What's next after Homosexual Marriage? Let's be vigilant people

[Cackles]

Not to take away from what you posted, I believe effective parenting begins and ends with good example.

The problem is everyone is a god now and feels their own example is best. Of course their ‘own’ ideals are really from atheist academia, agnostic secular culture, atheist scientists.

It should be known that some parents shall carry a heavier cross than others trying to set a good example. It may not seem fair, but God doesn’t give you something you can’t handle. There is a purpose behind all of this, but Gods purpose for us is not meant to be fully clear or proven by science. The incense at mass blurs our vision - a good way to remember this.

Parents should also know that divorce should be off the table when children are involved. Even under the sin of adultery when you are permitted to divorce, this should never be done if possible. Why? Because if you are responsible for divorce, you are held responsible for your children’s sins, your grand children sins, and your great great grandchildren’s sins. When you divorce, you’re family tree begins to bear bad fruit. This then propagates down the line and ultimately destroys whole communities and societies.

The father above talks about setting an example which is true (especially for Father and son). If you think you are pious because you work at the government and get huge salary, and have a huge home, and help out the Church, and then turn around and decide you want to move to another ‘phase’ of your life because your money and church will look after you - you should think again. You gave your children the example of divorce. Stats show they will carry this to further generations. The kids and their kids will commit more crime, have terminated pregnancies, and all the bad things that come out of single family households. The person who initiated the divorce have to pay for the sins for those generations to come. They are held responsible.

If a woman is on the fence and isn’t clear if she wants to have kids, then please don’t get married. Be a TV host, writer, actress, singer,flight attendant, lawyer, real estate agent etc. Pursue your goals and happiness. Attend church and stay in grace.

Women who want to get married and have kids know who they are. The women who want children are the life givers to the world. Our Lady said:

“For am I not here with you, your mother? Are you not safe in the shadow of my protection? Am I not the source of your life and your happiness? Am I not holding you in my lap, wrapped in my arms? What else can you possibly need?” – Our Lady of Guadalupe (most slept on miracle in religious history imo):

 

[edwest2]

Perhaps the first step is to re-establish the idea that chastity is a real virtue, not something invented by priests and other religious people in order to control others and prevent them from enjoying life.

The idea that civil government has any interest whatsoever in promoting chastity is currently treated as an absurdity, as if “chastity” were such a thoroughly religious concept that it violates the separation of church and state to suggest that it is a good thing to encourage citizens to practice sexual continence. Maybe that is where we need to start?

IOW, maybe the slide does not need to proceed inexorably in the wrong direction. Maybe the foundations of true and natural marriage can be rebuilt, even in the secular mind.

Oh it is being rebuilt. For example, kids in college are not happy with hook-up culture. And who would be? Companionship, real friendship, and someone to really be there for you, are the basis of a good relationship and marriage. This “nothing but sex” approach does not deal with other real human needs.

Some non-Catholics enter into what they cal “Covenant Marriage” where they agree to both getting counseling and doing whatever it takes to avoid divorce.

The media, by the way, is not interested in showing that on TV, or in movies. They’d rather have female actors have brief sexual encounters with some guy, which may lead to a temporary, mostly sexual relationship.

Peace,
Ed

 

[Kamaduck]

The problem is everyone is a god now and feels their own example is best. Of course their ‘own’ ideals are really from atheist academia, agnostic secular culture, atheist scientists.

Given that everything you post seems to have only the weight of your own opinion, I’m not sure what to make of this statement.

Parents should also know that divorce should be off the table when children are involved. Even under the sin of adultery when you are permitted to divorce, this should never be done if possible.

Once again, this is different from what the Church teaches. It would be polite to make it clear that you are speaking of your own religious beliefs, not ours.

It is not possible to end a sacramental marriage while both spouses are alive, even if one commits adultery. Civil divorce is permitted if it is necessary to protect or provide for children, or for one of the spouses. Some situations simply are not healthy for children, and sometimes that means that the couple must separate.

If a woman is on the fence and isn’t clear if she wants to have kids, then please don’t get married. Be a TV host, writer, actress, singer,flight attendant, lawyer, real estate agent etc. Pursue your goals and happiness. Attend church and stay in grace.

Given that you apparently think people should be married by 16 or not marry at all, I’m not sure how you defend this belief. I don’t know too many 16-year-olds who are 100% certain about the direction they want their life to take.

