Pedophilia does not have anything to do with homosexuality.

[Riverwolf]

From what I understand, a homosexual is no more likely, and perhaps less likely, to be a pedophile, than is a heterosexual. But, I do believe that it's reasonable to compare all sexual orientations. Is pedophelia an "orientation"? Are some people born with this orientation? If the answer is yes, then we can compare pedophilia to homosexuality and to heterosexuality. Almost all of society (certainly myself included) considers phedophilia to be abusive, a crime, a horrible act, etc. If it's also a "sexual orientation" that the pedophile did not ask for and was born with, then we must conclude that some people have instinctive sexual orientations that must be resisted and never acted upon.

I don't think pedophilia is currently recognized as a sexual orientation.

Even if it were, it'd still be a crime.

Homosexuality causes no harm to the consenting adults, and so is not something that need be resisted by those with it.

 

[idav]

then we must conclude that some people have instinctive sexual orientations that must be resisted and never acted upon.

Most of our animal instincts are the type that should be resisted since it is not in our best interests to get everything we ever want. However I don't think instincts drive orientation or else there would not be abnormal orientations, everyone would instinctually do the "natural" thing.

 

[SamIam]

I don't think pedophilia is currently recognized as a sexual orientation.

Even if it were, it'd still be a crime.

Homosexuality causes no harm to the consenting adults, and so is not something that need be resisted by those with it.

My point is that the simple fact that we have an instinct, an orientation, or a powerful urge to behave in a certain sexual way, does not mean that we should do it. Pedophelia is a fair example. The deciding factor is our moral code, not the existence of the orientation, urge, instinct, etc. Age and consent are certainly an important part of the equation and these strongly differentiate pedophelia from other types of sexual conduct. The question of if homosexuality causes harm or is otherwise morally wrong lies in the realm of moral judgement and in most cases a strong religious view. I see little difference between homosexuality and pre-marital sex by consulting adults. While in both cases the participants are adults and see no harm, both fall otuside of what I see as moral law. However, just as I would never accuse a co-habitating heterosexual couple of being lkely to molest children, I would also not accuse a homosexual couple. Pedophilia stands alone in the disgust factor due to the age and innocence of the children.

 

[SamIam]

Most of our animal instincts are the type that should be resisted since it is not in our best interests to get everything we ever want. However I don't think instincts drive orientation or else there would not be abnormal orientations, everyone would instinctually do the "natural" thing.

How do you see the difference between instinct and orientation? As far as I can tell, I have always been instinctively sexually attracted to women, with no sexual attraction to men. My understanding is that many, if not all, gays and lesbians describe their same sex attraction in the same way.

 

[idav]

How do you see the difference between instinct and orientation? As far as I can tell, I have always been instinctively sexually attracted to women, with no sexual attraction to men. My understanding is that many, if not all, gays and lesbians describe their same sex attraction in the same way.

That is my understanding as well but even though I feel there is some conditioning involved. Ever since I was five I was attracted to girls because I was conditioned so. Even so I liked girls, I was five and not at a stage where sexual instincts would be kicking in. In fact I thought girls had cooties and didn't want to go near them even so I felt an attraction. Puberty would be when a human actually starts instinctually looking to pro-create.

 

[CMike]

Regarding to the OP.

Because many OP seem to imply that homosexual behavior is okay because it's wrong for people to surpress their sexual desires.

Clearly if you believe in the bible it's immoral.

Pedophiles have sexual desires too.

There is no conclusive evidence what leads to homosexual behavior, and there is no conclusive evidence what leads to pedophile behavior.

Just because some people have a desire to do whatever doesn't make it right.

That is the comparison.

 

[crocusj]

Regarding to the OP.

Because many OP seem to imply that homosexual behavior is okay because it's wrong for people to surpress their sexual desires.

.

I think they are actually saying that it is wrong for people to supress their desires (whatever they are) when there is no victim of that desire.

 

[ImaTroll]

If the gays can get married why not let a man marry a goat?

next it'll be legal for a bird to marry a fish. or a mammal to marry a reptile.

 

[Yeshe Dondrub]

There is to much focus on sex. Like in many marriages or committed relationships, the focus on sex decreases later as it progresses and there are more important things to focus on.

A relationship of people of the same sex doesn't mean sexual relations are the key focus. Most people who appose it are obsessed and attached to the idea of sex themselves, not the people in the relationship.

Relating two humans in a relationship to two animals who do not have the logical ability to enter a binding commitment is simple a lack of wisdom.

However Same sex bounding is a common factor of nature with reason. Our planet is over populated. With the lack of it, it would be worse. "Be fruitful and multiply" simply is an illogical aspect and careless thought.

 

[ImaTroll]

However Same sex bounding is a common factor of nature with reason. Our planet is over populated. With the lack of it, it would be worse. "Be fruitful and multiply" simply is an illogical aspect and careless thought.

then perhaps everyone should be gay?

 

[Yeshe Dondrub]

then perhaps everyone should be gay?

What benefit and balance would that have? There is still death, and that is a factor of impermanence that is unavoidable. Population needs to be maintained, but at a controlled level, through both the natural aspects that have been present in nature, and humans using wisdom to help curve the issue, and be responsible.

I am sure people are not simply going to choose to be gay for that reason, nor is it needed. Responsibility in family planning will have benefit. We already have to many children abandoned. As well as a rise in abortion.

 

[ImaTroll]

Population needs to be maintained, but at a controlled level, through both the natural aspects that have been present in nature, and humans using wisdom to help curve the issue, and be responsible.

people won't likely change their love life for the sake of the greater good of humanity. people are too selfish.

 

[Yeshe Dondrub]

people won't likely change their love life for the sake of the greater good of humanity. people are too selfish.

There is no need for them to change their love life. Only attachments to certain aspects which lead to suffering regardless of orientation. Having understanding of the impermanence of all things, allows experience without the negative aspects, including the fact both will die.

There is no need for a gay or straight couple to change their relationship for the greater good of humanity. They both can have equanimity and compassion for all. They can still work within themselves, in order to benefit others. Be charitable and make a difference.

They are still two individuals and the other does not need to complete his partner, but they can share in the experience together.

 

[ImaTroll]

There is no need for them to change their love life. Only attachments to certain aspects which lead to suffering regardless of orientation. Having understanding of the impermanence of all things, allows experience without the negative aspects, including the fact both will die.

There is no need for a gay or straight couple to change their relationship for the greater good of humanity. They both can have equanimity and compassion for all. They can still work within themselves, in order to benefit others. Be charitable and make a difference.

so you're asking heterosexuals to stop having kids for the sake of population control?

 

[Yeshe Dondrub]

so you're asking heterosexuals to stop having kids for the sake of population control?

I am not certain if you are asking me a random question or you may not be able to comprehend and follow posts correctly so I was wondering at which point you believe that was a statement. There is a statement of no need to change their relationship aspect.

You quoted my statement as "
There is no need for them to change their love life. Only attachments to certain aspects which lead to suffering regardless of orientation. Having understanding of the impermanence of all things, allows experience without the negative aspects, including the fact both will die.

There is no need for a gay or straight couple to change their relationship for the greater good of humanity. They both can have equanimity and compassion for all. They can still work within themselves, in order to benefit others.

Be charitable and make a difference."

Where in this statement does it reflect your comments (ImaTroll posted "so you're asking heterosexuals to stop having kids for the sake of population control") Where i suggest heterosexuals should stop having children for sake of population control?

However if you are wondering about an actual answer, then proper planning, responsibility, and wisdom should play a roll in the number of children, need for children, and taking responsibility in the children.