However this is not the case and people choose to live corrupt lives. Also, no matter how innocent they seem these "scientists" are being paid good money to "prove" whatever a drug company wants, to legitimize to sell a drug to sheep that cannot or will not think for themselves.

[Germanicus]

To those that believe they are "born that way" or insert genetic excuse here because a scientist said so, you are wrong. You have absolute control over 100% of your actions. Because otherwise this means there are people who are living that have zero control over their actions similar to a dog with rabies. You are on the same level as an animal. You know what happens to dog with rabies.....they get put down. Because they are not in control anymore and are a threat to everyone around them. So if people are not in control and are a threat to our children because they have "rabies" they should be put down. However this is not the case and people choose to live corrupt lives. Also, no matter how innocent they seem these "scientists" are being paid good money to "prove" whatever a drug company wants, to legitimize to sell a drug to sheep that cannot or will not think for themselves.

I'm sorry, I dislike pedophilia as well, but...who exactly would pay a scientist to say that a pedophile has a genetic disorder?

[leggomynecro]

Someone who has money and is looking to make a lot more. You think scientists do this in their spare time for fun? They are getting paid by someone to research such "conditions".

[Germanicus]

Someone who has money and is looking to make a lot more. You think scientists do this in their spare time for fun? They are getting paid by someone to research such "conditions".

So, are you implying that you think someone could profit from pedophilia being a genetic disorder? I find that hard to believe.

[Shinobi Train]

Not to go off topic, but how is homosexuality a disturbing sexual conduct?

I'm not really wanting to reply to the others, but I will say that I was mainly speaking of male homosexuality. It is disturbing not only because it was forbidden, but also because it's just disturbing. I mean really? Really? It's actually natural for women to be somewhat attracted to each other, but men? Really? I literally thought it was a joke when I was first told about it...then come to find out that it's real...wow. If you don't think it's disturbing, then there's something wrong, either that or society is more influencial than I thought it was.

Just like pedophilia. Who would ever be attracted to a child? I can understand 200-500 years ago when people would be married off at a very young age, but that was how things were done, and it's not that bad considering the average life was very short...they mostly just wanted children before the people croaked. That's not pedophilia, it's survival. Otherwise, who wants a flat chested girl in bed with hardly any pubes to speak of? Or a man that can barely hold it long enough to do anything sensual since his puberty makes for premature ejaculation?

Seriously...we need James cameron to raise the bar (South Park reference FTW!)

[Unbiased]

To those that believe they are "born that way" or insert genetic excuse here because a scientist said so, you are wrong. You have absolute control over 100% of your actions. Because otherwise this means there are people who are living that have zero control over their actions similar to a dog with rabies. You are on the same level as an animal. You know what happens to dog with rabies.....they get put down. Because they are not in control anymore and are a threat to everyone around them. So if people are not in control and are a threat to our children because they have "rabies" they should be put down. However this is not the case and people choose to live corrupt lives. Also, no matter how innocent they seem these "scientists" are being paid good money to "prove" whatever a drug company wants, to legitimize to sell a drug to sheep that cannot or will not think for themselves.

I applaud you for a compelling argument. However according to your logic everyone can make free choices. By that logic why should someone have to be persecuted and "put down" because of how he is. If he truly is born that way then its wrong to tell him he can't do whats natural to him.

[Jack Spicer]

I'm not really wanting to reply to the others, but I will say that I was mainly speaking of male homosexuality. It is disturbing not only because it was forbidden, but also because it's just disturbing. I mean really? Really? It's actually natural for women to be somewhat attracted to each other, but men? Really? I literally thought it was a joke when I was first told about it...then come to find out that it's real...wow. If you don't think it's disturbing, then there's something wrong, either that or society is more influencial than I thought it was.