Absolutely people shouldn’t get married if they’re not sure. That’s why it’s best for young people to wait.

 

[Cackles]

Given that you apparently think people should be married by 16 or not marry at all

I never said that.

But I’ve been warned for promoting an ‘agenda’ so can’t comment on these issues anymore.

Looks like a certain ‘group’ got their way to hush me up. Again, I’m simply amazed how Catholicism got like this. It’s almost not recognizable since I was younger. I wonder where things went so wrong. We used to take Bible class in elementary school and Sister Mary would come over and these were extremely conservative, pious people. In high-school people would get nervous when the Father would come in for confession. People would shake.

I have no idea what happened the past 25 years. It’s almost not recognizable.

 

[Gordon_Sims]

There is a lot to be said for the sexualization of children and society in general. But these social problems are things that people on both sides of the political spectrum can work on. State statutory rape laws are tightened and loosened by politicians from both sides. Trying to frame this as though gay people or liberals want to be able to harm children is dishonest, and it does nothing to protect kids, only demonize people who haven’t done anything wrong.

I find it very interesting that you are so sure that it’s the gays who want to harm children, yet all of your examples are of heterosexual males who are excited for a female celebrity to turn 18.

Actually, only two of my examples pertained to men anticipating the birthday of a celebrity. Since a good portion of the discussion related to NAMBLA–which, despite many claims to the contrary, is a homosexual organization–it only makes sense that I frame some of my argument around homosexuals. And however you want to spin it, if you belong to or support a group who has as one of its primary goals the legalization of child rape, then you can’t say that you’re not a supporter of raping children. That’s like saying you were an ardent supporter of the Nazis but you in no way supported killing Jews.

As for the overall issue of the promotion of pedophilia as normal, I believe it’s a predominantly male issue, heterosexual or not. Most if not all of the people who stand to gain from the legalization of sex with minors are males. I’ve never had a female friend point out a 13-year-old boy and tell me they’re having illegal thoughts, but I do have several male friends who we’ve quit associating with now that our daughters are hitting puberty (sadly, I’m not being facetious). I’m sure most men would vehemently deny even the suggestion that they have thoughts along those lines, but I’d also be willing to bet that for a majority of them, the first thing they do after reading a story about an underage actress that portrays her in a sexual light is to Google pictures of her. They’d deny that they’re being groomed to accept the normalization of children as sex objects, but that’s exactly what’s happening.

 

[WilT]

Actually, only two of my examples pertained to men anticipating the birthday of a celebrity. Since a good portion of the discussion related to NAMBLA–which, despite many claims to the contrary, is a homosexual organization–it only makes sense that I frame some of my argument around homosexuals. And however you want to spin it, if you belong to or support a group who has as one of its primary goals the legalization of child rape, then you can’t say that you’re not a supporter of raping children. That’s like saying you were an ardent supporter of the Nazis but you in no way supported killing Jews.

As for the overall issue of the promotion of pedophilia as normal, I believe it’s a predominantly male issue, heterosexual or not. Most if not all of the people who stand to gain from the legalization of sex with minors are males. I’ve never had a female friend point out a 13-year-old boy and tell me they’re having illegal thoughts, but I do have several male friends who we’ve quit associating with now that our daughters are hitting puberty (sadly, I’m not being facetious). I’m sure most men would vehemently deny even the suggestion that they have thoughts along those lines, but I’d also be willing to bet that for a majority of them, the first thing they do after reading a story about an underage actress that portrays her in a sexual light is to Google pictures of her. They’d deny that they’re being groomed to accept the normalization of children as sex objects, but that’s exactly what’s happening.

Many lesbians don’t always agree with the homosexual males views. somehow they in the homosexual community have come together well and organized despite their differences.

 

[mommamaree]

I mean, I’m almost 18 and still consider it an accomplishment when I drive to a new place and take fewer than three wrong turns. I’m still a long, long way from getting some of the basic life skills that parents ought to have. It takes more than purity to successfully raise a family.

I am very surprised that you are a teenager. Your ability to think critically and express yourself clearly is a skill that many people do not master until their thirties or later.

