In case you’ve missed the latest headlines, we are now being told with increasing certainty that pedophilia is innate and immutable and that consensual adult incest should be legalized. And, of course, there is no slippery slope.
When I addressed the issue of pedophilia in “A Queer Thing Happened to America,” I stated (in bold caps, asking the reader to say these words slowly and out loud):
MICHAEL BROWN IS NOT EQUATING HOMOSEXUAL PRACTICE WITH PEDOPHILIA.
MICHAEL BROWN IS NOT CALLING ALL HOMOSEXUALS PEDOPHILES.
Every gay man I have ever discussed this with has made clear that he deplores the idea of sexual activity between a man and a boy, considering it abusive and wrong on every level.
Then why bring it up in my book, and why bring it up here?
It is because the arguments used to justify “man-boy love” parallel the arguments used to justify homosexual practice, including the belief that pedophilia is inborn and unchangeable. (See my column, “Why Are We Surprised with the Push for Pedophile Rights?” for a convenient list of the eight primary arguments.)
Several decades ago, the late Johns Hopkins professor John Money stated that, “Pedophilia and ephebophilia [referring to sexual attraction felt by an adult toward an adolescent] are no more a matter of voluntary choice than are left-handedness or color blindness. There is no known method of treatment by which they may be effectively and permanently altered, suppressed, or replaced. Punishment is useless. There is no satisfactory hypothesis, evolutionary or otherwise, as to why they exist in nature’s overall scheme of things. One must simply accept the fact that they do exist, and then, with optimum enlightenment, formulate a policy of what to do about it.”
Other scientists have been offering similar arguments for years (as documented in “A Queer Thing Happened in America”), not to justify pedophilic actions but rather to call for sympathy for those who struggle with adult-child attractions, since, we are told, they were born that way and they can’t change their desires (although they must control their behavior).
Now, these arguments are getting national attention, as an Oct. 5, 2014, headline in the New York Times announced: “Pedophilia: A Disorder, Not a Crime.”
The op-ed piece by Margo Kaplan claims that, “By some estimates, 1 percent of the male population continues, long after puberty, to find themselves attracted to prepubescent children.” (This would be very close to the percentage of males who are attracted to other males, based on the recent survey by the CDC that put the number of gays and lesbians at 1.6 percent of the population, identical to the recent findings of a national survey in the U.K.)
Kaplan addresses certain “misconceptions,” including the idea that “pedophilia is a choice,” noting that, “Recent research, while often limited to sex offenders … suggests that the disorder may have neurological origins. … Men with pedophilia are three times more likely to be left-handed or ambidextrous, a finding that strongly suggests a neurological cause.”
Haven’t we heard all this before when it comes to homosexuality? Gays are born that way and cannot change; homosexuality is not a choice; there is a genetic (or biological or neurological) cause for homosexuality; and a disproportionate number of gays and lesbians are left-handed.
Am I comparing the actions of two committed homosexual adults with an adult having sex with a child? Absolutely not (except that I believe both are wrong in God’s sight). There is certainly a vast difference between consensual, adult acts (like an unmarried man and woman sleeping together, which is also wrong in God’s sight) and an adult abusing a child.
The point I am making, which is simple and irresistible, is that the “born that way and can’t change” argument is utterly meaningless when it comes to advocating for the morality of the actions committed, and it’s high time gay activists trashed that line of reasoning. (Of course, there are many other problems with the “homosexuality is innate and immutable” argument, but I’m responding here as if the argument were true.)
An offended gay reader might say, “But you don’t get it. We’re talking about a loving relationship between two adults that hurts no one.”
Fair enough. That’s another argument to be discussed at another time.
But what is undeniable is that the gay activist cannot say, “I was born this way and can’t change, so my behavior must be accepted” and then tell the pedophile that he has no right to use the same argument. (I’m fully aware that some gay activists will gleefully seize on my words here and say, “You see! Brown is comparing homosexuality to pedophilia,” but the honest reader – and I’m trusting there are honest gay activists, too – will know that is not true.)
As for incest, just last week, “A Danish professor of criminal justice ethics … stated that he thinks consensual sex between adult siblings should be legal.”
As reported by Thaddeus Baklinski on LifeSiteNews, “According to Thomas Søbirk Petersen, a professor at Roskilde University, the rise in the number of births resulting from donor sperm, which has the potential to create biological siblings who are born into different families, has created a need to rethink the ‘old taboos’ against incest.”
Professor Petersen argued that, “In a society where more and more children are being conceived using donor sperm, the risk of falling in love with a stranger who turns out to be a biological sister or brother has increased.”
And so, rather than address the issue of sperm banks, parenting and family, Petersen joined German ethicists and sexual activists worldwide who advocate for the removal of laws against incest.
So, pedophilia is inborn, consensual adult incest should be legalized, and there is no slippery slope.
Need I say more?