So male homosexuality is disturbing, but female is a-okay? I don't think it's dair to play on one side of the fence and say "Well, one is okay, but the other is just wrong" despite being in the same realm. Most people think that way, but atleast you have a different reason. Most people are like "Two girls making out are hot, so I'm in" and are like "BEING GAY IS WRONG". Sorta hypocritical I understand why you think so, I disagree with it, but I completly understand and respect your reasoning more so than others, despite me, like I said, disagreeing with it because I just think saying one is okay, but the other isn't is kinda uncool to me. Well, not uncool, but not fair.

And nah, I really don't think so. I don't think homosexuality is distubring, male or female. To me, it's just people doin what they do, living their lives. Not harmful or anything, so I don't see it as negative at all. It's just normal people doing normal stuff to me. Is something wrong? Not to me, maybe to others, but I think overall society plays into both parts. People adapt to society and that defines to them what is disturbing and what is not.

Thanks for the cool reply, very calm and collected by the way. Cheers.

[Unbiased]

So male homosexuality is disturbing, but female is a-okay? I don't think it's dair to play on one side of the fence and say "Well, one is okay, but the other is just wrong" despite being in the same realm. Most people think that way, but atleast you have a different reason. Most people are like "Two girls making out are hot, so I'm in" and are like "BEING GAY IS WRONG". Sorta hypocritical I understand why you think so, I disagree with it, but I completly understand and respect your reasoning more so than others, despite me, like I said, disagreeing with it because I just think saying one is okay, but the other isn't is kinda uncool to me. Well, not uncool, but not fair.

And nah, I really don't think so. I don't think homosexuality is distubring, male or female. To me, it's just people doin what they do, living their lives. Not harmful or anything, so I don't see it as negative at all. It's just normal people doing normal stuff to me. Is something wrong? Not to me, maybe to others, but I think overall society plays into both parts. People adapt to society and that defines to them what is disturbing and what is not.

Thanks for the cool reply, very calm and collected by the way. Cheers.

Do you think people should censor their actions and lifestyle for the sake of not causing controversy?

[Shinobi Train]

So male homosexuality is disturbing, but female is a-okay? I don't think it's dair to play on one side of the fence and say "Well, one is okay, but the other is just wrong" despite being in the same realm. Most people think that way, but atleast you have a different reason. Most people are like "Two girls making out are hot, so I'm in" and are like "BEING GAY IS WRONG". Sorta hypocritical I understand why you think so, I disagree with it, but I completly understand and respect your reasoning more so than others, despite me, like I said, disagreeing with it because I just think saying one is okay, but the other isn't is kinda uncool to me. Well, not uncool, but not fair.

And nah, I really don't think so. I don't think homosexuality is distubring, male or female. To me, it's just people doin what they do, living their lives. Not harmful or anything, so I don't see it as negative at all. It's just normal people doing normal stuff to me. Is something wrong? Not to me, maybe to others, but I think overall society plays into both parts. People adapt to society and that defines to them what is disturbing and what is not.

Thanks for the cool reply, very calm and collected by the way. Cheers.

Ah, but I never said it was entirely okay for women to be straight out lesbian. I would recommend that they get husbands. Scripture, it says nothing about women except that Paul said in one place that women should not lay with women. For something to be true, there needs to be two witnesses, and that's only one.

This is my opinion, and yes, ones beliefs do have a place in such a discussion, despite people wanting to ignore that fact. I don't go around bashing gays, but I don't condone it either...let them speak with their maker is what I say. Sodomy is named so because of Sodom...and it was destroyed with fire. If someone truly wants to take that risk...more power to them.

[Ira]

So you hold that same philosophy with homosexuality? They both claim to be born that way and with research being done its being shown to be true.

There is a large difference between the two- age of consent.

Any kind of sexual relationship is allowed only as long as both the parties involved are consenting adults. If one of the involved parties is a minor/kid/under age in the eyes of law, different set of rules are applied. In such a case it doesn't matter if the relationship is homosexual or heterosexual.

Reason is that minors or kids do not understand full implications of such relationships. At the same time adults are supposed to be mature enough to be able to understand what the pros and cons of their actions are and allowed to make choices accordingly.