 

[BlueEyedLady]

Actually, only two of my examples pertained to men anticipating the birthday of a celebrity. Since a good portion of the discussion related to NAMBLA–which, despite many claims to the contrary, is a homosexual organization–it only makes sense that I frame some of my argument around homosexuals. And however you want to spin it, if you belong to or support a group who has as one of its primary goals the legalization of child rape, then you can’t say that you’re not a supporter of raping children. That’s like saying you were an ardent supporter of the Nazis but you in no way supported killing Jews.

As for the overall issue of the promotion of pedophilia as normal, I believe it’s a predominantly male issue, heterosexual or not. Most if not all of the people who stand to gain from the legalization of sex with minors are males. I’ve never had a female friend point out a 13-year-old boy and tell me they’re having illegal thoughts, but I do have several male friends who we’ve quit associating with now that our daughters are hitting puberty (sadly, I’m not being facetious). I’m sure most men would vehemently deny even the suggestion that they have thoughts along those lines, but I’d also be willing to bet that for a majority of them, the first thing they do after reading a story about an underage actress that portrays her in a sexual light is to Google pictures of her. They’d deny that they’re being groomed to accept the normalization of children as sex objects, but that’s exactly what’s happening.

Ok, let’s slow down. It is not wrong or unnatural for adult men to be attracted to teenagers. It isn’t politically correct, but it’s true. There is nothing disgusting or pedophilic about it. Teen girls are, and look, very fertile. Biologically, they are ready to start reproducing. Your own faith allows for a girl to enter into a sacramental marriage at 14! Is this akin to child brides and pedophilia?

Don’t get me wrong, I think the ‘barely legal’ stuff is sad and exploitative, but let’s not pretend that men are unnatural for finding young, healthy, fertile, biologically adult women attractive.

 

[Kamaduck]

"Kamaduck:

Given that you apparently think people should be married by 16 or not marry at all

I never said that.

I apologize if I misunderstood your earlier post. It sounded like you were saying that women older than 16 became “corrupted”, and thus made bad mothers, and thus should not get married:

As far as the women being young, the idea is the woman is very corruptable. She gets fooled easily by Satan. The more pure her soul is, the more better of a mum she’ll be. I’m just guesing, but by the time your 25 years old, and all that’s important to you is your degree, a pair of Dolce sunglasses, and a trip to Cancun, forgive me if i think you’ve been corrupted by Satan and will not be a good mother.

I think the kids should be married at 16. The earlier the better. There’s reasons for this.

If that’s not what you meant, then I apologize for misrepresenting your beliefs.

But I’ve been warned for promoting an ‘agenda’ so can’t comment on these issues anymore.

OK. In that case, we’ll drop this discussion. Blessings on your day, Cackles.

Looks like a certain ‘group’ got their way to hush me up. Again, I’m simply amazed how Catholicism got like this. It’s almost not recognizable since I was younger. I wonder where things went so wrong. We used to take Bible class in elementary school and Sister Mary would come over and these were extremely conservative, pious people. In high-school people would get nervous when the Father would come in for confession. People would shake.

I have no idea what happened the past 25 years. It’s almost not recognizable.

I wouldn’t say that. After all, you are on a thread that largely consists of discussion about the dangers of same-sex and/or plural marriage, the sexualization of minors, and how we can return to chastity. The teachings haven’t changed, and for the most part, the Catholics here are trying their best to live by those teachings.

I am very surprised that you are a teenager. Your ability to think critically and express yourself clearly is a skill that many people do not master until their thirties or later.

Why, thank you, mommamaree! This post really made my day.

 

[Cackles]

Ok, let’s slow down. It is not wrong or unnatural for adult men to be attracted to teenagers.

No it’s not.

Although spouces should always be in the same generation and ages should be close together as possible.

Teen girls are, and look, very fertile. Biologically, they are ready to start reproducing. Your own faith allows for a girl to enter into a sacramental marriage at 14! Is this akin to child brides and pedophilia?

And the woman is less corrupted. It’s funny you mention this though because last night i was watching a round table and this Jew called up to donate 18k and they let him speak and he said the biggest problem in Judaism is the kids were getting married to late he wanted to atleast have them married at 20. And this was a normal LA Jew saying this. He made a comment that if they get too old their too set in their ways.

Don’t get me wrong, I think the ‘barely legal’ stuff is sad and exploitative, but let’s not pretend that men are unnatural for finding young, healthy, fertile, biologically adult women attractive.

… And not corrupted which is a ver core thing. My wife and i wish we could go back to 15. We can handle these babies no problem and enjoy the blessing of children much more.

