I believe it's important to precisely distinguish between good and evil. In this context, I would like to propose a thought experiment in an attempt to answer a question. So here goes...
I have a strong sexual preference for Emma Stone. In my mind she is fucking hot, but I will never act on that sexual preference because she has not given me consent.
Children cannot give consent - that's my opinion. So a person who finds children sexually preferable should never act on that preference. Never.
Preferences are not objective. They depend on who you ask. I like Emma Stone, and some rare few people like children.
Let's say Emma Stone will never give me consent to sleep with her. I know it's a stretch, but lets say she never ever does. If I raped Emma Stone this would be evil because she has not consented. I am using her body (her property) without her consent.
By logical extension: Given that a child cannot consent, an adult having sex with a child is always rape.
Question: Given that Emma Stone will never give me consent to have sex with her, am I evil for having a strong sexual preference for her?
If the answer to this is NO how would you answer this question?
Question: Given that a child cannot give consent, is a person evil for having a strong sexual preference for a child?
If your answer to this question is also no, then a person who regards the sexual preferences of pedophiles to be evil may have some other argument to make that assertion. I am aware of no such argument.
If having certain preferences does not make a person evil, then I believe it's important to distinguish in your mind between the people who have acted immorally and those who have not.
view the rest of the comments →
Possible ago
Intentionally or not, you're completely avoiding the question. We can focus on the direct claim you are making some other time. I'm sure you'll find this can be structured as an argument which doesn't carry the emotional baggage that you've decided to use.
Don-Keyhote ago
Your whole post is a straw men that hangs on consent from a grown woman being comparable to a child's postulated consent which does not exist becsuze children are a asexual by definition.
Possible ago
This is simply not correct. The point is neither have given consent, but everyone wants to say the preferences in one case are totally fine but in the other case they're evil and fucked up. So if that's logically consistent, then there must be an argument which can say that certain types of intentions are evil while others are not. In other words, pedophilia as a sexual preference is being treated like a thought crime by people who regard them as evil merely for their preferences, and I wonder how that's justified.