Originally posted by WheelyAll morality is indirectly dependent on practical points. If not, it is useless and unjustifiable in my opinion. So the practical point is what justifies morality.
I take the point about being incapable of raising a child. In the past, family units stayed together and the whole family would raise a child. I guess it was less of a problem then if your nine year old daughter got pregnant.
OK, that's a practical point against it but we were talking morally.
I don't know if I think paedephillia is wrong. Personally ...[text shortened]... are actually mature enough I'm not sure I could say it would be wrong for them to have sex.
Then we'll have to justify what exactly 'mature' means. Nine year old girls or boys are not intellectually capable to avoid manipulation by adults, so the idea of 'consent' is in a way fallacious. The same applies for the mentally disabled.
The line between consent, coercion and manipulation is sometimes not a clear one, especially when we're talking about children susceptible to be convinced by trifle arguments such as candy or toys. Their minds are not yet capable of realizing what they're actions mean and the consequences of their actions. This is valid for crime, work, sex, driving, etc.
I don't wish to discuss if the legal frontier is ideal or not. I would perhaps set it at around 16, but the question is clear (at least to me) for children of 9.
1 edit
Originally posted by lebowskiYour comment "was the father Muhammad? islamofarts would say ok to that" is offence to Muslims, this thread has nothing to do with Islam and to write words such as "Islamofart" is not acceptable.
was the father muhammed? islamofarts would say ok to that.
It is offensive and demonstrates a lack of understanding of the second largest faith in the world.
If your doing this for a joke it’s not funny as no one has even commented on your posting.
Every true Muslim takes ignorant comments about their faith and Prophet VERY SEROIUSLY
Originally posted by PalynkaOK then. Some nine year olds ARE definitely able to know what they are doing. However, if I understand you correctly, the argument is that there is a risk that a younger child isn't able to clearly understand his or her actions and therefore we make it illegal across the board to be sure.
All morality is indirectly dependent on practical points. If not, it is useless and unjustifiable in my opinion. So the practical point is what justifies morality.
Then we'll have to justify what exactly 'mature' means. Nine year old girls or boys are not intellectually capable to avoid manipulation by adults, so the idea of 'consent' is in a way fallacio ...[text shortened]... rhaps set it at around 16, but the question is clear (at least to me) for children of 9.
If this is the argument, I can understand that and would be willing to go along with it. The only thing that bothers me slightly is that it isn't something we generally do. We don't ban alcohol because some people can't handle it.
Perhaps also, I'm slightly unsure what we might mean by the consequences of sex unless, of course, we are talking about pregnancy.
Originally posted by RSMA1234Don't get upset about it. Any internet forum is going to have a few people too immature to make sensible comments. You should ignore him, everyone else did.
Your comment "was the father Muhammad? islamofarts would say ok to that" is offence to Muslims, this thread has nothing to do with Islam and to write words such as "Islamofart" is not acceptable.
It is offensive and demonstrates a lack of understanding of the second largest faith in the world.
If you doing this for a joke it’s not funny as no one has ...[text shortened]... .
Every true Muslim takes ignorant comments about their faith and Prophet VERY SEROIUSLY
Originally posted by RSMA1234i for one have alerted the mods about it.
Your comment "was the father Muhammad? islamofarts would say ok to that" is offence to Muslims, this thread has nothing to do with Islam and to write words such as "Islamofart" is not acceptable.
It is offensive and demonstrates a lack of understanding of the second largest faith in the world.
If you doing this for a joke it’s not funny as no one has ...[text shortened]... .
Every true Muslim takes ignorant comments about their faith and Prophet VERY SEROIUSLY
Originally posted by WheelyWell, I can't prove it either but I've never seen one, never known one,never heard of one.
Though I can't prove this, I'd be willing to bet there is. Maybe they are rarer these days but we have had young children throughout history that have had to grow up damn fast.
Originally posted by WheelyI doubt that such nine year olds exist, and if they do it is indeed a very small margin (much less than 1😵. The vast majority of nine-year-olds should then be protected.
OK then. Some nine year olds ARE definitely able to know what they are doing. However, if I understand you correctly, the argument is that there is a risk that a younger child isn't able to clearly understand his or her actions and therefore we make it illegal across the board to be sure.
If this is the argument, I can understand that and would be willin ...[text shortened]... we might mean by the consequences of sex unless, of course, we are talking about pregnancy.
I don't think the case is comparable to alcohol because the adult is held directly accountable for his actions, therefore we consider he is capable of understanding his choices. Note that even if he didn't understand, he had the capability to do so and therefore is held accountable and has the freedom to choose it.
The consequences of being tricked into sex at that age are more than the fear of pregnancy. There are many cases of psychological trauma in children that had such experiences and this could impair their ability to correctly learn how to behave in society and how to deal with others.
1 edit
Originally posted by WheelyThere is no grey area here.
Then please tell me why it is wrong. I'm more than willing to be converted on this issue.
To recap: The issue is if an eleven year old boy who is mentally and sexually mature has sex with a thirty year old women and nobody has been coerced into anything, is it, at least a grey area.
It is Rape.It will always be rape, and no intellectual argument is going to change my mind on this.
I see you have chosen to re-iterate the fact that you were talking about a 30 year old woman, and a 11 year old boy. Just because this is the most socially acceptable variant of the pedophile situation, doesn't make it right.
So what about a 30 year old man and a 11 year old girl? or an 11 year old boy for that matter, or is your grey area a conditional one??