 

[BlueEyedLady]

No it’s not.

Although spouces should always be in the same generation and ages should be close together as possible.

And the woman is less corrupted. It’s funny you mention this though because last night i was watching a round table and this Jew called up to donate 18k and they let him speak and he said the biggest problem in Judaism is the kids were getting married to late he wanted to atleast have them married at 20. And this was a normal LA Jew saying this. He made a comment that if they get too old their too set in their ways.

… And not corrupted which is a ver core thing. My wife and i wish we could go back to 15. We can handle these babies no problem and enjoy the blessing of children much more.

I definitely don’t think that teenagers should be getting married, so you’re on your own on that one.

I’m saying that there is a world of difference, biologically and morally, between being attracted to a sexually developed teen girl and being a part of some plot to legalize pedophilia or even just wanting to have sex with children.

I definitely think it’s also a problem when an adult coerces, uses their position of authority, or in any way pressures a minor for sex, regardless of physical development. But lets not pretend that the men who were drooling over me when I was running around at 16 in shorts and a bikini top were viewing me as a child or were looking to commit pedophilia. And when I was a teenager, I had several friends that my older brother (in his 30’s at the time) thought were very cute. Would he have pursued a relationship with them? Heck no! He is not intellectually or emotionally attracted to teen girls. But like most males, he has a biological response to young, healthy, attractive, fertile women. And even if we don’t consider teens adults in our society, their bodies disagree.

****Once again, I’m not supporting Cackles argument for teen marriage. There is a lot more that goes into marriage than being young and fertile, and I don’t think teens have it. But it’s not unnatural for teens to have sex, and for adult male to look at younger, developed bodies.

 

[Cackles]

I definitely don’t think that teenagers should be getting married, so you’re on your own on that one.

I’m saying that there is a world of difference, biologically and morally, between being attracted to a sexually developed teen girl and being a part of some plot to legalize pedophilia or even just wanting to have sex with children.

I definitely think it’s also a problem when an adult coerces, uses their position of authority, or in any way pressures a minor for sex, regardless of physical development. But lets not pretend that the men who were drooling over me when I was running around at 16 in shorts and a bikini top were viewing me as a child or were looking to commit pedophilia. And when I was a teenager, I had several friends that my older brother (in his 30’s at the time) thought were very cute. Would he have pursued a relationship with them? Heck no! He is not intellectually or emotionally attracted to teen girls. But like most males, he has a biological response to young, healthy, attractive, fertile women. And even if we don’t consider teens adults in our society, their bodies disagree.

****Once again, I’m not supporting Cackles argument for teen marriage. There is a lot more that goes into marriage than being young and fertile, and I don’t think teens have it. But it’s not unnatural for teens to have sex, and for adult male to look at younger, developed bodies.

Why would you think that a normal, sane person would say that 16 year old should seriously get married in todays world? Would i recommend something so ludacris.

You’ll say “because thats what you said”. And then I’ll say:

This is what hanging around internet Athesit cults do to you. They’ve messed up your mind so much with their false philosophies that you cant be rational anymore. You see sentences as math equations and your goal is to be contentious and outsmart everyone because thats what these cults do. They lie about the economy, lie about the problems, lie about the solutions, and place people as idols. Learn to think as they say. So we think of ourselves as idols and begin to self idolatry which is a sin that will get you cursed.

Your last statement proves you self idolatry because your under the assumption everyone cares what you think because you consider your own ‘mind formulas’ to be law. You’ve lost humility, think you have answers via math equations and philisophical formulas, and you think humans are lifeless animals who act only on intinct and biological functions that are out of our control.

What’s happened is you lost yourself and the person you used to be. The Atheists have killed your real self and we need to get it back. You mind is cursed right now and you dont realize it. I’s a long road back to getting normal again.

What would it take for you to stop hanging around the athesit cults and coming back home to faith in God. I’ll take up any challenge or proof you ask. Your life is being wasted by the Atheists and you dont belong. Let the old person we knew a long tome ago come back. You will get signals in your dreams if you start to contemplate things.

 

[Gordon_Sims]

Ok, let’s slow down. It is not wrong or unnatural for adult men to be attracted to teenagers. It isn’t politically correct, but it’s true. There is nothing disgusting or pedophilic about it. Teen girls are, and look, very fertile. Biologically, they are ready to start reproducing. Your own faith allows for a girl to enter into a sacramental marriage at 14! Is this akin to child brides and pedophilia?

