August 27, 2013 (National Review) - I have written about this before. In our growing hedonistic culture, pedophilia is in the process of being normalized, downgraded by some from a severe sexual perversion into a mere ”orientation.”
The Atlantic–mainstream media!–has two articles that push us in that direction. First, “I Pedophile,” by David Goldberg–a Canadian journalist convicted for viewing child pornography–argues that his obsession with children is a “sexual orientation:”
The main query that I am convinced will always be without an answer is why I am a pedophile. It is the equivalent of trying to determine why someone is heterosexual or gay. We don’t choose our sexual orientations. If we could, believe me, no one would choose mine.
Then, he says incarceration isn’t the right approach to child porn consumers:
I am not advocating the cross-generational lifestyle. In fact, there is never an instance when an adult should engage in sexual behavior with a child. But until we as a society learn that help for those who view child pornography is a far better alternative to incarceration, we are doomed to see the continued proliferation of this problem. Scientists don’t know for certain if there is a correlation between viewing child pornography and offending against children. Wouldn’t it be nice to get pedophiles help before we find out for certain?
“Cross generational lifestyle?” Watching child porn is “offending against children!”
Goldberg says he is “lucky” to have been caught in Canada and given only a 90-day jail sentence. Otherwise he would have had to spend time with “hardened” criminals. But who is a more hardened criminal than someone who victimizes children?
Click "like" if you are PRO-LIFE!
It’s one thing for a pedophile to rationalize his perversion. It is another for ”experts” in treating the condition to claim that pedophilia is a sexual orientation. From, “What Can Be Done About Pedophilia?”
“Sexual orientation” means different things in different contexts. When they say “sexual orientation,” most people mean a sexual interest that is inborn and unchangeable. No one chooses to be sexually attracted to children, although people do choose whether they act on their sexual attractions. Therapists have been attempting to turn pedophiles into non-pedophiles for a very long time, but no one has presented any objective evidence of any enduring change in sexual interests.
The expert isn’t suggesting that pedophilia should be treated as the same as homosexuality–yet:
Scientists have more specifically called it an “age orientation.” Caution has to be used, however, so as not to confuse the scientific use of the phrase “sexual orientation” with its use in law. Because the phrase “sexual orientation” has been used as shorthand (or as a euphemism) for homosexuality, there exist laws and policies barring discrimination on the basis of “sexual orientation.” These were not likely intended to refer to pedophilia.
Why “not likely” if we come to see pedophilia as a mere “orientation?”
The experts say allow pedophiles to seek help before they “offend:”
I believe we can prevent a much greater number of victims if we put greater energies into early detection and provide support before the first offense occurs, rather than relying only on stronger and stronger punishments after the fact.
Fine. But not by reducing our repulsion of pedophilia or by reducing the threat of severe sanction if a child is abused or child porn is consumed. Let sure punishment be the stick that drives the pedophile to seek help before committing a criminal act. Moreover, a decent person will seek help regardless of feared personal consequences to prevent harm to an innocent child.
Sigh. The intellectual thrust of these arguments is meant to soften our views of people who lust after children. Somewhere, the minions of NAMBLA are smiling.