Those who want to see normalised sexual relations with children have been very vocal of late. Of course they have long been making these demands, and they have had a long relationship with the homosexual rights movement as I have documented in my book Strained Relations.
In fact, the homosexual activists have long called for the lowering of the age of consent – or abolishing it all together. Sadly they are not alone in all this. Just recently a leading legal eagle in the UK called for the age to be dropped to 13, to stop the ‘persecution of old men’! Yes, that is what she actually said. As a newspaper report says:
“A senior human rights barrister has sparked a storm of outrage after calling for the age of consent to be lowered to 13 in order to prevent the ‘persecution of old men’. Barbara Hewson made the controversial suggestion in an article for the online magazine ‘Spiked’. In the column, Hewson, who is a barrister at Hardwicke in London, stated that the move was necessary in the wake of the Savile scandal. She refers to Operation Yewtree as the ‘Savile Inquisition’ and describes its inquiry as reminiscent of Soviet-era Russia. She goes on to suggest some of the offences investigated were ‘low level misdemeanours’.”
Fortunately not everyone took kindly to the idea: “Peter Watt, Director of the NSPCC helpline said: ‘These outdated and simply ill-informed views would be shocking to hear from anyone but to hear them from a highly experienced barrister simply beggars belief. Stuart Hall has pleaded guilty to abusing children as young as 9 years-old, we think most people would agree that crimes of this nature are incredibly serious.
“Thankfully the law, and most people, are very clear on this matter. To minimise and trivialise the impact of these offences for victims in this way is all but denying that they have in fact suffered abuse at all. Any suggestion of lowering the age of consent could put more young people at risk from those who prey on vulnerable young people’.”
But worse yet, there are now many “experts” who are arguing that paedophilia is an innate predisposition and orientation, just like is claimed about homosexuality. A number of illustrations of this can be provided here. Take for example this ominous headline: “Some homosexual activist groups a ‘dream’ to pedophiles”. The piece begins as follows:
“Two psychologists testified before a parliamentary session on a bill related to sexual assault on children that pedophilia is a ‘sexual orientation’ just like homosexuality or heterosexuality. Lifesitenews reported on the testimony at a parliamentary session in Canada regarding a bill intended to increase mandatory minimum sentences on child sex offenders for particular crimes.
“Dr. Vernon Quinsey and Dr. Hubert Van Gijseghem were testifying on how offenders responded to treatment. Van Gijseghem, psychologist and retired professor of the University of Montreal, said, ‘Pedophiles are not simply people who commit a small offense from time to time but rather are grappling with what is equivalent to a sexual orientation just like another individual may be grappling with heterosexuality or even homosexuality.’ He went on to say, ‘True pedophiles have an exclusive preference for children, which is the same as having a sexual orientation. You cannot change this person’s sexual orientation. He may, however, remain abstinent’.”
We find here the same line used for homosexuals: this is an orientation from which no change is possible. And just as groups like the American Psychiatric Association (APA) were hounded by the militants to change their stance on homosexuality, so too the paedophile activists are trying to do the same thing.
Consider the words of Matt Barber who attended a pro-paedophilia conference in Baltimore in August 2011. In an article by Jeremy Kryn we get to hear from Barber and what he experienced: “As a former law enforcement officer I’ve dealt with situations involving suicide, homicide and other violence. That said, I’ve never felt the level of spiritual oppression and evil that I felt in that room.”
He continues, “These mental health ‘professionals,’ and self-described pedophile and ‘gay’ activists were inexplicably able to cavalierly discuss, in an almost dismissive way, the idea of child rape. They used flowery, euphemistic psychobabble to give quasi-scientific cover to a discussion about the worst kind of perversion.” Kryn describes the conference:
“The organization B4U-ACT sponsored the event in Baltimore last week, which was attended by pro-pedophile activists and mental health professionals. The conference examined the ways in which ‘minor-attracted persons’ could be involved in a revision of the American Psychological Association (APA) classification of pedophilia. Conference panelists included Fred Berlin of the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Renee Sorentino of Harvard Medical School, John Sadler of the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, and John Breslow of the London School of Economics and Political Science.
“Speakers addressed the around 50 individuals in attendance on themes ranging from the notion that pedophiles are ‘unfairly stigmatized and demonized’ by society to the idea that ‘children are not inherently unable to consent’ to sex with an adult. Also discussed were arguments that an adult’s desire to have sex with children is ‘normative’ and that the APA’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) ignores the fact that pedophiles ‘have feelings of love and romance for children’ in the same way adult heterosexuals and homosexuals have romantic feelings for one another.”
Another alarming piece entitled “Many researchers taking a different view of pedophilia” in the Los Angeles Times also notes how so many of our sexperts are arguing that paedophilia is an unchangeable condition. It begins with a “case study” of a man who claims his desires for children are intrinsic to who he is. It then says this:
“In the laboratory, researchers are coming to the same conclusion. Like many forms of sexual deviance, pedophilia once was thought to stem from psychological influences early in life. Now, many experts view it as a sexual orientation as immutable as heterosexuality or homosexuality. It is a deep-rooted predisposition — limited almost entirely to men — that becomes clear during puberty and does not change. The best estimates are that between 1% and 5% of men are pedophiles, meaning that they have a dominant attraction to prepubescent children.”
Once again we see this as a mere “sexual orientation” which we are meant to simply accept. And the real worry here is this: in numerous places laws are being enacted which makes it a criminal offence to “discriminate” against anyone based on their “sexual orientation”. So the obvious concern here is this: if paedophilia is just another sexual orientation, must we now accept, embrace and promote it like we now must do with homosexuality?
And this is no hollow concern. Consider a pro-homosexual bill in California which is based on this very way of thinking. This is what one report says about the proposed law:
“California Congresswoman, Rep. Jackie Speier CA (D), wants to federalize a state law to prohibit counseling to change a person’s sexual orientation. Under the bill’s language, a mental health counselor could be sanctioned if there was an attempt to get a gay individual to change his or her behavior or speak negatively about their behavior as it relates to sexuality. The bill calls on states to prohibit efforts to change a minor’s sexual orientation, even if the minor requests it, saying that doing so is ‘dangerous and harmful.’ The text of the legislation doesn’t specifically ban ‘gay’ conversion therapy. Instead, it prohibits attempts to change a person’s sexual orientation.”
Said Brad Dacus, president of the Pacific Justice Institute, “This language is so broad and vague, it arguably could include all forms of sexual orientation, including pedophilia. It’s not just the orientation that is protected—the conduct associated with the orientation is protected as well.”
But thanks to the homosexual activists, we now are having a very hard time saying no to any of this. Indeed, we know things will not stop there. Soon every conceivable “sexual orientation” imaginable will be argued for and publically championed – and eventually legalised. You see, there is still so much “sexual inequality and injustice” which needs to be dealt with.