Don’t get me wrong, I think the ‘barely legal’ stuff is sad and exploitative, but let’s not pretend that men are unnatural for finding young, healthy, fertile, biologically adult women attractive.

But what’s the dividing line between a biologically normal attraction to a 16-year-old girl and an immoral and unquestionably illegal attraction to an 10-12 year old early bloomer? From a strict biological standpoint there’s little to no difference between them and an 18-year-old. One of my daughters has a classmate who was more fully developed at the age of 9 than some of the 8th graders at their school. If the janitor had been caught molesting her in the bathroom would it have been an acceptable defense to say that he was just responding to a healthy biological urge? One would hope that a person could have more control over their own base instincts than that. Unfortunately, with the media doing everything they can to blur those lines it gets a lot harder to draw a mental line in the sand and a lot easier to make a relativistic argument about what is and isn’t acceptable.

I have a former friend who spent almost seven years in prison for raping an 11-year-old girl. Part of his defense was that she looked 15, which his lawyer felt should have opened the door to a plea down to statutory rape. Interestingly, based on your mention of barely legal stuff, his large collection of barely legal porn was part of that line of defense. A lot of the women making that look younger than my 12-year-old. I’ve seen models in ads who look younger than her in barely/no clothes and in extremely sexual situations. Should that make it okay for a 40-year-old man to make advances toward her? He sees things on TV and in magazines on a daily basis that tell him it’s normal. Why should he be expected to control his urges when Hollywood tells him they’re okay?

 

[WilT]

If I read correctly in the last discussions on this threat, my comment would be that as an older man he shouldn’t be ‘attracted’ to younger men. First of all we shouldn’t lust after other things it is one of the commandments I believe. Secondly, fine if you *admire *the youth for there youth and nothing else than it’s probably fine. Sometimes I wish I could be physically 25 but with the mind and knowledge I have now.

 

[BlueEyedLady]

But what’s the dividing line between a biologically normal attraction to a 16-year-old girl and an immoral and unquestionably illegal attraction to an 10-12 year old early bloomer? Unquestionably illegal attraction? There’s nothing illegal about being attracted to anyone, regardless of age, gender, or even species! Furthermore, even the Catholic church does not regard attraction as immoral-it is understood that it is involuntary, and that acting or dwelling on it is problematic.From a strict biological standpoint there’s little to no difference between them and an 18-year-old. One of my daughters has a classmate who was more fully developed at the age of 9 than some of the 8th graders at their school. If the janitor had been caught molesting her in the bathroom would it have been an acceptable defense to say that he was just responding to a healthy biological urge? Attraction =/= molestation. And sexual abuse is never ok, regardless of how old someone is (that goes for adults, too). Attraction is never an excuse.One would hope that a person could have more control over their own base instincts than that. Unfortunately, with the media doing everything they can to blur those lines it gets a lot harder to draw a mental line in the sand and a lot easier to make a relativistic argument about what is and isn’t acceptable. I very strongly disagree. Historically, marriage, sexual activitiy, and child bearing has occurred at much younger ages. It is our modern society that is saying “No, we need to let 16 year olds be 16 year olds”. It was in my grandmother’s time that 16 year olds got married to 20-somethings, lived on a farm, and started making babies.

I have a former friend who spent almost seven years in prison for raping an 11-year-old girl. Part of his defense was that she looked 15, which his lawyer felt should have opened the door to a plea down to statutory rape. Honestly Gordon, I have no desire to delve into what the people in your anecdotes may have been thinking/feeling/etc. Needless to say, you’re surrounded by crazies. Regardless, statutory rape laws are a very complicated patchwork, and many do allow for the “But I thought she was ____” defense under certain circumstances-particularly if you met the person at a place where you wouldn’t expect underage people to be. Interestingly, based on your mention of barely legal stuff, his large collection of barely legal porn was part of that line of defense. A lot of the women making that look younger than my 12-year-old. I’ve seen models in ads who look younger than her in barely/no clothes and in extremely sexual situations. Should that make it okay for a 40-year-old man to make advances toward her? No, 40 year old men should not be making advances towards your 12 year old. You seem to have trouble drawing a line between attraction and predatory sexual behavior. He sees things on TV and in magazines on a daily basis that tell him it’s normal. Why should he be expected to control his urges when Hollywood tells him they’re okay? Hollywood tells him it’s ok to make advances on a 12 year old? You and I must be talking about different Hollywoods. I’ve never seen a Hollywood production that promoted the idea that 40 year old men should have sex with 12 year olds. What’s more, even when a movie contains such a thing (Taxi Driver), it isn’t endorsed. No one saw that movie and thought that Scorsese was telling them to go hire a 12 year old hooker.

