Posted on 04/25/2002 10:15:12 AM PDT by Starmaker
A recent article in the USA TODAY, written by Karen S. Peterson, discusses the book, Harmful to Minors: The Perils of Protecting Children from Sex. I must admit that I have not read the book, as it is scheduled for release on May 1. However, the article in the USA TODAY highlighted some of the ideas in the controversial book. The ideas expressed in the book are greatly alarming, and should be of paramount concern for all parents.
Judith Levine, the author of the book, states that she is not completely opposed to sex between adults and children. Although she opposes all non-consensual sex, she believes that "non-consensual" is an unfair label of sex between adults and children. According to the article, she applauds a Dutch age-of-consent law that permits adult sex with a child ages 12-16 if the young person consents. Either the child or the child's parents can file charges if the sex is coerced. She and other 'experts' in the field of child-sexual abuse appear to be trying to tear down the walls of law that have been enacted in this country, which forbid sex between adults and children.
The idea that a child can even engage in consensual sex with an adult is preposterous. A twelve-year old child knows little about sex, outside of images he has seen on television or discussions he has had with his friends. This is certainly not quality information. Even if this child has received some type of sex education, whether in school or by his parents, he still has little perception of the non-physical relationship sex causes between two people. A child is hardly capable of understanding how having sex with an adult will impact her life. This is especially true if she is being 'talked into' having sex by an adult who is seemingly wiser and more knowledgeable than her.
The children of America are already being bombarded with sexual images on television shows and in magazines which are targeted to the teen audience. Watch an episode of "Dawson's Creek", preferably without your child, and judge for yourself. The program depicts young people as having the sexual maturity of a 30-year old, with the body of a teenager. Of course, this program is hardly the exception.
Spend some time watching professional wrestling. When I was a child, I loved to watch wrestling. However, the sexual innuendoes and graphic attire worn by the women was non-existent then. In fact, very few women were ever seen during a professional wrestling program. Flippant references to sex and horribly mistreating women are commonplace on such programs today.
One can pick up any number of today's teen magazines and see references to sexual activities, where not many years ago the same article space might be used to discuss kissing. Explicit pictures of a virtually naked Brittney Spears, and a host of other teen stars, also cover the magazines, further creating a culture of sex among our young people.
With the incredible amounts of sexually-explicit material making its way to the eyes of our young girls and boys, is it a good idea to let adults have sex with these young people without the fear of persecution? Certainly not. Furthermore, allowing sex between adults and children remains improper even if the child consents, which would be far more difficult to prove or disprove if children and adults were given the right to engage in consensual sexual activity.
Ms. Levine and other numerous experts have reasoned that adult/child sex does not have any harmful effects upon children later in life. Though that reasoning hardly stands up to even the slightest amount of common sense, an even broader question should be asked, "What benefits does the child receive from sex with an adult?" The answer is there are no benefits, but, contrary to Ms. Levine's thoughts, there are some monumental consequences of adult/child sex.
Imagine if adult/child sex were allowed in this country and that adults were free to have sex with children as young as twelve years old. Does anyone honestly believe this would better our society? If this were allowed, there is no doubt that HIV and other sexually-transmitted diseases would grow exponentially among teenagers, as most of the adults engaging in sex with the young people would likely have many sexual partners. Furthermore, teenagers are the least likely demographic group to engage in "safe sex", which would result in an even faster spread of the diseases among teens versus any other group.
In addition, allowing sex between children and adults would cause a further erosion of negativity associated with sex among the nation's young people. Children having children remains a significant problem in our country and would only grow if these types of activities were allowed.
Finally, adult/child sex would also greatly increase the number of out-of-wedlock births in this country. Numerous studies have shown that children born out-of-wedlock have a far more behavioral problems; are more likely to live in poverty and will probably have their own out-of-wedlock children. Without question, creating more out-of-wedlock births would cause serious long-lasting damage upon our society.
For those parents, and future-parents, who are still on the bubble regarding this issue, ask yourself one question. How would you like your child to lose his/her virginity to an adult? I know my answer, and I pray it is no different than yours.
Anyway, maybe I'm not making any sense, but this is sick and should be soundly rejected by society. Children must be protected from this filth. This isn't a debate to even have.
I found this sentence interesting.
How are they going to protect the pedophiles who attempt to have sex with my children or any children I know from recieving a severe dose of lead poisoning.
However, in debates, I would simply ask the audience: Should your child be allowed to have sex with an adult even if he/she wanted to? Start there. Bring it home to people. Then, throw in facts and sound science.
However, it all goes back to whether society should be condoning or encouraging pre-marital sex, and at what age? Are there any studies done on the divorce rates for couples where one or both of the spouses were virgins? Or on the promiscuity rate compared to the divorce rate? Then we have studies on abortions (oh, yeah, the liberal pro-aborts don't keep good records, surprise surprise), increase in births, adoption, suicide, education, economic status, etc., etc.
Someone SHOULD do the research and counter this argument; I don't disagree with that. I would be pleased to quote and use it to refute this liberal witch. But there are so many factors in child-sex issues that I wouldn't even know where to start.
Sex with minors is vastly underreported (of course it is, it's illegal) and a rapidly growing cultural trend.
As much as possible considering the legal issue, Hollywood and the elite already accept this practice
(Roman Polanski, Woody Allen, and the film American Beauty come to mind right off).
There was a noticable lack of outrage when Clinton was caught with Monica, despite the fact she was less than half his age.
Youth is celebrated and much sought after, and the young don't mind marketing it. Anna Nicole Smith --- need I say more?
Cries of "homewrecker" and "cradle-robber" are still heard, but are muted and quickly forgotten.
The oldster and the youngster both get what they want --- sex and/or money, usually.
Who loses the most in this? Older men without money, homely youngsters and anyone who relies on stable family life for fulfillment.
Don't forget those feminist boomers, too --- finding a successful man who appreciates a mature woman can only get harder.
I'm so glad that will never happen.
Course, I'd guess, like the Levine woman, they don't have children.
How do these advocates differentiate between pedophiles or molesters between emotionally mature adults who simply want to court a youngster with a goal toward marriage (if there is such an animal?).
John Douglas, of the FBI, writes this in his book "Journey Into Darkness":
I can't help but wonder if the attorneys of child molesters or other violent offenders are willing to let their own children befriend these guys once they get out. Will they let their own kids be the guinea pigs in some informal child molester rehabilitation study? What makes us think that once they've seen they can manipulate educated, advanced degreed, mature adults into believing what they want them to believe, that they'll stop using their influence and skills to prey on children, especially children to which they're very strongly sexually attracted?
Kids weren't pressured by outside forces to have sex and the community protected them.
Now we send our kids off to school and they learn all about all kinds of sex activities in taxpayer funded schools.
Yes, back in the good old days, some kids engaged in sex before married, and some gals got pregnant. But not at the rate we are seeing now.
It isn't. It's being discussed in America.
You forgot the cap! My front stuffer won't go bang without a cap!
Semper Fi & Keep the powder dry!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.