I got a good solution. We just beat all of them to death. That will solve it.

Texaggie7nine said:

---

I got a good solution. We just beat all of them to death. That will solve it.

---

That doesn't even work in Islamic countries...

AstroAg17 said:

---

Almost every sentence in your post is a prediction of something that nobody supports. You have to make up scary futures because you can't find a problem with what's actually occurring.

---

Scary futures is all they have left to work with in their failed effort to coerce everyone else to live and think the same blinkered way they do. There is literally zero concrete evidence provided to support their assertions. They subsist on the false and petty hope that someday raping children will be legal, thus allowing them to exact their vindicating revenge with a big huge "I told you so!"

I'm telling you, human sacrifice is going to be rampant. The cults will utilize these religious freedom laws to behead people in their temples. I hope I'm wrong.

I think that's it.

Another thing I've been thinking about - for this hypothetical future to happen, where most people are totally fine with pedophiles, we'd have to completely reverse all the trends we've seen relating to when a person is considered to be an adult. I can think of only one instance in recent history where we've looked at the age of majority and decided it needed to be adjusted down - the 26th Amendment.

In any other situation where we've either changed our laws or societal views, it's always gone up. The drinking age went up. At some point we looked at our age of consent laws for sex and marriage and decided many of them were too low. 30 years ago, it was common for people to marry right out of high school and immediately start having kids. Today if someone is 25 with two kids, people assume something "went wrong" in their life or that they got married way too young. I've actually seen people on this very thread lament the fact that people "stay children" for far too long these days.

All of this happened as acceptance for gays steadily shot up. People started putting off marriage/children, and as a society we stopped looking at a 23 year old as someone who should be starting a family, and started saying things like "he's a dumb kid with his whole life ahead of him." For this scary future to happen, where we lower consent age laws and attitudes, all of that would have to reverse. It's ludicrous.

Beer Baron said:

---

Literally everyone here can agree that pedophilia is bad.

---

A disordered sexual orientation is bad. Gotcha.

Not the acting on it, but the orientation. Gotcha.

You know what's cool about a forum like this? It's on the internet and will be saved forever. So, in time, we can revisit the topic and figure out who was right in their predictions.

I'll put mine right here. By 2028 we will have heard about "minor attracted persons" in the same vein that we hear about gay persons and transgender persons.

Publicly expressing any discomfort with the minor attracted agenda will invoke calls that you're a bigot. A celebrity or two will come out as minor attracted and characters on TV shows will feature the minor attracted. We'll be set up for having sympathy for them.

The APA will switch course and not call pedophila a deviance anymore.

Attempts to enforce or strengthen laws to protect children will be met with cries of "Bigot!"

With the inevitable acceptance of minor attracted as a legitimate and immutable orientation, more children will be abused and gradually, even that won't be considered a serious crime.

Quote:

---

We'll be set up for having sympathy for them.

---

You should have sympathy for someone who wants to kill themself. That doesn't mean you think it's even remotely ok for them to do it.

747Ag said:

---

So, in summary... Pedophilia is bad and everyone agrees it's bad. The only argument against treating those attracted to kids (but not molesting kids) is that someday, somewhere someone might make a push for pedophilia and molestation to be socially acceptable. Is that about right?

---

I never made any argument about treating those attracted to kids. If there is a way to "treat" them, then by all means I would support it; as long as that treatment doesn't include any sort of acting on the desires.

Most of you will recall that there was at one time a move to "treat" homosexuality too. We all know how that went.

If pedophilia is an "orientation", then why would anyone believe it is any more possible to "treat" or "cure" or "manage" than other "orientations"?

Further, if some protocol is found that is successful in keeping the MAP from ever acting on their desire, what is to prevent some organization from following up and saying that this should be available for treatment of other orientations?

If the "treatment" is support for abstinence in the case of the MAP, that goes completely against what popular culture teaches about sexuality.

It is this cognitive dissonance of our society with respect to sexual mores that make me skeptical of any discussion of treating pedophilia as an "orientation" rather than a "disorder".

Marco Esquandolas said:

---

ok but what if seamaster and dad o lot don't FEEL like that is what will happen? Did you ever think about THAT, man?

---

Please note where I ever referred to my "feelings".

Beliefs yes, feelings, no.

A subtle but important distinction.

I readily admit that my beliefs may prove to be wrong. When I see trusted evidence showing my belief to be wrong, I will re-examine them.

Feelings are useless. They are mine and mine alone and no one else's business.

The ironic thing is that while you're concerned about what addressing the actual issue respectfully may result in, let's look at the other side with regards to homosexuality, since you seem to be continually equating the two. You say treating homosexuality as an "orientation" as opposed to a "disorder" had these horrific unintended consequences, well let's look at the flip side. Look what treating it as a "disorder" leads to....oppression, ridicule, hatred, violence, suicide. If we're going to play the slippery slope game, play it both ways.

Texaggie7nine said:

---

Its actually not that complicated. Homosexuals harm no one when acting on their desires while pedophiles do. Therefore advocating for treatment for pedophilia is humane while advocating for treatment for homosexuality is being an a hole.

---

Why is that relevant when we are just talking about orientations and whether or not they can be "cured", or changed, or "managed".

have you never heard of a homosexual who wanted to change, but couldn't? If a protocol was available, why wouldn't we make it available to those who wanted to try it?

