Pedophilia is not a mental disease.

[_Keno_]

Not in all cases.

Not in any cases.

Can you link what research shows that excessive amounts of certain hormones change orientation? Even if that is true, which I doubt it is, it is not the choice of the child.

And can you tell me how pedophilia being a mental disorder has anything to do with opinion?

 

[3mmanu3lrc]

Can you link what research shows that excessive amounts of certain hormones change orientation?

Click here and start from: "El PNUMA, actualiza los datos en su informe anual" to save you time.

And here Read the right pane of the site - The one with the tittle: "PLÁSTICOS: PORTADORES DE DISRUPTORES HORMONALES"

Even if that is true, which I doubt it is, it is not the choice of the child.

In child cases it's not a choice, but what about a grown person? which would be the same for pedophilia.

And just in case you didn't want to read all that:

Spoiler

Los alteradores endocrinos se comportan en forma similar a las hormonas naturales en el cuerpo humano, alterando los sistemas de señales químicas que guían el desarrollo del cerebro y de los sistemas de reproducción

I never say something because it looks cool, I speak with bases, Write in this case.

Also, take a look at this:

And let me know if you want it in English.

Spoiler

There have been several studies which
link conditions in both animals and humans, exposure to environmental contaminants that could affect your endocrine system.

The endocrine system is the set of organs and tissues of
the body that release a class of substances called hormones, which controls, coordinates and regulates many vital activities such as metabolism and reproduction.

Read the Introduction of this for that last collapsed part.

 

[_Keno_]

From what I've read about chemical alteration, sexual development is slowed, permanent harm to a fetus can occur, can cause certain diseases, some secondary sexual physical characteristics can be altered, and there is often harmful blockage of certain hormones. I never saw anything that referred to change in sexual orientation.

If there is something, please directly quote that portion.

 

[3mmanu3lrc]

Scientists are continuing to sound the alarm about some common chemicals, including the herbicide atrazine, and link them to changes in reproductive health and development. Endocrine disrupting toxic chemicals have been found to feminize male frogs and cause homosexual behavior. Ashley Ahearn reports on how these substances may be affecting human development and behavior.

CURWOOD: It's Living on Earth, I'm Steve Curwood. From the carpets in our living rooms to the liners of our canned goods we're exposed to manmade chemicals every day. We use synthetic chemicals for everything from plastics to pesticides. They eventually make their way from our farms, households or industry into the environment – and into our bodies. And they may be affecting our reproductive health – indeed, even our sexual preferences. Producer Ashley Ahearn reports.

Here if you want the link

Also:

 

[_Keno_]

Here if you want the link

So a herbicide can change the sexual preference of frogs? Oh wait, reading more in depth, it doesnt just change preference, it changes GENDER (did you know that many species of frog can change gender by themselves?). After exposure, a frog has eggs, a uterus, can have baby froglets, and all primary and secondary sexual characteristics become female.

Everything about humans is just speculation, the most Curwood ever says is that it "may" affect humans, "may" affect cause reproductive problems, "may" affect orientation. I seriously doubt it affects humans at all. And even if that particular speculation were absolutely right, what does that have to do with pedophilia?

 

[3mmanu3lrc]

When a mother is pregnant, she keeps using all this products that make the females hormones get faster developed, the boy born with too many of them

is when in womb.

Yeaha!

And by the way, what is the point you are trying to work toward?

What I said in the #160 post, that homosexuality and pedophilia are not choices in all cases, which is what JeKartaN1 said before.

 

[_Keno_]

First of all, everything he says in relation to humans is just speculation.
Secondly, what exactly does that have to do with pedophilia?
Thirdly, I responded to your post #160 saying that "homosexuality is not a choice in any case," how does what you say contradict me at all?

 

[3mmanu3lrc]

Are you gonna make me quote all the previews posts back?
Seriously read!

 

[_Keno_]

Okay, this is all you've ever said about pedophilia:

But Pedophilia, That is a mental disease imo.

Its a mental disease...in your opinion. I for one didnt know diseases were opinions.

Lets see, have you shown that homosexuality can be a choice? Nope, you've only debated with me one of the possible sources of non-choice homosexuality. Even if you were perfectly right on what we debated, it would only be further proof for what I originally said.

 

[3mmanu3lrc]

Its a mental disease...in your opinion. I for one didnt know diseases were opinions.

That, doesn't make any sense.

Lets see, have you shown that homosexuality can be a choice? Nope

Because I wasn't trying to show that it could be a choice, my arguments are for the "not a choice" part.

 

[_Keno_]

That, doesn't make any sense.

You said "Pedophilia is a mental disease in my opinion," and I'm asking how opinion has anything to do with whether something is a disease or not.

Because I wasn't trying to show that it could be a choice, my arguments are for the "not a choice" part.

Yes, I know. I'm just doubting that specific "not choice."

I'm currently questioning this:

Not in all cases.

Not in all cases implies that there are some cases, and that "not a choice" is a minority of cases.

 

[3mmanu3lrc]

You said "Pedophilia is a mental disease in my opinion," and I'm asking how opinion has anything to do with whether something is a disease or not.

Here, check this out.

 

[_Keno_]

LOL

Disease is not something that can be opinionated. Its like saying "In my opinion, George Washington was an African American."

 

[3mmanu3lrc]

It doesn't sound like the same to me.

