I'm a pedophile with no goal.

skeleton-countess wrote:

I oppose the current law, but stay within it as I lobby for legal and social change in an attempt to create a world where such relationships are safe.

How exactly would you make the relationships "safe"? Legalizing adult-child love isn't going to necessarily make children understand or want sex with an adult. You can't expect children to be able to make the same decisions as adults. That's why they're called children.

Without getting too deep into the proposals I put forward in more political areas than this site, it basically comes down to using the exact metrics you alluded to, knowledge, comprehension, and decision making ability to gauge ability to consent rather than the current standard of age. Treat anyone without those traits as we currently treat children and treat anyone possessing them as we currently treat adults.

On reflection after a good night's sleep, that last post was probably too political already for open forum here and might be more triggering to others than I intended.

Mods, feel free to blank it.

I don't think it was that political. Plus, I was the one who asked about it sorry.

I mean I'm in favor of better sex ed and stuff too so. But yeah we're also off topic. Sorry ineedhope.

YouthRightsRadical wrote:

ineedhope wrote:Thanks for sharing man. In my country, back in the 70's, I've read there was an actual organization for the legalization of sex with minors. I will say that I personally believe that it is wrong. Children may in some way or another have a sex drive, but they do not understand it and it should not under any circumstance be interacted with by adults. I regret my actions and I will say that I look down upon those who honestly believe there is nothing wrong with molesting/loving children.

You and I are as close to opposites as I think we're likely to find. I oppose the current law, but stay within it as I lobby for legal and social change in an attempt to create a world where such relationships are safe. You support the current law but couldn't stay within it, exposing a child to all the risks, censure, and hardship I want to see ended. Seems the one thing we have in common is that we both look down on eachother.

I do not look down upon you in any way. I want to make that clear. I have my beliefs and I think I've taken the stance I have because of honest and true regret of my actions. I also respect your views, though I disagree with them.

YouthRightsRadical wrote:

skeleton-countess wrote:

I oppose the current law, but stay within it as I lobby for legal and social change in an attempt to create a world where such relationships are safe.

How exactly would you make the relationships "safe"? Legalizing adult-child love isn't going to necessarily make children understand or want sex with an adult. You can't expect children to be able to make the same decisions as adults. That's why they're called children.

Without getting too deep into the proposals I put forward in more political areas than this site, it basically comes down to using the exact metrics you alluded to, knowledge, comprehension, and decision making ability to gauge ability to consent rather than the current standard of age. Treat anyone without those traits as we currently treat children and treat anyone possessing them as we currently treat adults.

Interresting angle you got there. As much as I find it interresting I also do believe it may be slightly utopian in its point. Surely it should not fall upon the individual to judge whether or not the mental state of a child is fit for a romantic relationship. Furthermore, the manipulation skillsets possesed by adult would allow for people with dark goals (actual abuse) to be free to reign.

Furthermore, how would society treat mentally handicapped people that happen to have the mindset of a child, but the sex-drive of a normal adult?

I see your point, but would this ideal not leave too much wiggle-room than what is good for society and the people who actual WANT to see children harmed?

While I have responses to those questions, like I said above, I think I've already said more than I should have on this board. This isn't the place to hash out that sort of legal and political policy proposal.

YouthRightsRadical wrote:While I have responses to those questions, like I said above, I think I've already said more than I should have on this board. This isn't the place to hash out that sort of legal and political policy proposal.

That is alright.

YouthRightsRadical wrote:While I have responses to those questions...

This may surprise you: but Martin Luther King Jr actually had a policy of not replying to critics. Probably because there were literally tens of millions of people who wouldn't/couldn't understand him; there are better uses of time and energy. He discusses this in the opening of "Letter from Birmingham Jail".