And still none of this supports that your notion that the “gay agenda” wants to lower the age of consent to allow adults to legally commit pedophilia so that your 40 year old friends can hit on your post pubescent teenager.

 

[Kamaduck]

Why would you think that a normal, sane person would say that 16 year old should seriously get married in todays world? Would i recommend something so ludacris.

You’ll say “because thats what you said”. And then I’ll say:

That’s exactly what you said. If it isn’t what you meant, then you have to explain why. Otherwise, everyone here will take your words at face value (or else assume that you are a troll).

This is what hanging around internet Athesit cults do to you. They’ve messed up your mind so much with their false philosophies that you cant be rational anymore. You see sentences as math equations and your goal is to be contentious and outsmart everyone because thats what these cults do. They lie about the economy, lie about the problems, lie about the solutions, and place people as idols. Learn to think as they say. So we think of ourselves as idols and begin to self idolatry which is a sin that will get you cursed.

Alright, look. Atheism isn’t a cult. I suppose you could argue that certain branches of the online community operate in a somewhat similar manner, but I’d say even those aren’t real cults. A real cult controls everything about you, such that you absolutely cannot trust your own judgement anymore. You are dependent on the leader for everything, and are not free to make your own decisions. I think that would be very hard to accomplish without a face-to-face link.

Atheism is the opposite of that- it doesn’t require any structure at all. It’s simply a lack of belief in God. If BEL’s label is “atheist”, then that’s the only thing you know about her, apart from how she conducts herself in these threads. You have no idea whether she is anti-religion or indifferent- technically, just the word “atheist” doesn’t even tell you that she’s not religious (Buddhists, for example, are often religious atheists).

That’s why we have to engage with our fellow forum-goers as people, not as labels. I’m obviously not an atheist, but just because I disagree with her doesn’t mean I think we can spread misinformation about what BEL believes. If you want to know what she believes, ask her, instead of lecturing her without taking the time to understand.

Which, to tie this into the thread as a whole, is also a good practice in terms of engaging with people who are attracted to people or things that we find gross or disturbing. They’re still a person, they can choose not to act on their attraction, and we need to love them and not make uncharitable assumptions about how they’re living.

Your last statement proves you self idolatry because your under the assumption everyone cares what you think because you consider your own ‘mind formulas’ to be law. You’ve lost humility, think you have answers via math equations and philisophical formulas, and you think humans are lifeless animals who act only on intinct and biological functions that are out of our control.

As my math teacher always used to say, “God gave you a brain. Use it!”

And of course we’re interested in what BEL has to say. If we weren’t, we wouldn’t be reading her posts.

But what’s the dividing line between a biologically normal attraction to a 16-year-old girl and an immoral and unquestionably illegal attraction to an 10-12 year old early bloomer? From a strict biological standpoint there’s little to no difference between them and an 18-year-old. One of my daughters has a classmate who was more fully developed at the age of 9 than some of the 8th graders at their school. If the janitor had been caught molesting her in the bathroom would it have been an acceptable defense to say that he was just responding to a healthy biological urge? One would hope that a person could have more control over their own base instincts than that. Unfortunately, with the media doing everything they can to blur those lines it gets a lot harder to draw a mental line in the sand and a lot easier to make a relativistic argument about what is and isn’t acceptable.

I’m going to jump in to say that there’s a difference between attraction and acting on that attraction. I would agree with BEL that it’s not unnatural (or disordered) for an adult man to be attracted to a teenager who is biologically capable of reproduction, even if she’s as young as 12 or 13. I would then immediately note that acting on that attraction is unacceptable, for several reasons besides the statutory rape laws:

1. There’s a huge power imbalance in the relationship. The girl may doubt that she has the ability to say “no”, making her “yes” meaningless.
2. Although she is biologically an adult, she is mentally still a child (or at least not mature enough to consistently make responsible decisions). That’s why we don’t allow minors to enter legally binding contracts on their own- they aren’t always thinking about the consequences. This is especially true now, since being an adult in the modern world is rather more complicated than it was several hundred years ago.
3. From a Catholic perspective, of course, it’s always wrong to make sexual advances towards someone you’re not married to. Since it would be unwise for someone that young to get married, there is no situation where it would be OK to make sexual advances towards them.