 

[_Keno_]

Something is either a disease or isnt, there is no "opinion" about whether it is.
You can believe something is or isnt, but that is not an opinion either.

Ugh, this is a useless semantics argument. You still havent stated why you believe pedophilia is a mental disorder.

 

[ballin4life]

LOL

Disease is not something that can be opinionated. Its like saying "In my opinion, George Washington was an African American."

If you go back enough generations Washington's ancestors came from Africa, right?

Anyway, what "opinion" means here is basically what definition you are using. So make that definition explicit and then people can debate whether it is a good definition or not.

 

[3mmanu3lrc]

But Pedophilia, That is a mental disease imo.

Its a mental disease...in your opinion. I for one didnt know diseases were opinions.

All right, I said that because a person does not choose to be a pedophile, he/she certainly have the choice to inhibit his or her behavior, controling his/her feelings within the moral limits.

If tomorrow you decide to do what a pedophile does, that will make people say that you're a pedophile when to the eyes of science you're not, you can be tested to prove that you're doing those things just because you wanted to, not because you feed attraction, so you may be treated as a crazy instead of a pedophile which is also a mental disorder.

 

[HaiWayne]

Is pedophilia comparable to homosexuality (in the way of not being curable) and how useful is it to treat pedophiles to "cure" their condition with tax payer's money?

Yes, pedophilia is comparable to homosexuality in that they are both terms that describe an individual's sexual preferences. It is true that pedophilia is much more widely criticized as immoral/abnormal than homosexuality (although homosexuality is still considered immoral by the plurality of Americans source: http://www.opposingviews.com/i/poll-half-of-americans-think-homosexuality-morally-wrong), but in order to justify such a difference in public attitude, we must explain or prove how pedophilia harms the children involved. If this can be done successfully, then we can reasonably defend the notion that homosexuality should be accepted, and pedophilia should be rejected. Unfortunately, I believe there is yet to be good evidence proving that pedophilia would necessarily harm children, as children can have sexual desire with adults willingly at a very young age. There is a lot of research however that shows pedophiles often sexually abuse children against their will, but this cannot be used against pedophilia itself as homosexuals can also sexually abuse/**** others of the same gender, which cannot be used as evidence against homosexuality either. So my conclusion is that pedophilia cannot be readily criticized as much as most people would because of the lack of evidence proving pedophilia is harmful to chldren who willingly want to have a sexual relationship with an adult.

 

[_Keno_]

All right, I said that because a person does not choose to be a paedophile, he/she certainly have the choice to inhibit his or her behavior, controling his/her feelings within the moral limits.

What moral limits? Your moral limits? Mine? Your deity's? And are you saying that simply being a paedophile is immoral?

If tomorrow you decide to do what a pedophile does, that will make people say that you're a pedophile when to the eyes of science you're not, you can be tested to prove that you're doing those things just because you wanted to, not because you feed attraction, so you may be treated as a crazy instead of a pedophile which is also a mental disorder.

I dont see what the point of this paragraph was...

 

[3mmanu3lrc]

What moral limits? Your moral limits? Mine? Your deity's? And are you saying that simply being a paedophile is immoral?

No anyone moral limits, but moral limits per se, there's a standard for it, even yours could be different than mine, there's a base line. And no, I'm no saying being a pedophilian is inmoral, but some of the action may get to be.

I dont see what the point of this paragraph was...

That was about pointing that pedophilia is not a choice, but sorry that was a little vague.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Beyond biological leashes, there is no absolute morality.

 

[3mmanu3lrc]

I didn't say absolute, but standard /pattern of morality, which is what I meant with base line, but that could also vary depending on the society/groups and countries.
"Absolute" would be a too strong word for it, but somehow I agree with you.

But I was refering to the pedophile's moral behavior based on the society he belongs to.

 

[_Keno_]

I was refering to the pedophile's moral behavior based on the society he belongs to.

Why is it necessary that a person's moral behavior reflect the morality of his society? And what if morals vary greatly within the society?

That was about pointing that pedophilia is not a choice.

Well, I agree with that.

 

[3mmanu3lrc]

Why is it necessary that a person's moral behavior reflect the morality of his society?

Spoiler

world peace, if you do what your society thinks is moral, the chances that you won't have your neighbor against you, are high. J/K

But anyway:

And what if morals vary greatly within the society?

I'm not saying it's necessary since you can live in your own, leaded by your own judgement w/o harming anybody.

 

[_Keno_]

world peace, if you do what your society thinks is moral, the chances that you won't have your neighbor against you.[/B]

So I should do whatever my society thinks is moral, regardless of what it is? And I should abstain doing certain things others deem immoral even if i dont?

We would still be in the stone age if this was how people really thought.

And why should my neighbor be against me if i'm doing something "immoral" in his/her eyes if it doesnt affect him/her?

 

[3mmanu3lrc]

I said "Chances" and if it doesn't affect him/her then what I said doesn't apply.

Also, you stocked to the joke part of the post, I probably shouldn't have written that. What was that?

 

[Thino]

I said "Chances" and if it doesn't affect him/her then what I said doesn't apply.

Also, you stocked to the joke part of the post, I probably shouldn't have written that. What was that?

the problem with this kind of situation is that "affect" and "harming" depends on morals also.

if you come from a society where having sex with 12 years old is ok , then until you know its not okay with your neighbour , you will not think of causing any harm or affecting