RetiredAg said:

---

The ironic thing is that while you're concerned about what addressing the actual issue respectfully may result in, let's look at the other side with regards to homosexuality, since you seem to be continually equating the two. You say treating homosexuality as an "orientation" as opposed to a "disorder" had these horrific unintended consequences, well let's look at the flip side. Look what treating it as a "disorder" leads to....oppression, ridicule, hatred, violence, suicide. If we're going to play the slippery slope game, play it both ways.

---

I am all for compassion, but people don't want "compassion" when they are convinced that there is nothing wrong with what they are doing. They don't want pity or even just tolerance, they want acceptance and eventually celebration.

Dad-O-Lot said:

---

RetiredAg said:

---

The ironic thing is that while you're concerned about what addressing the actual issue respectfully may result in, let's look at the other side with regards to homosexuality, since you seem to be continually equating the two. You say treating homosexuality as an "orientation" as opposed to a "disorder" had these horrific unintended consequences, well let's look at the flip side. Look what treating it as a "disorder" leads to....oppression, ridicule, hatred, violence, suicide. If we're going to play the slippery slope game, play it both ways.

---

I am all for compassion, but people don't want "compassion" when they are convinced that there is nothing wrong with what they are doing. They don't want pity or even just tolerance, they want acceptance and eventually celebration.

---

"I'm all for compassion, but....". Classic.

Perhaps the pendulum wouldn't swing so far in one direction if it hadn't swung so far in the direction of hate for far too long. But I disagree that they demand 'celebration'. In my experience, they want to be treated like equals with the same rights and be treated with the same respect that all human beings (and bearers of God's divine image) should be.

Quote:

---

have you never heard of a homosexual who wanted to change, but couldn't?

---

Yes. I know some that felt that way when they were younger. But the data is pretty clear that it just doesn't work. I don't get why that is so hard for you to accept.

The fact that they cannot change their orientation has nothing to do with weather it should be ok for them to act on it.

Quote:

---

I am all for compassion, but people don't want "compassion" when they are convinced that there is nothing wrong with what they are doing.

---

There IS nothing wrong with what homosexuals are doing.

RetiredAg said:

---

But I disagree that they demand 'celebration'.

---

How many pride celebrations, pride months, pride parades do you see for how many different orientations?

your head is in the sand if you don't believe that the homosexual agenda demands celebration.

How many orientations have been highlighted with a specific lighting on the White House?



So the question becomes: Can sexual orientations be "cured" or "managed" so that the person with the identified orientation is expected to never act on that orientation?

Those who are getting upset at me for conflating homosexuality and pedophilia are angry at the wrong person. I wasn't the one who decided to start referring to pedophilia using the same terminology as homosexuality. I just noted the similarity in the language.

"I am all for compassion, but people don't want "compassion" when they are convinced that there is nothing wrong with what they are doing. They don't want pity or even just tolerance, they want acceptance and eventually celebration."

Bingo.

The blueprint is well played and will be repeated.

The funny thing is, I had decided to go to Pride this year in Houston to see what all the fuss was about. It seemed rather tame. I was surprised. Nobody tried to convert me. They just seemed to be people, like all of us here, that wanted to celebrate an aspect of their lives with people from the same community. The only people I saw demanding anything was the Westboro Baptist folks demanding people at Pride burn in hell.

Any pride parade I've ever been to has been tamer than an average Tuesday evening in November on Bourbon Street.

Beer Baron said:

---

Any pride parade I've ever been to has been tamer than an average Tuesday evening in November on Bourbon Street.

---

It will certainly be tamer than what College Station would be like if the Aggies ever win a national title in football. I feel for all the non-Aggies though. How dare Aggies DEMAND that non-Aggies celebrate their title?!

"Gays hurt no one by acting on their attractions."

You mean, other than themselves.

seamaster,
I'm curious. What is your solution to what you clearly think is a "gay problem"? Do you think homosexual acts should be illegal? Should the state punish them? Institutionalize them? For as much as you fixate on them, surely you've thought out how you would address the perceived problem, right?

I think truth should not be sacrificed at the altar of the sexual revolution.

I think the lifestyle is indeed harmful and that those with same sex attraction should be loved and told the truth.

https:/couragerc.org

RetiredAg said:

---

seamaster,
I'm curious. What is your solution to what you clearly think is a "gay problem"? Do you think homosexual acts should be illegal? Should the state punish them? Institutionalize them? For as much as you fixate on them, surely you've thought out how you would address the perceived problem, right?

---

Good luck getting an answer. I've asked dozens of times. Not just of him but others too. If any kind of answer gets put forward at all, it's just something along the lines of wanting us to know our place and stay hidden from sight. Then there's the occasional "banish them from society" types.

Seamaster said:

---

I think truth should not be sacrificed at the altar of the sexual revolution.

I think the lifestyle is indeed harmful and that those with same sex attraction should be loved and told the truth.

https:/couragerc.org

---

That doesn't answer my question, and if you think you're "loving" them, then you're kidding yourself. That's a problem that many have. They hide behind the "love the sinner, but hate the sin" as a way to treat the sinner with nothing but hate and derision, as you repeatedly do here.

"They hide behind the "love the sinner, but hate the sin" as a way to treat the sinner with nothing but hate and derision, as you repeatedly do here."

I don't see it that way.

I've never hated anybody.

What I have done is speak the truth and I've tried to do so patiently and respectfully. I could see how it can be offensive but sometimes truth is offensive.