If someone completely ignores those reasons and acts on his attraction anyway, then of course he’s in the wrong. That’s illegal, and rightly so. But there’s nothing illegal about attraction in and of itself- it’s just that like a person who experiences SSA, or person who experiences OSA and is not yet married, or a person who is already married and experiences OSA towards people other than their spouse, the man who finds himself attracted to a 14-year-old girl is simply going to have to control himself. If he does, there’s no sin involved.

 

[WilT]

And still none of this supports that your notion that the “gay agenda” wants to lower the age of consent to allow adults to legally commit pedophilia so that your 40 year old friends can hit on your post pubescent teenager.

I think BlueEyedLady someone early mentioned a group called…NAMBLA or something like that. Check earlier post for the group. They are adults interested in teens and below teens.

 

[EasterJoy]

And still none of this supports that your notion that the “gay agenda” wants to lower the age of consent to allow adults to legally commit pedophilia so that your 40 year old friends can hit on your post pubescent teenager.

I do not think there is a broad agenda among LGBT activists to do anything but break down boundaries and consequences having to do with what lesbians, gays, bisexuals, and transgender persons want to be free to do.

The problem is that the attacks they have chosen to make on societal taboos against what they want will have removed society’s legal standing to enforce societal standards of sexual morality generally. They have worked to change both laws and attitudes to reach the most “hands-off,” MYOB, “I am the same as you no matter what I do” climate possible.

I don’t think the result is hard to predict with regards to plural marriage. Regardless of their stated intentions, their arguments have not left taboos against plural marriage or marriage between adult siblings with a leg to stand on (particularly with regards to siblings who are not blood relatives, persons who are no rarity in our bear-children-divorce-then-remarry culture). When it is argued that “love” (meaning sexual desire) conquers all and trumps all, though–no, when one’s sexual desires are the most basic feature defining one’s identity, a feature to be held up with pride and celebrated all the more, the more unusual that desire is!–that gate is not easily closed.

Their arguments in favor of same-sex marriage were not, however, a direct assault on age-of-consent laws and did not question the legal requirement that parties be capable of consent in order to marry. I don’t see how that case can be made, excepting the degree to which they have encouraged a “question authority, question past taboos” permissiveness and a sense of entitlement to sexual license generally. As a group, they do not wink at adults preying on children, let us say that. If anything, they have bent over backwards to be conservative with regards to polygamy and pedophilia, in order to show how “normal” and “mainstream” their agenda is.

What they have done, unwittingly or not, is to encourage sexual experimentation and impurity among young people by trying to rush youth to self-identify with regards to sexual orientation. They have encouraged youth who are trying to discern their sexual proclivities to self-identify as gay, and applaud those who do so as being particularly endowed with the virtue of courage. Why it is courageous for a teen to go public with the lust they feel for persons of their own gender, I have no idea. It is not as if lust for one’s peers is some admirable trait in a teenager generally. I suppose they view lust not as a common trial of the young, but as a natural and beautiful expression of youth.

 

[Cackles]

But what’s the dividing line between a biologically normal attraction to a 16-year-old girl and an immoral and unquestionably illegal attraction to an 10-12 year old early bloomer? From a strict biological standpoint there’s little to no difference between them and an 18-year-old. One of my daughters has a classmate who was more fully developed at the age of 9 than some of the 8th graders at their school. If the janitor had been caught molesting her in the bathroom would it have been an acceptable defense to say that he was just responding to a healthy biological urge? One would hope that a person could have more control over their own base instincts than that. Unfortunately, with the media doing everything they can to blur those lines it gets a lot harder to draw a mental line in the sand and a lot easier to make a relativistic argument about what is and isn’t acceptable.

