Two years ago, we reported that the American Psychiatric Association issued a statement on pedophilia saying it’s ‘Natural, And Normal To Be AROUSED By Children’.
In light of the recent attempt by Democrats to legalize abortion after a baby has been born, I thought it was important to juxtapose that position with the APA finding.
I found the video of Virginia Governor Wortham advocating for new legislation that would allow for a child to be born, putting the baby somewhere comfortable, then having a chat with the “mother” about whether it would be best to kill the baby.
By saying that he would speak to the mother, implies that the “fetus” is in actuality, a human baby.
Speaking about so-called “Medical Professionals”, I am reminded about what The American Psychiatric Association said a couple of years back, that they felt pedophilia was “normal”.
I have to wonder how we have gotten to this place in America where we have so little value for children.
Here is our article from November, 2016:
An academic conference said that to be interested in pedophilia is “natural and normal for males”, and that “at least a sizeable minority of normal males would like to have sex with children, and normal males are aroused by children.”
The discussion took place last year during a conference. The “professionals” attended so they could discuss the classification of sexuality in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), for most who have no idea what that is, it’s the standard international psychiatric manual used by the legal system.
The conference, titled “Classifying Sex: Debating DSM-5″, featured many speakers who were in favor of sex with children, basically, they supported pedophilia.
The American Psychiatric Association (APA), (who also put on the confrence) couldn’t decide if hebephilia should be included as a disorder. Hebephilia is the sexual preference for children in early puberty, usually anywhere between 11 to 14-year old’s.
The proposal became a hot topic due to the fact that children are going through puberty at a younger age. The current definition of pedophilia is to have an attraction to pre-pubescent children, but these children are not pre-pubescent if they have gone through puberty.
One of the enthusiastic participants, was Tom O’Carroll, a multiple child sex offender, a long-time campaigner for the legalization of sex with children, and former head of the Paedophile Information Exchange. “Wonderful!” he stated on his blog afterward. “It was a rare few days when I could feel relatively popular!”
The Telegraph reported:
After a fierce battle in the American Psychiatric Association (APA), which produces it, a proposal to include hebephilia as a disorder in the new edition of the manual has been defeated. The proposal arose because puberty in children has started ever earlier in recent decades and as a result, it was argued, the current definition of pedophilia – pre-pubertal sexual attraction – missed out too many young people.
Ray Blanchard, professor of psychiatry at the University of Toronto, who led the APA’s working group on the subject, said that unless another way was found of encompassing hebephilia in the new manual, that was “tantamount to stating that the APA’s official position is that the sexual preference for early pubertal children is normal”.
Prof Blanchard was in turn criticized by a speaker at the Cambridge conference, Patrick Singy, of Union College, New York, who said hebephilia would be abused as a diagnosis to detain sex offenders as “mentally ill” under US “sexually violent predator” laws even after they had completed their sentences.
But perhaps the most controversial presentation of all was by Philip Tromovitch, a professor at Doshisha University in Japan, who stated in a presentation on the “prevalence of pedophilia” that the “majority of men are probably pedophiles and hebephiles” and that “paedophilic interest is normal and natural in human males”.
O’Carroll, the former PIE leader, was thrilled and described on his blog how he joined Prof Tromovitch and a colleague for drinks after the conference. “The conversation flowed most agreeably, along with the drinks and the beautiful River Cam,” he said.
There are so many reasons that this is wrong! I get that fine, whatever, some people think it’s a mental disorder, and maybe it is, but that doesn’t mean that people should give into their terribly unnatural urges just because they have a screwed up brain!
Even if it were consensual between an old person and a young pre-teenish child, who’d already gone through puberty, it shouldn’t be legal. According to mentalhealthdaily.com Our brains do not fully develop until we are AT LEAST 20! Some speculate even 30-years-old.
“All behaviors and experiences you endure until the age of 25 have the potential to impact your developing brain.” With that in mind, tell me why these idiots think that a child with an “underdeveloped brain” as they put it, can make a life-altering decision?!
And if the child has no say, then it’s just rape, plain and simple, which should be illegal for obvious reasons. Then again, one would think that pedophilia would be illegal for obvious reasons too, but idiot liberals seem to have gotten the lines of morality very blurred on that one, so can we really expect too much from them?
Maybe we are going somewhere with this, maybe being liberal is a mental disorder? That seems more plausible.
