Hypothetical: If someplace claims not to discriminate on grounds of sexual orientation, would they be ‘forced’ to not discriminate against him or her, or be forced to change their policy? Is pedophilia even a legally recognized sexual preference for anti-discrimination policies?
Is moron an intellectual preference? Is coprophagist a gustatory preference?
I assume what you’re asking is: If a locale claims “sexual orientation” as a category protected against discrimination, does that claim oblige the locale to thereby make necrophilia, rape, and other crimes with sexual elements legal?
Yes, that’s it. And the GD of it might be, if pedophilia is a sexual preference, does that mean that there are some instances where discrimination on basis of sexual preference are moral/fair?
In instances where the preference is harming another physically and mentally against their will, yes. In my understanding of morality, I think that would easily qualify. As it would be unfair to a less participatory member then the only fair position is to make it against the law. Under the circumstances I think you could say that only one individual in these cases is preferring.
Of course, a child could proposition an adult for sex, but we set an age limit on their right to make that decision based on their understanding of potential consequences. For an example of what might happen if age limits are dropped, picture four drunk ten year olds out on the street shooting pistols at each other.
Necrophilia is against the law(Well, we know why. . .) or at least has failed to be challenged because it would violate the rights of the family members of said dead person. If you were their next of kin, and could determine their remains’ disposition, presumably you could ride grandma one last time, and that would be fine.
Animals certainly have no say in who their sexual partners are or what their preference is so that leaves them out.
Since a child is deemed to be unable to consent to sexual relations with an adult, pedophilia takes on a legal status similar to rape. And “rape” certainly wouldn’t be recognized as a sexual preference - it’s simply a crime.
A more interesting question is what happens when a jurisdiction adopts a statute that prohibits discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, but still has laws on the books that prohibit homosexual activity between consenting adults. Does anyone know if that internally inconsistent situation actually exists anywhere?
You post my refutation for me. How thoughtful. As you point out, sodomy is still illegal in many places, such as here in Virginia. Thus, the ‘it’s a crime, not a preference’ argument holds little water.
To continue, actually having sex with children is a crime. But merely desiring to do so is not. I am asking if that desire legally protected to the same extent other sexual desires are.
People who can’t see the difference between consensual sex between adults and pedophilia worry me. A lot.
If sodomy is illegal in Virginia then it is also a crime, the problem is with the law in that instance. If acting out a “sexual preference” means commiting a crime against another person then it can and will be legally discriminated against. Sodomy laws should be overturned because they do not pass such a test; ie. it is entirely possible for sodomy to be practiced between two consenting adults. To make the mere desire for pedophilia illegal would wrong, but acting on that desire constitutes a very real crime against a minor.
IANA lawyer or anything, so don’t blame me if that doesn’t make a whole lot of sense or lacks consistency. It’s just how I see it.
What the standards should be as to what age truly constitutes “a minor” is still open to debate IMHO. I don’t think there is anything magical about turning 18, it certainly isn’t a distinction shared by all cultures. (ie. the age of consent is 16 in Norway.)
MrVisible people who can’t understand the need theoretical discussion worry me. A lot.
So what if hypothetical pedophile does not, in fact, break the law. Let’s say that I am quite unabashed in my fondness for pubescent teens. I make a hobby of travelling to countries where the age of consent in 13 or 14 and engaging in legal sex with those children. Maybe I have a habit of marrying, then divorcing, 16 year olds.
Or perhaps my thing is bestiality, and I follow the letter of the law, but I make no bones about my carnal love of schnauzers.
Upon learning of my predilections, I get fired, or denied a lease or something. Can I sue?
for someone to claim that they were born with the “Pedophile Gene” and are therefore not responsible for their actions. They could even start their own thread here and bitch and moan about how oppressed they are by society; how discrimination and prejudice hound them wherever they go; how misunderstood they are; and why they should be allowed to march in parades and adopt children.
Pedophilia is not an orientation, it’s a pathology. There’s a difference.
Just about everyone answering the OP seems to assume that all pedophiliacs act on their desires. There are, in fact, many people who feel uncontrollably sexually attracted to children, yet who realize that this is wrong and who never actually carry out any sexual abuse.
That is, while these people may not be able to control their desires, they often can and do control their actions. Many spend years - even their whole adult lives - in therapy designed to keep them from acting on their impulses.
We may find it sick that some people are sexually attracted to children - and i’m not sure exactly how pedophilia is categorized by psychiatrists and psychologists (mental illness?) - but we should realize that having the feelings and acting on them are two separate things.
Of course, if you’re a pedophiliac with this much self-control, i doubt you’d tell any potential employer (or anyone except your therapist, for that matter) about your predilection, and thus it would never come up as an issue for discrimination, making the OP’s question irrelevant in such a case.
:rolleyes:
I just saw Diogenes’s post.
What exactly constitutes a pathology? Is this word synonymous with “mental illness” in the world of psychiatry and psychology? Or is it another category altogether?
IANA abnormal psychologist but the way I understand it is that a pathology basically conotes a distortion in psychological perception or development. A sexual pathology means that an individual’s sexual psychology has become altered or “warped” in some way, often because of early childhood trauma. I don’t think it is characterized as “mental illness” in the same way that schizophrenia would be, it just means that a part of their emotional and sexual psychology has developed abnormally.
Sexual orientation is not a pathology. It is simply denotes the gender(s) that an individual is attracted to sexually. It is a normal part of psychological development. Homosexuality is nowconsidered a normal (non-pathological) orientation by the AMA and the APA. It is not Homosexuality is not analogous to pedophilia any more than heterosexuality is.
Of course that wasn’t always the case. You don’t have to go that far back to get to a time when homosexuality was considered a pathology
Doctors used to bleed people with leeches too, so what?
** mhendo ** beat me to it.
Doctors still use leeches to facilitate the process of re-attaching things like fingers and toes.