Discussion: Is pedophilia pseudoscience?

Status
Not open for further replies.
What was the scientific basis on which humans made the AOC laws?

Expediency. It is easier to make blanket statements than to cater to individualism. This still does not excuse AR's position that all children are capable of consent...
 
this area of the law doesn't need any scientific explanation.
the only requirement is:
must represent the collective will of the people without violating the constitution.
 
What was the scientific basis on which humans made the AOC laws?

Why does the basis have to be scientific? To overturn the law you are going to need a solid reason, but to make it? Laws are not solely grounded in science, but ethics, morality, and cultural standards.

Simply, it's unethical to test if there is harm done or not. Also, the law is there, not to punish the precocious, but to protect the weak. Each case can be tried on it's individual merits if it comes to that.

Seems AR just doesn't have faith in the judicial system to vindicate his actions.
 
isn't really in the end about the children

this is my concern

tell me of any child that is not affected emotionaly , psychologically by having sex with an adult at a much , much to early age , 5>15,16 at the very minimum

to the child , the child him/her self is there an actual loving bond , with the adult not forced ?

no

these childern will never understand true love
 
STOP , I mean STOP MAKING ANY EXCUSSES FOR WHAT YOU WANT

THINK JUST THINK AND PUT YOUR SELF IN THE CHILDS PLACE

IF YOU HAVE BEEN ABUSED , DID YOU AT THE VERY FIRST ENCOUNTER WANT IT

shit have any of you thought about or cared about the consequences of the future well being of the child ?

if not why not ?
 
Stryder

By demanding that someone focuses on a side question, you admit that you cannot answer the central premise.

It's not helping your side.


Ancientregime

By refusing to be specific... you admit that your statement is not in fact scientific.

I'll put it simply for you Rob.

Some of my questions are "Discussion/Debate", while others are actually "Investigation". As a Moderator here on Sciforums it's one of our many tasks to ascertain the nature of the persons posting, especially on subjects like this.

In AncientRegime's case he's been very prudent to make sure that he doesn't admit anything from his perspective, generating argument should anyone state that suggests that "he" saw or did anything in examples.

If the argument becomes too personally attached to him he stalls, until the person trying to point out says something that he can use as ammo. I can understand the debate technique, however I can also understand it being predatorial, where they try to stay just outside of reach.

This is why the questions about his Religion (which in honesty he's purposely not stated, perhaps fearing that he would easily be rideculed.) Believe me, J.E. knows full well this because I've been quite forthcoming with my queries, I'm just wondering how much of a vandal he is.
 
John99 said:
scott3x said:
Personally, I don't think it'd make for good science in some areas where many people dislike disturbing the status quo; something that many very good scientists have struggled with throughout the ages...

unless the science is regressive, then it is just boring rehashed bs.

I don't believe that this subject falls into that category.

every subject that is provocative is not automatically progressive or interesting.

Perhaps. I still think that this one is, however.


John99 said:
most likely this debate would just turn people off.

Some people may be turned off by this debate, but a lot of people are responding; I would argue that some of the arguments on both side of the debate are some of the best.


John99 said:
The topic line is ill conceived and stupid as well.

I think it would have been better if it had simply said something like 'should we base sexual activity privileges on age?'. I would have argued in the negative, you may have argued in the affirmative.


John99 said:
It is like asking is is heterosexuality pseudoscience or is homosexuality pseudoscience.

the ideal being heterosexuality and homosexuality being between two adults (keyword ADULT) capable of consenting and having the capacity to understand what they are consenting to. what is so hard to understand?

Adults aren't the only people who are capable of consent. The nettlesome issue isn't consent but informed consent. But when you look at it objectively, you will come to realize that there is no currently no way to determine whether -anyone- is capable of informed consent. Saying that one is capable of informed consent depending on how many times the earth has revolved around the sun and frequently adding in how many times the earth has revolved around the sun for his or her partner isn't the worst way of trying to determine this, but I personally believe that attempting to test for the ability of one or both parties to make good decisions directly is a better approach.
 
