Why are there laws against paedophilia?

Post Reply New Topic

I think it should stay illegal because picturing an adult having sex with a child is down right disgusting also traumatizing to the childs childhood.If it were legal the lowest aoc would have to be 16 but I still think its disgusting.

Traditionally, across the world, the age of consent for a sexual union was a matter for the family to decide, or a tribal custom. In most cases, this coincided with signs of puberty, menstruation for a woman and pubic hair for a man.

In Ancient Rome, it was very common for girls to marry and have children shortly after the onset of puberty....

The first recorded age-of-consent law dates back 800 years: In 1275, in England, as part of the rape law, a statute, Westminster 1, made it a misdemeanor to "ravish" a "maiden within age," whether with or without her consent. The phrase "within age" was interpreted by jurist Sir Edward Coke as meaning the age of marriage, which at the time was 12 years of age....

In the 12th century Gratian, the influential founder of Canon law in medieval Europe, accepted age of puberty for marriage to be between 12 and 14 but acknowledged consent to be meaningful if the children were older than 7. There were authorities that said that consent could take place earlier. Marriage would then be valid as long as neither of the two parties annulled the marital agreement before reaching puberty, or if they had already consummated the marriage. It should be noted that Judges honored marriages based on mutual consent at ages younger than 7, in spite of what Gratian had said; there are recorded marriages of 2 and 3 year olds....

The American colonies followed the English tradition, and the law was more of a guide. For example, Mary Hathaway (Virginia, 1689) was only 9 when she was married to William Williams. Sir Edward Coke (England, 17th century) made it clear that "the marriage of girls under 12 was normal, and the age at which a girl who was a wife was eligible for a dower from her husband's estate was 9 even though her husband be only four years old."....

Again: Paedophilia is not sex with children, is not abuse, is not molestation.

ad 1) "neither is an 18-year-old's" Then when he/she is? And who decides?

If you would actually read the first sentence, you'd see that I utilized the "/" to denote "or," thus showing that I did in fact consider the differences between pedophilia (sexual attraction towards children, with or without a sexual act being committed), molestation of a child (which may or may not involve "penetration" -- groping, etc.) and intercourse involving a minor. One cannot make thoughts illegal, but the term is commonly used colloquially to refer to the actions resulting from the desires (child pornography, molestation, rape).

Because children are more vulnerable than adults. They are also not as capable of making informed decisions as adults.

In other words, children need to be protected - by all of us.

This is why and I totally agree.

Why are there laws against paedophilia? The fact that the age of consent differs from country to country, and even from state to state, plainly demonstrates that youth and maturity are mere social constructs used to maintain the status quo.

A person of 15 might in fact be more mature than another person of 17. Say then that these two people were both in relationships with 19 year olds, and say that the age of consent was 16. Then the law might unfairly damage the relationship of the 15 year old while doing nothing to prevent the 17 year old from being exploited.

And then there is the culturally supremacist aspect. The age of consent in America and in other western countries is typically 16 or 17. But in China and Sierra Leone for example it is 14. This is simply sending out a thinly-disguised message that certain practices and by extension certain people (eg, people with too much melanin in their skin or with funny-shaped eyes) are not welcome here.

I am not saying that I have sexual relations with young teens myself, but I think you can see my point.

Pedophilia/child molestation/sex with a child should be illegal for the following reasons:

1) A child's brain is not yet matured (neither is an 18-year-old's) enough to understand the gravity of such a decision. One could wind up pregnant (which a child's young teen's body is not designed to accomodate) or contract an STD.

2) As I have mentioned earlier, their bodies aren't designed for intercourse. There are several instanced when I interned at a correctional facility where inmates caused severe injuries to infants, toddlers, children and young teenagers after having sex with them. An infant even died as a result.

3) Children tend to dislike being molested/having sex with the perpetrator. Often the perpetrator groomed their victims and told the victim they "owed" them something in return. The victims expressed a sense of dread regarding the act that was to occur. There is a reason it is called child sexual abuse.

Note that I attempted to avoid bringing ethics/morals into the issue, since that is the easiest way to lose credibility in an argument.

If you would actually read the first sentence, you'd see that I utilized the "/" to denote "or," thus showing that I did in fact consider the differences between pedophilia (sexual attraction towards children, with or without a sexual act being committed), molestation of a child (which may or may not involve "penetration" -- groping, etc.) and intercourse involving a minor. One cannot make thoughts illegal, but the term is commonly used colloquially to refer to the actions resulting from the desires (child pornography, molestation, rape).

The age of 18 is still sufficient to comprehend (in a person of a normal-functioning brain) what sex is, though perhaps they may not understand fully the gravity of such a decision. Generally, the Common Law courts have reached a concensus that a person who can grasp the concept of right and wrong were viewed as being at the "age of majority." this has been changed several times in the history of America's legal system, but many states now feel the age at which someone can be responsible for themselves and own property, etc. is 18 (some 17 and even 16). Of course, this is subjective, as is any decision regarding the age of majority/consent, regardless of who decides.

You're using child as a legal term when it's much more of a biological term. A child is the human equivalent of a tadpole. Tadpoles undergo a metamorphosis state that transforms them from being a tadpole into an adult frog. THAT is what adolescence is: a transitionary stage between childhood and adulthood. Puberty is is human metamorphosis.

To molest means to touch or fondle without consent. What pedophiles do is basically child RAPE: They force children to have sex with them against that child's will. NOBODY enjoys being raped, but "statutory rape" is legally distinguishable from "sexual assault" in the sense that if an underage person is physically coerced or threatened into have sex with someone that is "sexual assault". But if a teenager gives his/her permission that its statutory rape.

The first point you make however, is something that you cannot possible know because you cannot verify what goes on in another persons brain. Some 30 year olds may not truly understand the gravity of a sexual situation but it's assumed that they do. So the scientific argument really does not apply here since different people develop emotionally and sexually at different rates.

AspieRogue, I addressed this already. Please read this earlier post. I emphasized "normal functioning brain" and the Common Law decisions regarding age of majority. I have also distinguished between the acts as well, but it appears you didn't include that post or perhaps you didn't see it (yet found the previous post??).The "tend to" in the initial post was meant in a sort of tongue-in-cheek manner, obviously nobody wants to be raped (unless they are part of that "rape fetish" subculture, but that is a whole 'nother Oprah - or perhaps - Dr. Phil.)