I have a former friend who spent almost seven years in prison for raping an 11-year-old girl. Part of his defense was that she looked 15, which his lawyer felt should have opened the door to a plea down to statutory rape. Interestingly, based on your mention of barely legal stuff, his large collection of barely legal porn was part of that line of defense. A lot of the women making that look younger than my 12-year-old. I’ve seen models in ads who look younger than her in barely/no clothes and in extremely sexual situations. Should that make it okay for a 40-year-old man to make advances toward her? He sees things on TV and in magazines on a daily basis that tell him it’s normal. Why should he be expected to control his urges when Hollywood tells him they’re okay?

The Atheist way of looking at this issues is strictly biological because the goal is to remove the bible and God as much as possible in order to promote worship of man.

But in Truth, the girl or ‘tween’ can physically be in her prime, men can even know this, but the big question is do men inherintly break the 7th or 10th commandment by admiring or being attracted to these young girl? The answer is no. Let me go into secret teachings.

God saw that man should not be alone and created woman. Here’s the kicker though, Adam and Eve were the SAME AGE. The age of husband and wife are encouraged to be as close together as possible because of this. God shows us that those of the closest age are more compatible as Adam and Eve’s marriage was the longest lasting and had the fewesest problems in all of history of mankind.

Now we need to examine one of the most misused, bastardised, quotes in the Bible. Jesus saying that those who look at a woman to covet her commits adultery in his heart.

The thing is this. It is NOT POSSIBLE for sane men to covet these kinds of girls because of the age difference. This is regardless of how sexually attractive the man finds her. Regardless of how statuess her body is with out one line of cellulite. When you get locked in an office alone with persian girl the same ahe as you for over a year straight, then real coveting can take place and the resulting curses. This is due to mental age and our creation. If she was a kid or teen I’d be driven crazy to run out of there or disregard her. Thered be no coveting or chance of committing adultery in real life.

Now what about age gap. Well it’s encouraged that the age be as close as possible, but if there is a gap, it must be within the SAME generation. So if your generation y, stick with generation y.

God puts safe gaurds in all man that they dont take every tween. If we were animals and monkeys, we’d be raping them in the washroom etc if we pkeased. But we are naturally lustfull and covet people that we are able to have mental companionship. Adam could not find companionship witht the animals. God kept him alone on purpose so he could know the feeling and understand true companionship. You see, we are humans and not animals. This is what out Athesit friend doesn’t understand. Or she has Austism and naturally has trouble with ‘humans’. This is the curse that Atheism cults and self idolatry. They take away your soul and humanity. All lines become blurred. This also goes for media. They then begin to think its ok to sexualize these girls which is not appropriate in 2014 thats for sure. They begin to promote some social norm the more Satan takes over. They’re goal is to skew society to the unnatural.

Even if these geoups existed before, the media would simply view them as nut jobs and not give them the time of day. But we’re no much under Satans control, we take all ideas as serious and feel we need to bless the, with our human logic, reminds me of University… A bunch of Autistics running around halls as self Gods because they have high test scores, and are litterally, mentally disabled not able to function in the real world. Their autistic confusion is now in the mainstream thanks to credentialism. So because she’s biologicaly ready, people think its ok and natural to covet her. Well it’s NOT. (And i mean serious coveting. Not sexual attraction and admiration).

 

[otjm]

As for the overall issue of the promotion of pedophilia as normal, I believe it’s a predominantly male issue, heterosexual or not. Most if not all of the people who stand to gain from the legalization of sex with minors are males. I’ve never had a female friend point out a 13-year-old boy and tell me they’re having illegal thoughts, but I do have several male friends who we’ve quit associating with now that our daughters are hitting puberty (sadly, I’m not being facetious). I’m sure most men would vehemently deny even the suggestion that they have thoughts along those lines, but I’d also be willing to bet that for a majority of them, the first thing they do after reading a story about an underage actress that portrays her in a sexual light is to Google pictures of her. They’d deny that they’re being groomed to accept the normalization of children as sex objects, but that’s exactly what’s happening.

We have had two, if not three prominent cases in Oregon and Washington in the last couple of years involving adult female high school teachers and male, under 18 students. To presume that there is a massive number of unreported cases does not appear to have any support factually; however, to presume that these are the only cases is to engage in naivety.

And perhaps I am belaboring a point, but pedophilia is sexual relations with a pre-pubescent child. A more correct term (and there may be several) is ephebophilia.

Not sure why the thread has gone in the direction of child abuse, as I don’t see the laws changing due to court action. It is far more likely that the courts will continue to dismember the definition of marriage viz a viz polyamory.