Supreme Court Same Sex Marriage Argumet

[Anima]

Well if I believed in God I'd pray for your school pupils, no shade

Pedophilia "love" is one-sided, making it manipulation at best and rape at worst. A man might claim that he "loves" a grown woman he raped, that's still rape. It's not the rest of the world who are failing to see the distinction between homosexuality and pedophilia, it's you, you're the one saying this shit. If you ask me, I think you're a little too interested in the subject for my comfort.

I am sorry but this response assumes the child or the incestuous have been manipulated and are not capable of making a rational decision. While I do admire it as a different way to say the same thing (which is to say the child may not consent) you have not evidenced why a child may make decisions in term of their own life or death, the ownership and use of a device which is designed to take the life or death of others, and to the contraction of necessaries, but just cannot seem to willing agree to this one thing without coercion.

Furthermore, the majority of the world (you know the non-US part) considers pedophilia and homosexuality to be analogous. In both cases each represent an inclination to engage in sexual activity with partners in a manner which does not follow from the di-hybrid procreative inclination (that is to say a minimum of two persons of pubescent age and opposite genders). In that regard they are indeed analogous. However if we wish to say they are not analogous it may be argued that pedophilia is a far more reasonable defect of the procreative inclination faculty than homosexuality.

For example if one observes an 80 year old and a 40 year old they generally find the younger 40 year old more attractive. The same may be said of a 40 year old and a 20 year old. So we established there is an attraction to the younger of a pairing that is in relation to age and, generally speaking, procreative fertility. If attraction is related to procreative fertility it may be said there is a lower bound of pre-pubescence and an upper bound of senility. Where it is recognize the fertility of one who has not gone through puberty or has passed well beyond it is non-existent (or greatly diminished) and thus attraction to them is equally non-existent (or greatly diminished). Thus 80 loses to 40 while 25 does not lose to 5; due to the child being below pubescent age and outside the range of fertile age.

Observing the relation that exists between attraction, fertility, and age it may be said if a person were to establish a false equivalency that age is inversely proportional to fertility (1/age = fertility) rather than recognizing their is a relations between the two (fertility = -(age+constant)^2+constant), but not an inverse equality, they would reason the younger of greater attractiveness beyond the pre-pubescent threshold into the pedophilia range. This may be said for one who makes the improper relation between age and fertility; what more may be said to one whose determination of attractiveness is not tied to procreative fertility at all.

(NOTE: I AM NOT SAYING PEDOPHILIA IS RIGHT!! I AM ONLY SAYING IT MAY FOLLOW LOGICALLY FROM A DEFECTIVE UNDERSTANDING OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN AGE AND FERTILITY.)

And I'm sorry but what I said is true whether you like it or not. I stand by what I said earlier (which you failed to even address). I'll believe your concern is true when I see some real evidence that you have devoted a lot of your spare time (not "being a teacher" which you do primarily to make a living), energy and money to helping kids who are really abused. Lots of parents and teachers are assholes btw, not saying necessarily that you are, but just saying being either doesn't mean you're a champion of childrens' rights.

I am sorry but this is a foolish ad hominem argument by which you seek to avoid the question by arguing the quality of the questioner. Even if ACE is the patron deity of children you will not accept that as sufficient proof because you are trying to avoid the question. So how about you answer the question or if you do not have an answer just say so.

Otherwise with every post you make you are going to have to provide proof of your personal credentials to support your assertion or question to a degree we find satisfying. By the way, in case you forgot this is an atheist board so most here are not inclined to believe something you say simply because you say it or have a picture of it. Good luck making your proof.