Thank you, sir, for your civility. The fact is that, to a child, sex is as incomprehensible as the 5th dimension of space. This causes the happenstance to be internally repressed. While it is true that children experience things that they don't understand quite frequently, nearly all they experience in understandable. Sex is, quite simply, not understandable to a child. This is in conjunction with the natural feeling of utter stress when placed in a situation of powerlessness. The body experiences immense trauma whenever the fight-or-flight response ceases to be a viable option. A person tied to a chair will be incredibly traumatized even if he or she is under no real danger. Even when sexual contact with a minor has benevolent intentions, damage can be done through denial of the fight-or-flight response.summerof2010 said:
There is also the question of sexual orientation. It is becoming increasingly evident that sexual orientation is a product of genetics. Even though children do not have a sexual identity they will almost certainly develop one. Whatever sexual identity they develop may disagree with any sort of sexual contact experienced during prepubescence. A straight man would certainly be harmed by any homosexual activity in his childhood just as he would be harmed in his adulthood.
From a biological standpoint, sex with children is illogical, since all children lack the the capacity for reproduction. I realize that a form of this argument is also used against homosexuality, however the situation is different insofar as pedophilia goes. The difference being that consenting homosexual relationships are usually made between two homosexuals while sexual relations involving pedophilia only involve one pedophile. It is very hard to prove a relationship to be consensual if both parties do not share the same perversions. The child in question may grow up to become a pedophile, but as he or she is not at the time, the child is effectively equivalent to an asexual adult.
Which brings me to my next point, that asexual people can not have sexual relationships without being raped. Please note that I am not referring to demisexuals, whom have no love for sex, but may perform the act out of admiration for their partner. It is my experience that children are pretty much asexual. One might call into question whether children are asexual or demisexual, to which I would reply that the lack of a true scientific study into this subject leaves this in question. However, since children are not biologically capable of performing sex acts (they are only capable of having sex acts performed on them) it makes sense for children to be asexual.
While it is technically possible for children to not be ENTIRELY incompatible with sex; the legalization of such would, much like a legalization of incest, cause many problems. The general consensus is that most children are harmed by sexual contact at a latter age if not at the age at which the act occurs. An explosion of child rape would also occur if such legalization were to happen.
Sex with children is most simply wrong for all of the above reasons. I admit to the possibility of these problems not being an issue in certain special cases, but I can not abide by any system that attempts to treat all individuals as if they belong to the minority of special cases.
Post Script: While I am against all forms of censorship, I do believe that it would be wise to include a preceding disclaimer for the more objectionable subjects.
