John McGuinness posts an argument
last week about "child molester=gay, pedophile vs. ephebophile", round-robin some have been engaging in. In it however, he makes the statement regarding molesting those who aren't prepubescent:But something else happened on the way to driving gays out of the priesthood. People's sense of outrage softened a bit. Yes, it's still evil and wrong for a grown man to seduce a minor, especially when the grown man is sworn celibate who is supposed to have some religious authority. But this seduction is not as disturbing to us as the forced molestaion of eight year olds. And I think most of us would consider it a lesser offense.
No John, most of us wouldn't. I note that you're not trying to blame the victim, but the idea that you put forth, that it is somehow a lesser offense to butt-fuck a child with
pubic hair as opposed to butt-fucking a child without
pubic hair is grotesque and deranged. I do however, find it interesting that in your understanding, once the child is post-pubescent, then it's no longer a molestation
but a seduction
Bubbles the Terrible 6/22/2002 05:54:00 PM
|| (0) comments