Not to forget that the kids are more vulnerable to be taken advantage of - being physically weak and dependent on adults around them in various ways and easier to manipulate. That's why law provides them extra security.

Before someone raises this point- I know that some minors can be smarter and some adults quite stupid, still we have to draw a line somewhere and thus comes the legal age of consent.

[Ishan Hokage]

I find pedophiles weird.. moreover mate teenagers who date each other r pedos? R u mad or wht?

[sweetyhearty89]

Well Pedophilia is a "Mental Disorder" and there's a lot of causes for a mental disorder and Genetics can be one!
But u cannot say that pedophiles r born that way coz it could also be due to trauma, drugs, life experiences, society, culture and more..
A child can never be a pedophile coz a pedophile is a person 16 years of age or older!!!

[Unbiased]

There is a large difference between the two- Homosexual relationship means relation between two consenting adults.

If one of the involved parties is a minor/kid/under age in the eyes of law, different set of rules are applied. In such a case it doesn't matter if the relationship is homosexual or heterosexual.

Reason is that minors or kids do not understand full implications of such relationships. At the same time adults are supposed to be mature enough to be able to understand what the pros and cons of their actions are and allowed to make choices accordingly.

Not to forget that the kids are more vulnerable to be taken advantage of - being physically weak and dependent on adults around them in various ways and easier to manipulate. That's why law provides them extra security.

Before someone raises this point- I know that some minors can be smarter and some adults quite stupid, still we have to draw a line somewhere and thus comes the legal age of consent.

Wouldn't that be an injustice in regards to equality? I know in some places you can be marrried off as early as the age of ten. What's to say our legal definition of becoming of age isn't wrong?

[Ira]

Wouldn't that be an injustice in regards to equality? I know in some places you can be marrried off as early as the age of ten. What's to say our legal definition of becoming of age isn't wrong?

Difference in age of consent in different countries doesn't fall under definition of equality. We do not have a world government. Law of the land depends on various aspects depending upon the people of that place and they have a right to make their own rules on any subject whatsoever. Nations often bargain on the various aspects of civil/political/economic rights on mutual basis.

Unless there is a severe case of violation of human rights- i.e. some behaviour/practice which is accepted to be against human dignity universally the other nations do not/cannot/should not have a say at all. And even then it can be pretty subjective matter. International laws/definitions do not apply on any nation unless that nation has given consent/accepted to abide by those.

All of us go by what we have defined as the right age of maturity in our own countries. It would be stupid if people of one country go and try to dictate their opinion regarding what should be the right age for them.

Still keep in mind that in many of the places where they allow marriage of kids as young as ten it is not up to the kids to give consent. their parents and guardians give their consent on their behalf as they are supposed to be doing that in the best interest of the kid.

[Unbiased]

Difference in age of consent in different countries doesn't fall under definition of equality. We do not have a world government. Law of the land depends on various aspects depending upon the people of that place and they have a right to make their own rules on any subject whatsoever. Nations often bargain on the various aspects of civil/political/economic rights on mutual basis.

Unless there is a severe case of violation of human rights- i.e. some behaviour/practice which is accepted to be against human dignity universally the other nations do not/cannot/should not have a say at all. And even then it can be pretty subjective matter. International laws/definitions do not apply on any nation unless that nation has given consent/accepted to abide by those.

All of us go by what we have defined as the right age of maturity in our own countries. It would be stupid if people of one country go and try to dictate their opinion regarding what should be the right age for them.

Still keep in mind that in many of the places where they allow marriage of kids as young as ten it is not up to the kids to give consent. their parents and guardians give their consent on their behalf as they are supposed to be doing that in the best interest of the kid.

So i guess in regards to what you are saying its a matter of opinion. I find it interesting however that adults would give up their kids for marriage at that age. Leads me to question if an age of consent is neccesary. What i mean by that is if every parent should be given the option to say their kid is an adult. I personally wouldn't have this law where i live (america) becauuse here parents find its the schools job to raise children and in such aren't huge key players in the teachings of their children.

