John Tate Posted February 8, 2009 Share Posted February 8, 2009 I have had an interest in sexual ethics for some time – and I have consequentially noticed throughout history found almost a complete vacuum of any sexual ethics at all in a conceptualized fashion that can explicitly explain the issues with sexuality and Children (except what is implied through philosophies of natural rights barring force, for example). I find a lot of people have different views on sexuality outside the realm of consent. Political forces are considering changing the minimum age in different areas (higher or lower) among other things. This generally seems to stir a growing consensus that restrictions on age are simply arbitrary and often along with it that they are not worth considering. That phenomenon might also be attributed to the fact that interaction between older adolescents and younger adolescents is common on the Internet where in the past historically age groups have been separated by school grades – they are becoming integrated outside of that environment and outside of an environment of authority at all. For years, I have sparked discussion in various Internet communities about the issue of children and sexuality. Most people cannot state a specific reason about child sexuality that makes it wrong. The usual response from people is aversion from discussion of such a grotesque subject, on purely emotional terms without the backing of any solid thought at all. This I believe is a sign of modern cultures lack of intellect and lack of ability to defend itself from growing movements seeking the “Liberation” of pedophiles and/or children. While most people completely ignore the subject and any debate of it out of disgust, growing organized groups try to rationalize that adults having sex with children is fine. Along with this is that growing amounts of adolescent try to rationalize sexual activities with younger and younger partners – probably due to reasons of integration I have established.Something of which I have noticed over time is that most people have developed no reasoning to bring credit to the facts which surround the issue of sexuality and children. No effort is made I believe to rationally dismiss the crime as sexual abuse because the issue is generally considered to be held wrong by all. This instance of morality by consensus really is nothing more than consensus without rationality. Thus, various movements promoting the “Liberation” of pedophiles regularly target this specific fact surrounding the issue. Everyone is just saying “it is wrong.” Very few people are mentioning why.Why is it wrong? First I will explain a key principle in Objective morality. These are the rights to life, liberty, property, and pursuit of happiness. The right to pursue self-interest rationally – provided that does not infringe on the rights of others to pursue their own self-interest rationally. Thus, this demands the abolition of force and coercion from human relationships. The rights of a child do indeed bend on the basis that a child is not fully capable of making rational choices, and also that children are in a state of learning and forming convictions based on their surroundings. A child naturally trusts the adults around them, which leaves them open to learn our lessons. This also leaves children extremely impressionable. Thus, there are appropriate impressions that can be made upon children. To ensure a child can live morally, and pursue self-interest rationally it is important a child is taught to be able to rationalize appropriately.To enter the sphere of sexual morality, sexuality comes with an implicit agreement on the terms which can be derived from the expression of sexuality. Two pointless people will come up with equally pointless terms. More developed and conceptualized people will have very different terms demanding very different levels of commitment in a relationship and the virtues they require. For a child regarding sexuality with another adult: the child will be unable to perceive the level of commitment to a relationship compared to an adult. Essentially a child is far less developed in concepts and choices are conceptual. Love is essentially a marriage between the concept of a relationship and all the virtues one demands within it. To a child, these demands and virtues are not known, and still being discovered. Thus any cry on the basis of love by an adult towards that child is essentially one-way. A child has no concepts to derive terms for a relationship. For any adult targeting children for a relationship, they are essentially going to set all the terms, and norms for the basis of that relationship and form what the child will agree with. Thus, anything goes in the relationship. While children should learn about their bodies, they should do it with their peers on the basis that they will be equally as absent of complex concepts of commitment.With a child requiring the development of a rational mind, and sexuality between adults and children setting an almost unlimited possibility of norms on a child we can see that clearly sexuality between adults and children will do nothing to develop rational principles on which that child can live life as an adult. This impedes on a child’s right to be treated rationally, and sexuality between adults and children attacks a child’s conceptual faculty’s ability to form rational value-judgments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!Register a new account
Already have an account? Sign in here.Sign In Now