Psychiatric Association Debates Lifting Pedophilia Taboo

CNSNews.com ^ | 6/11/03 | Lawrence Morahan

[Windsong]

My son just graduated from high school. He was number 2 in his class. He was given a four year academic scholarship. Yeah, that's dysfunctional.

Visit Japan lately? If you do, take mark of how many promising young people commit suicide who have all A's across the board.

[Old Professer]

Truth is cruel, not I.

[MEGoody]

Removing pedophilia from the list of mental disorders doesn't matter much. In fact, I would say that someone choosing to be a pedophile despite having a perfectly 'sound mind' would result in them holding a higher level of responsibility for their acts.

[MEGoody]

"Yet they completely changed their view of it. So much for the "science" of it."

Exactly. It's not about science but about man searching for that which satisfies his itching ears.

[kuma]

**Where two consenting adults are concerned, I don't make it my business.**

I'm the youngest in a family of 3 girls. Even though I'll be 30 years old this year, I'm so glad that my mother makes the happiness of our lives her business even though we are all grown adults. My sisters and I (and even my husband) all ask her for advice even though we know there will be times she disapproves of something we've done.

She disapproves because she cares. According to you that is hatred. I'll continue to care about the people in my life no matter what others have to say. That includes moral relativists.

I'll also continue to be the person they call when they have no one else to talk to. They keep calling even when I don't approve of everything they do. Funny how they don't think I'm full of hate and proceed to tell their aquaintences that they know they can talk to me because I will love them no matter what they do.

That is true unconditional love.

[MEGoody]

"Yeah, I've seen those "changed" homosexuals. They aren't changed."

How do you know?

[Revolting cat!]

Psychiatric Association Debates Lifting Pedophilia Taboo

Well, I say, why not! Perhaps we can call pedophilia "merry" and make it groovy and acceptable, just like we, yes we here, have made pederasty acceptable by referring to it as "gaiety". There are 36 mentions of the word "gay" on this thread up to this point. (How do you think unpleasant things become acceptable?!)

[Dimensio]

I happen to agree. Unfortunately most people here are equating "removal of classificaton as mental illness" with "declaring it to be a great and wonderful thing", when there is no evidence that this is the case. I see nothing here that would suggest that the APA is defining child sexual abuse as a "good" thing (or even a "not bad" thing), but that will be the perception of many ignorant fools. I suspect, however, that political pressure will end this debate rather than actual research.

An act is not "right" just because it's not brought about by mental illness. Declassifying pedophilia as a mental illness would not justify sex with children.

[Qwerty]

Clint.. this post was pitiful. You still have no idea what ad hominem means, and probably still deny the definition of "murder" too.

"The law is being violated whether it be consensual a violation or not"

Well, I guess that's as close as it gets to you admitting no "rights" have been violated.

"Misdemeanor fines are fine by me when those who practice perversion are found."

Of course they are. You enjoy having your personal morals enforced by the government.

Fortunately you're on the losing side. The tide turned against you, and it's only going to change faster.

"The government (the people) wants to protect our society from those who pervert and seek to negatively change it."

Explain how homosexuals seek to pervert and negatively affect society. Make predictions about what will happen if gay couples have civil unions. Then we can see if you're right, since it will probably happen within my lifetime.

" if you’re going to make it based on consent then don’t be a hypocrite."

If you want to start a thread on pedophilia and euthanasia, then I'll explain my viewpoint on those subjects there. Focus on this one idea for once...

[Qwerty]

"Unfortunately most people here are equating "removal of classificaton as mental illness" with "declaring it to be a great and wonderful thing", when there is no evidence that this is the case."

This is exactly why the de-listing is such a non-story. Some Freepers are proclaiming this the validation of the slippery slope argument, and are waiting for pedophiles to freely roam the streets having sex with children...

[k2blader]

Sick.

[dsc]

"Where two consenting adults are concerned, I don't make it my business."

Your son has been condemned to miss at least some of life's greatest joys and probably to die prematurely (statistically, SSAD reduces lifespan) precisely because somebody got to him *before* he was an adult.

I'm fully aware that your disordered friends will have been lying their wimples off to you about this, but it is a stone cold fact that attraction to youth is one of the archetypal symptoms of SSAD. Wherever there is an SSAD sufferer, teenage boys are at risk. Period.

You have adopted the belief that anyone who fails to enthusiastically endorse homosexual behavior must be motivated by "hatred" and "bigotry," but the fact is that most are motivated by a desire to protect the innocent from falling victim to your son's fate, and by pity for the SSAD sufferers themselves.

As a soldier in the war to "mainstream" deviant sexual behavior, you are actually working to increase the access of SSAD sufferers to the young. I don't have to allege that this "will" result in an increasing incidence of SSAD, because it already has, and the numbers continue to trend upward.

