XPost: alt.support.boy-lovers, alt.support.girl-lovers, alt.fan.prettyboy   
   XPost: alt.oyp.norp   
   From: mccoyf@millcomm.com   
      
   In alt.support.girl-lovers "bobandcarole"  wrote:   
      
   >The majority of experts believe that CSA is innately harmful to minors.   
      
   By definition.   
   If by "CSA" you mean "Child Sexual Abuse"; then it *has* to be harmful, or it   
   isn't abuse!  Of COURSE Child Sexual Abuse is harmful to kids.  ANY abuse,   
   sexual, verbal, physical, or otherwise is harmful by-definition.   
      
   Now if you leave out the word "abuse", which none of those with an axe to grind   
   against sex ever will, then "Child Sex" doesn't have to be (and rarely is)   
   harmful.  Most "children" start having sex LONG before it's legal; and damned   
   few of them are ever harmed by it.   
      
   This is most especially true; since teenagers, the horniest part of the   
   population, are still considered "children" by these same so-called "experts".   
      
   It's a case of DEFINING sex as abuse; and then claiming that *since* it's   
   abuse,   
   it's innately harmful.  Yet they never see (or at least never admit) to the   
   circularity of their logic.   
      
   It's about as silly as calling talking to a child as "Child Oral Abuse"; and   
   saying that COA is innately harmful to minors.  Well, it's TRUE that abusing a   
   child orally IS harmful ... But that doesn't make merely talking to a child   
   harmful.  But the logic is the same as that given about sex.   
      
   To swallow that logic however, you first have to buy into the idea that sex   
   itself is inherently bad, evil, or harmful ... Something that our major   
   religions have been beating into our minds for centuries; so it's no surprise   
   that the idea is easily accepted when it comes to children.  If sex is so   
   harmful to ADULTS (It isn't; but that's the attitude we unconsciously get.)   
   then   
   how much worse and horrible it must be for "children".  Then we define   
   "children" as anybody under 18; thus including people who are actually adults   
   physically and in the prime of their sexuality and sexual interest ....   
      
   It's amazing how STUPID a conclusion can be reached by starting with a   
   definition that's been deliberately altered to match somebody's fanatical   
   religious beliefs.  The worst (of course) being "faith".   
      
   But that's another can of worms.   
   The soapbox is empty.   
   NEXT!   
      
   --   
       _____   
        /  '               / ™   
     ,-/-, __  __.  ____  /_   
    (_/   / (_(_/|_/ / <_/ <_   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)