The gay and the Pedophile....

[The_Tick]

I am not trolling. Far from it actually.

I gave to talk on this in my sociology class a few years ago regarding social norms.

I am not an "intellectual" here I get that. But my question is sincere as day.

Is consent really the only thing we differenciate between the two?

I don't know if my uncles were born that way to be completely honest. One of them is a lawyer, never shown interest in women since even as a kid. (According to my mother)

The other was married for 20 years and has two twenty something kids. One day just decided to not be married anymore, and now has a life partner. Was in something he was repressing? Don't know...haven't ever really thought of asking him because it isn't my business.

Sorry that some of you here always think someone is trolling when they aren't. I assure you...no wolf in sheeps clothing. I thought I actually had an interesting topic.

Thanks Archaea for at least giving it thought.

[The_Tick]

Originally Posted by jay santos

The comparison is offensive. But the principle behind the offensive is important.

The bottom line is there are a lot of things the natural man wants that it can't have. I'm not sure very many people in the world are completely sexually satisfied a majority of the time. It seems to be something God wants us to experience and learn from. In light of that, the task the homosexual has in life is a heavy cross to bear but not inordinately special. It's a cross we all bear to some extent.

I am not comparing. Drawing a parallel.

Using one to draw out a discussion about the other.

[marsupial]

OK. Since you say you are not trolling, I will say that it is more than just consent. It is also a pedophile's inability (or lack of desire) to have an meaningful relationship with an adult partner. A pedophile's relationship with a child is selfish domination, not mutual satisfaction.

[The_Tick]

Originally Posted by marsupial

OK. Since you say you are not trolling, I will say that it is more than just consent. It is also a pedophile's inability (or lack of desire) to have an meaningful relationship with an adult partner. A pedophile's relationship with a child is selfish domination, not mutual satisfaction.

I agree with that. I believe it tends to have something to do with abuse as a child myself. Someone that is domineered wants to dominate.

I tried getting with the county to do some research for my speech back in 05 but they weren't any help.

[UtahDan]

Originally Posted by The_Tick

I am not trolling. Far from it actually.

I gave to talk on this in my sociology class a few years ago regarding social norms.

I am not an "intellectual" here I get that. But my question is sincere as day.

Is consent really the only thing we differenciate between the two?

I don't know if my uncles were born that way to be completely honest. One of them is a lawyer, never shown interest in women since even as a kid. (According to my mother)

The other was married for 20 years and has two twenty something kids. One day just decided to not be married anymore, and now has a life partner. Was in something he was repressing? Don't know...haven't ever really thought of asking him because it isn't my business.

Sorry that some of you here always think someone is trolling when they aren't. I assure you...no wolf in sheeps clothing. I thought I actually had an interesting topic.

Thanks Archaea for at least giving it thought.

If you are thinking for yourself and critically examining your assumptions and beliefs you are an intellectual. Don't sell yourself short.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by marsupial

OK. Since you say you are not trolling, I will say that it is more than just consent. It is also a pedophile's inability (or lack of desire) to have an meaningful relationship with an adult partner. A pedophile's relationship with a child is selfish domination, not mutual satisfaction.

Sounds like you've given this more thought than I.

We did have one pedophile in our ward. Here's how it worked.

He apparently had been convicted/plea bargained and excommunicated as a member in Utah. He had a child I believe and moved to our state as an excommunicated member. He claimed he had worked for the CIA in Panama and had to execute prisoners after interrogation, this was an object lesson of priesthood which he was allowed to teach.

So he goes on the LDSsingles, finds a girl, borrows money from ward members, convinces this girl to marry him, despite people pleading with her to avoid him. They go to Mexico to honeymoon, return home for a scuffle at one member's house during the open house. Later, a few weeks later, he's arrested for molesting her daughter, in jail with marriage annulled. This apparently was his third or fourth marriage. Obviously, something was wrong with the dude, and he sits in Utah State Prison where he may rot.

I have no idea what makes those guys tick. He was able to procreate yet despite its misuse continued in a harmful and malicious way. Still can't figure it out to this day.

[BlueHair]

Originally Posted by jay santos

I'm not sure very many people in the world are completely sexually satisfied a majority of the time.

My wife is one of the few.

[BarbaraGordon]

Originally Posted by BlueHair

My wife is one of the few.

I heard her boyfriend's pretty proud of that fact, too.

[Taq Man]

This is a complicated question when one considers the well established practice of pederasty that existed from ancient times and has only recently become a disgusting practice worthy of the death penalty.

Societal acceptance is a poor standard for what is or isn't "acceptable".

[BlueHair]

Originally Posted by Taq Man

This is a complicated question when one considers the well established practice of pederasty that existed from ancient times and has only recently become a disgusting practice worthy of the death penalty.

Societal acceptance is a poor standard for what is or isn't "acceptable".

What would be a better standard?