To speak of "consenting adults" in this context is worse than meaningless; it is deceptive. Everyone who now suffers from SSAD is in that condition because he was traumatized by homosexual molestation or seduction before maturity. Where SSAD exists, predation on the young exists.

[dsc]

"Unfortunately most people here are equating "removal of classificaton as mental illness" with "declaring it to be a great and wonderful thing", when there is no evidence that this is the case."

"This is exactly why the de-listing is such a non-story. Some Freepers are proclaiming this the validation of the slippery slope argument"

Ummm, folks, we're pretty well along the road to declaring "the gay sexual orientation" to be a great and wonderful thing, and removal of homosexuality from the DSM was an important step in that process. It has had inestimable propaganda value.

Do you remember when that happened? I was in college at the time. Do you remember society before that, to compare with what we have now?

This is not a "non-story." It is a milestone in the movement to lower the age of consent. Say, to four.

[Qwerty]

"Ummm, folks, we're pretty well along the road to declaring "the gay sexual orientation" to be a great and wonderful thing"

Well, I might be biased about "the gay sexual orientation".

"Do you remember society before that, to compare with what we have now?"

What, are we comparing the 70's to now?

"This is not a "non-story." It is a milestone in the movement to lower the age of consent. Say, to four."

It is a non-story, it isn't going to help lower the age of consent, and the age of consent will never be four.

[Dimensio]

Yeah, I hear that. Thing is, people's attitudes toward homosexuality were changing before it was removed from the DSM. In fact, that attitude change was very likely one of the factors behind its removal. On the other hand, I'm not seeing widespread or even growing approval of sex with children. I see a few fringe groups that have become a bit louder and a bit more organized thanks to the methods of communication currently available, but I've not met a lot of people ready to consider that sex with a six year-old may not be that bad after all. I don't think that people will be changing their minds just because the inclination to have sex with a six year-old is no longer considered a "mental illness".

I personally lack the credentials to really make a call on whether or not pedophilia should be considered a mental illness, but my belief that sex with children is a "bad thing" is not based upon pedophilia being a mental illness. To me, it does not matter whether or not pedophilia is a sickness, I believe that there are other and more valid criteria for outlawing it -- laws aren't based upon actions driven by mental disorders; if they were then hand-washing would be illegal because of obsessive compulsives.

As I said, I don't think that anything will come of this. The article itself looks to be blowing things out of proportion and I think that there's quite a bit of political pressure aside from that to keep such a decision from being made for precicely the reason that I stated: idiots can't tell the difference between saying that pedophilia is not a mental illness and saying that child sexual abuse is not a bad thing.

[LibertarianInExile]

Two quick things to say to you, giggles:

1) I'm not sure why you use the term "Pot" in referring to me, but I'm guessing it's because you're a closet dealer who prefers to keep the product in your own distribution chain and it just slipped out. As previously mentioned, projection is a bad thing. I don't touch the stuff, and just because you do, doesn't mean everyone else does or wants to buy some from you. Get yourself fixed, both mentally, morally, and reproductively.

2) Just because Buffalo Kevin's personal theory is shared by a host of DU fans like you doesn't mean it isn't his personal theory, too. You're so logically impaired you saw someone post the word fallacy and thought they were talking dirty.

[LibertarianInExile]

You think wrong. He doesn't misunderstand. He intentionally distorts to make sure that no Libertarians want to be around FR or Republicans in general, in an attempt to drive out that wing of the big tent. He wants to see his buddies at DU happy.

Nothing wrong with that, as long as he actually admits he's a DemocRAT, but he'd be the first to whine about Libertarians 'costing Republicans elections,' too, and pretends he's actually a Republican supporter. Hypocrisy at its finest.

[Clint N. Suhks]

1) I'm not sure why you use the term "Pot" in referring to me, but blah, blah, blah...

Pot, Kettle, black...sorry to confuse you with nursery school analogy but anyway how would you know “Any time there's a thread on here talking about pedophilia or some other perversity, he's[KEVIN’s] on it. It's like a sexual weirdo thread checklist” if you’re not there too??? I’ll try to speak more to your IQ next time.

2) Just because Buffalo Kevin's personal theory is shared by a host of DU fans like you

No not really, Liberals and Liberaltarians share more in common with “DU fans” than conservatives but why would I expect you to understand those subtleties? Go figure?

Signed

Mr. Giggles

[Clint N. Suhks]

I've not met a lot of people ready to consider that sex with a six year-old may not be that bad after all. I don't think that people will be changing their minds just because the inclination to have sex with a six year-old is no longer considered a "mental illness".

But that’s not the age where homosexuals offend. It’s really the age of mental capacity to consent and I believe I’ve proven to you that’s more than possible at the latter ages of pre-pubescence, pubescence and post-pubescence…ages 10 to as late as 15 for the late physical not but mental bloomers.

[UnklGene]

"Let the 'Kid-Buggery' begin!
How did the old Maurice Chevalier song from 'Gigi,' go........."Zank Heaven for leetle 'boys'........"