May 30, 201412 yr Author Sure, but I don't see that slippery slope leading to legalization of pedophilia. We're still talking about minors here. I'm not certain of the laws, but haven't they in recent years changed the age of consent to 16?
May 30, 201412 yr I'm not certain of the laws, but haven't they in recent years changed the age of consent to 16? Depends on the state I think.
May 30, 201412 yr Jim is SPOT ON on this issue. Much ado about nothing. Exactly, I do not follow the slippery slope argument with this one.
May 31, 201412 yr This article is stretching the argument at best. It looks like a lot supporting arguments may have either been taken and presented out of context or are taken from questionable sources. Also note, the article was written almost a year ago, and there certainly hasn't been any forward progress, or changes in law concerning pedophilia. The article is poorly written and linking acceptance of homosexuality to the eventual acceptance of pedophilia is a huge reach.
May 31, 201412 yr Don't whiz on the electric fence.What rolls down stairs alone or in pairs, and over your neighbor's dog? What's great for a snack, and fits on your back?
May 31, 201412 yr For those that are now saying it will never happen, I wonder how many would have said the same thing concerning gay marriage when laws allowing interracial marriage were debated? Remember at that time homosexuality was considered a mental disorder. I'm not quite following your intent here. Care to elaborate?
May 31, 201412 yr Just a parallel. It just sounds like you are saying that interracial marriage led to homosexual marriage which will lead to pedophilic (?) marriage. I don't think that you feel that way, so I just can't decide the intent of your post. Edited May 31, 201412 yr by True blue (and gold)
May 31, 201412 yr It just sounds like you are saying that interracial marriage led to homosexual marriage which will lead to pedophilic (?) marriage. I don't think that you feel that way, so I just can't decide the intent of your post. Not at all. I'm just pointing out how views on marriage have changed. I doubt very strongly that the people that supported legalizing interracial marriage years ago ever gave any credence to the idea of gay marriage. After all at that time homosexuality was considered a mental disorder and in many cases a criminal act. I do know that there are some that currently support gay marriage that point to a change in views on interracial marriage as evidence that "marriageability" (if that's even a word) can evolve. Heck, when Obama was running he was against it. I understand that pedophilia involves underage people so there is no absolute parallel here, but those that say there's no way views on pedophilia can ever change just need to look at how views on homosexuality have changed. 50 years ago I'm sure that many on both sides of the political spectrum that would have said homosexuality would never be accepted by society. Further please do not interpret this as in any way condoning pedophilia. I would have no problem with sharia type punishments being imposed on child molesters. What really surprises me is that no one has yet tried to challenge the bans on polygamy if the 3 or more people involved are consenting adults. If marriage is no longer defined as between 1 man and 1 woman, why should it be limited to 2 people as long as all parties are consenting adults.
May 31, 201412 yr Not at all. I'm just pointing out how views on marriage have changed. I doubt very strongly that the people that supported legalizing interracial marriage years ago ever gave any credence to the idea of gay marriage. After all at that time homosexuality was considered a mental disorder and in many cases a criminal act. I do know that there are some that currently support gay marriage that point to a change in views on interracial marriage as evidence that "marriageability" (if that's even a word) can evolve. Heck, when Obama was running he was against it. I understand that pedophilia involves underage people so there is no absolute parallel here, but those that say there's no way views on pedophilia can ever change just need to look at how views on homosexuality have changed. 50 years ago I'm sure that many on both sides of the political spectrum that would have said homosexuality would never be accepted by society. Further please do not interpret this as in any way condoning pedophilia. I would have no problem with sharia type punishments being imposed on child molesters. What really surprises me is that no one has yet tried to challenge the bans on polygamy if the 3 or more people involved are consenting adults. If marriage is no longer defined as between 1 man and 1 woman, why should it be limited to 2 people as long as all parties are consenting adults. Thanks for the response. Like you, I could see more of an argument for polygamy than pedophilic marriage. Personally, I think that marriage should be a religious institution, not a government one.
June 1, 201412 yr Not at all. I'm just pointing out how views on marriage have changed. I doubt very strongly that the people that supported legalizing interracial marriage years ago ever gave any credence to the idea of gay marriage. After all at that time homosexuality was considered a mental disorder and in many cases a criminal act. I do know that there are some that currently support gay marriage that point to a change in views on interracial marriage as evidence that "marriageability" (if that's even a word) can evolve. Heck, when Obama was running he was against it. I understand that pedophilia involves underage people so there is no absolute parallel here, but those that say there's no way views on pedophilia can ever change just need to look at how views on homosexuality have changed. 50 years ago I'm sure that many on both sides of the political spectrum that would have said homosexuality would never be accepted by society. Further please do not interpret this as in any way condoning pedophilia. I would have no problem with sharia type punishments being imposed on child molesters. What really surprises me is that no one has yet tried to challenge the bans on polygamy if the 3 or more people involved are consenting adults. If marriage is no longer defined as between 1 man and 1 woman, why should it be limited to 2 people as long as all parties are consenting adults. Oh they will-and will win at some point...
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.