I'll put it simply for you Rob.

Some of my questions are "Discussion/Debate", while others are actually "Investigation". As a Moderator here on Sciforums it's one of our many tasks to ascertain the nature of the persons posting, especially on subjects like this.

In AncientRegime's case he's been very prudent to make sure that he doesn't admit anything from his perspective, generating argument should anyone state that suggests that "he" saw or did anything in examples.

If the argument becomes too personally attached to him he stalls, until the person trying to point out says something that he can use as ammo. I can understand the debate technique, however I can also understand it being predatorial, where they try to stay just outside of reach. This is why the questions about his Religion (which in honesty he's purposely not stated, perhaps fearing that he would easily be rideculed.) Believe me, J.E. knows full well this because I've been quite forthcoming with my queries, I'm just wondering how much of a vandal he is.

I completely disagree with the assertion that ancientregime's debating technique is in any way predatorial, or that he has demonstrated in any way that he is a vandal; I believe both statements to be personal attacks and libelous to boot.
 
Adults aren't the only people who are capable of consent.

Actually that's the problem, the Law states who is capable of consenting. Adults consent, Minor's have decisions made by a Parent or Guardian. This means if a minor makes the wrong decision, if can actually fall on their Parent or Guardian as making the wrong decision and they could find themselves culpable.

What this means is if you wanted to do anything with a minor (Anything could mean being a school tutor and taking them on a school trip), you need the consent of the Parent or Guardian. However this doesn't mean that should something happen that the Parent or Guardian is the "sole" person at fault, it just means they a proportion of the decision making process in that child's life to make sure they don't make mistake or get taken advantage of.
 
I completely disagree with the assertion that ancientregime's debating technique is in any way predatorial, or that he has demonstrated in any way that he is a vandal; I believe both statements to be personal attacks and libelous to boot.

It has nothing to do with Libelous Scott. If it's of any relevancy, I guess you could say the last line isn't stating he's a vandal here, but enquiring as to if his Christmas went well. (In honesty he might or might not know what I'm talking about)
 
I completely disagree with the assertion that ancientregime's debating technique is in any way predatorial, or that he has demonstrated in any way that he is a vandal; I believe both statements to be personal attacks and libelous to boot.
listen scott in this area of the law it doesn't matter what you personally agree or disagree with.
it's what the collective will agrees with that matters.
you simply cannot debate this issue one on one.
 
Expediency. It is easier to make blanket statements than to cater to individualism. This still does not excuse AR's position that all children are capable of consent...

as to who's advantage? Kids? and adults decide whats best for a kid? :D

Few weeks ago, my 16 year old female friend was found quite depressed and was telling me that she is getting picked up by her classmates saying she is way too childish. She said she want to be mature and behave like a grown up. I told her "Look around you... everything you see which has gone wrong or messed up have been contributed by a so called mature grown up individual. Practically every single thing that adults have found out over centuries have been a complete mess and had to revise it way too many times to fit according to their changing needs and understanding of the world around them. You must consider remaining childish and immature in my opinion."
 
as to who's advantage? Kids? and adults decide whats best for a kid? :D

Few weeks ago, my 16 year old female friend was found quite depressed and was telling me that she is getting picked up by her classmates saying she is way too childish. She said she want to be mature and behave like a grown up. I told her "Look around you... everything you see which has gone wrong or messed up have been contributed by a so called mature grown up individual.

Practically every single thing that adults have found out over centuries have been a complete mess and had to revise it way too many times to fit according to their changing needs and understanding of the world around them. You must consider remaining childish and immature in my opinion."

I agree

I mean how many adults are truely mature ?

very few
 
She said she want to be mature and behave like a grown up. I told her "Look around you... everything you see which has gone wrong or messed up have been contributed by a so called mature grown up individual. Practically every single thing that adults have found out over centuries have been a complete mess and had to revise it way too many times to fit according to their changing needs and understanding of the world around them. You must consider remaining childish and immature in my opinion."
the sober second thought of the people is seldom wrong.
-thomas jefferson.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top