This depends on what you mean.
I am starting to suspect that you feel that people with sexual disorders are bad merely for existing. Pedophilia seems to not be an action but a physiological condition and we should hate them for having this condition, not for their actions.
You don't say, it's almost like pedophiles have a mental disorder or something
Everyone else seems to be judging them based on their actions. Someone who commits a sexual crime is a criminal, someone who desires to but does not is not a criminal.
Yeah they're not a criminal, they're a pedophile
probably because pedophilia is a condition people experience, while fucking children is an action, would be my guess
pedophilia is acceptable in the same way as some kinds of epilepsy are - it's an objectively bad, yes, but i'm not about to judge someone immoral for suffering it until they do something wrong, which i guess in this analogy means that driving a car in a crowded city knowing you could have a seizure and lose control of the vehicle without warning is akin to engaging in sexual relations with minors?
i'm not seeing any dissonance
One of my friends was epileptic, dead now - he'd go into seizures and you'd have to hold him, keep saying his name to bring him back and make sure he didn't fall over and injure himself on anything in his seizures. How is this is in any way the same as wanting to fuck children, no matter how fancily you dress this up as being "pro-contact" with children or "engaging in sexual relations with minors?" As if there's ever a situation in society where "oh no I've lost control of my actions, better molest some children"?
"In the midst of that dark era in my life, I discovered an unhealthy pedophile forum. Nothing illegal was happening there, but many of its most influential members were pro-contacters, meaning they believed that sex with children was theoretically OK and supported the elimination of age of consent laws. That forum still exists and I won’t name it here, but suffice it to say, I found myself taking up the same pro-contacter chants, if only to feel like I belonged somewhere."
The only way we know he did nothing wrong was by his word, which is frankly worthless. I thought peeps turning blind eyes to pedophiles was a national thing, not international :|
Apologies though, Salon is just being so brave and contrarian for for pushing for pedophile acceptance
And again, in any case it's literally advocating for thought-crime enforcement and prosecution to suggest that people should be judged based on their desires rather than their actions.
So someone who wants to fuck children should not be judged on their desire to fuck children, or else we're literally 1984
As before, I think that a simple "Judge not, lest ye be judged," is supremely fucking appropriate here. Especially considering, LW, that the argument you're balancing on the other hand is for it to be legal for random assholes to own tools whose only purpose in modern society is killing other people. Someone has immoral desires but refuses to acts on them? HALT CRIMINAL SCUM! Someone wants to be able to buy a gun and shoot anyone that they feel threatened by? HAIL FREEDOM!
In what bizarre world do you live in where I represent some mass murder faction fighting the pedophile faction? You can address my arguments or you can address my strawmen
On another note: Your claim that the homicide rate in the U.S. has been steadily decreasing? That's true, if you're fucking myopic.
Why do I even post links if people don't bother reading them, it's like they don't give a shit about sourcing they just like the glow of that yellow link which probably means I'm not just talking out of my goathair
I wasn't trying to cause offense, but killing dangerous wildlife is decidedly not an aspect of modern, urbanized, post-industrial society.
If you don't have foxes killing your neighbourhood's pets
I should have been clearer--note that in the case LW was trying to make, he's arguing that Britain needs looser gun control laws; their problems with wildlife are pretty much exclusively in the past, and have been ever since they finished killing off the wolves in the British Isles.
Nope, we've got to keep the deer populations and fox populations down, we just don't have to worry about wolves - I also was not arguing that Britain needs looser gun control laws, I was replying to someone who had brought up that the USA has a higher homicide rate than the UK and I was replying by saying that the USA does not have 1 camera watching every 10 people
Okay, speaking of cherry-picking, if you're going to try to tie economic conditions to violent crime, how do you explain there not being an equivalent spike in violence during the Great Recession? The only upward movement at all in recent years was a very small one in 2006. Where was the Great Depression-level economic crisis that helped cause the massive spike in crime during the latter half of the previous century?
Lol when have I made these arguments