[SandVillageShinobi]

I'm not really wanting to reply to the others, but I will say that I was mainly speaking of male homosexuality. It is disturbing not only because it was forbidden, but also because it's just disturbing. I mean really? Really? It's actually natural for women to be somewhat attracted to each other, but men? Really? I literally thought it was a joke when I was first told about it...then come to find out that it's real...wow. If you don't think it's disturbing, then there's something wrong, either that or society is more influencial than I thought it was.

Just like pedophilia. Who would ever be attracted to a child? I can understand 200-500 years ago when people would be married off at a very young age, but that was how things were done, and it's not that bad considering the average life was very short...they mostly just wanted children before the people croaked. That's not pedophilia, it's survival. Otherwise, who wants a flat chested girl in bed with hardly any pubes to speak of? Or a man that can barely hold it long enough to do anything sensual since his puberty makes for premature ejaculation?

Seriously...we need James cameron to raise the bar (South Park reference FTW!)

Actually straight woman are not supposed to be sexually attractive to one another it's just a lot of straight girls pretend to be lesbian or bi to fit in.

[Unbiased]

Actually straight woman are not supposed to be sexually attractive to one another it's just a lot of straight girls pretend to be lesbian or bi to fit in.

I went to high school and college in florida and its totally like that. People pretend to be bi or lesbian.

[Ashflura]

Clearly pedophiles are under the influence of either past bad experiences that have led to a psychological disorder or under the influence of something supernatural. We all look and condone the act, but can never pinpoint the reasoning to why they act this way...its out of a human's mind capacity to understand why a logical thinking adult would do something like that to a child. Hence, why I believe they are under the influence of something while committing the act rather than simply being born that way.

A child subjugated is an immediate radar on our minds. The act is sick, wrong and ultimately against human morality. People aren't born pedophiles, despite the article, it's a load of nonsense.

As far as equality goes for people born with genetic disorders...people can tell if someone is under the influence of something genetic and if their behaviour is altered to an average person with a stable mindset, so the sense that applies here is common sense. A practical example is saying someone with Down Syndrome should be treated the same way as someone without the syndrome. The two individuals immediately require different amounts of attention, different amounts of compassion, patience and consideration. Although their needs are different, and the way they see life is - as it is for any individual. The need for basic human rights is still in order.

The right to not be judged because of beliefs, age, race, etc The right to live until it is there natural time of death by God.

The act of sodomy may be against the will of God, but remember a choice does not ultimately make a person. Who is to decide when a man or act is bad?

[Algalon]

Yes they are born that way and both need to answer for what they do wrong

However an adult consenting same sex partner is very different from a pedophiles victim that is usually forced and has no or little knowledge about the situation

If a homosexual woul rape a person believe me that they wouldbe prosecuted

However two consenting homosexual partners did absolutely nothing wrong

[leggomynecro]

I applaud you for a compelling argument. However according to your logic everyone can make free choices. By that logic why should someone have to be persecuted and "put down" because of how he is. If he truly is born that way then its wrong to tell him he can't do whats natural to him.

Not free choices everything has a consequence possible outcomes being positive, negative, or neutral. That is why words like amoral, moral, immoral exists. OFC you can tell him/her what is wrong thats just naive.

[Ira]

So i guess in regards to what you are saying its a matter of opinion. I find it interesting however that adults would give up their kids for marriage at that age. Leads me to question if an age of consent is neccesary. What i mean by that is if every parent should be given the option to say their kid is an adult. I personally wouldn't have this law where i live (america) becauuse here parents find its the schools job to raise children and in such aren't huge key players in the teachings of their children.

I find your first sentence quite misleading and self serving. Are you referring to age of consent as a matter of opinion or your main topic itself? I never said it is a matter of opinion only. Only thing that can depends on opinion and vary, is age of consent not the fact about difference in homosexual behaviour and paedophiles. And even in the concept of age of consent only difference is where any particular nation draws the line regarding the minimum age for holding you legally responsible. The basic principle as to why it needs to be defined ( age of consent) remains the same.