XXX wrote:
> 4s00th <4s00th@hushmail.com> wrote:
>> You've repeatedly blamed society for the harm that comes to children
>> who become sexually involved with adults -- you blame society for
>> making the gun.
>
> And without the gun there would still be no damage.
>
>> But the gun doesn't go off unless someone pulls the trigger; ie, no
>> child is harmed unless an adult pulls the trigger and gets sexually
>> involved with a child.
>
> Again, without the gun there would be no damage. With the gun there could
> be damage when someone else (not an adult) pulls the trigger (like when
> society finds out that a 12-year-old impregnated his 13-year-old girlfriend
> and charges both with sexual assaulting the other). Safer and better to do
> away with the gun than to leave it around to be used. It is the gun that
> is bad.
Yes, but look at it this way: If a child has sex with someone,
especially an adult, there's a chance that the child would be harmed
by the experience. In good-to-ideal circumstances, that chance is
probably pretty low. (And the likelihood of the circumstances being
good-to-ideal is also pretty low).
However, should anyone in authority find out (which is quite
possible), the chance of harm occurring rapidly becomes very high. Can
you allow that harm to occur just because it's someone else's fault?
For me, I simply could not risk the chance that someone I feel for
could be harmed by things largely out of his (or her) control. While
sex is nice, safety is nicer, and much more valuable.
Have sex with a kid, and it might result in his/her life being screwed
up; even if the sex itself isn't the primary cause, it's still the
underlying factor.
Much better not to, just in case.
--
rgds
LAurence
...I'm not tense -- just terribly alert.
---*TagZilla 0.059* http://tagzilla.mozdev.org
|
| Follow-ups: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
|