What is the difference between pedophilia and homosexuality?

O.k. here’s the situation. Some of my friends are for gay-marriage and see nothing wrong with homosexual relationships.

They asked me why would gays suffer ostracizing from friends and family as well as larger society for acting on certain sexual urges if they could choose to be like everyone else?

I rebutted why would pedophiles suffer even more severe ostracizing from friends and family as well as larger society for acting on certain sexual urges if they could choose to be like everyone else?

One is a crime and another isn’t I know this, but the latter has actually been glorified in certain times in history and in certain societies.

I mainly want to know if the above asserion is a valid rebuttal or not.

The reply will probably be that homosexuality doesn’t affect others. That isn’t true, but most people believe it is.
If your friends are starting with the assumptions that we have a right to use our bodies as we wish, sexual orientation cannot change, we are born with it and everything we are born with and stuck with is our identity and therefore cannot be rightfully criticized, they are going to hear any argument against gay marriage as cruel and thus invalid, no matter how much sense it makes.
The problem with slippery slope arguments (which this isn’t, it’s a parallel analogy, but it evokes a common one), is that the other side tends to fear the slope tips the other way, and that to let you win would be dangerous. That’s why the fundamental assumptions have to be put on the table and discussed first. That’s what I’m starting to think about a lot of issues.

I take it negative rights and concent are entirely foreign concepts to you?

How does homosexuality affect others or is dangerous in and of itself? I don’t want the religious answer I already know and believe it.

What I do want are credible online sources (secular preferably) that I can use to complement my argument.

You’re not going to find too many secular sources that tell you that homosexuality is harmful.

Really, the only difference between pedophilia and homosexuality (at least in the context of your argument) is how society views the two. Pedophilia is somewhat taboo in American culture; can you think of anyone who doesn’t initially condemn its practice? Homosexuality, however, has become more and more acceptable in American culture. It was, just a little bit ago, taboo as well, though. Societies’ views change, which is why we have our little debate on the subject today.

To answer the specific question (at least in the title of your thread) pedophilia is the attraction to young boys or girls----let’s say under the age of 10—before they hit “puberty”—Homosexuality is the attraction to the same sex–I am sure there could, and sometimes is, some overlapping there. As there is overlapping, sometimes, with heterosexuals.

Also the comparision is a little ridiculous. I mean, do you really know any “out and about” pedophiles? I mean they are totally different situations.

Howdy Holy_wood…

I think I get your “hyperbole”. One man’s fancy, another man’s fantasy.

Because society sees things as “acceptable”, does not remove them from the absurd. Both of these examples are of “disorder”.

Yet, with Pedophiles, their prey/target is another human being who may not have the right or ABILITY to choose… Even today, most children are brought up to trust and respect elders and authority. Therefore, it falls to us to ensure we are careful where that power resides.

I have used the arguments to show the errors in calling one of these “good” and the other “evil”.

I have been called a bigot for speaking on these matters… hopefully it will save souls.

As for a website for those seeking healing of the homosexuality there is this: couragerc.net/index.htm



Pedophiles like the ones in NAMBLA by and large are in hiding because of social stigma.

Nevertheless, do you think they would want ostracizing from friends and family when they know that if they stopped having the urge for sexual relationships with minors they would assimilate more easily with larger society.

The answer is obvious. One act is between consenting adults. The other is not. Can’t you see the difference here???

Let’s see. Homosexuality involves two consenting adults of the same sex. Pedophilia involves molesting children!

Yes, I know homosexual actions are wrong. But two adults doing it out of their own free will is quite different than an adult taking advantage of a young child!

Always? No adult homosexual has ever had sex with a minor? There’s never been an instance of two minors engaging in homogenital activity with each other?

Homosexuality is a sexual attraction to a member of one’s own gender. Pedophilia is a sexual attraction to a child. The two are not mutually exclusive, nor inevitably linked. A homosexual man can be a pedophile. In fact, considering their ratio of the general population, homosexual men are over-represented among sex offenders.

– Mark L. Chance.

Yeah, and heterosexuals are never pedophiles either:rolleyes: Seriously. And a lot of the sex offenders I’ve heard of, in my area? Straight.

I know tons of homosexuals. NONE of them are pedophiles and ALL of them would kill anyone who even thought of doing that. I don’t agree with their life choices but geez!

Because that’s what I said, right? Oh, no. Wait. I didn’t say that. I didn’t even imply it. But that’s okay. I understand that strawmen are easier to deal with than facts.

A homosexual man can be a pedophile. This is unquestionably true. Why is this controversial? So can a heterosexual man. That most sex offenders are heterosexual is a no-brainer. Most of pretty much any category of people are heterosexual because most people are heterosexual.

That you don’t know a homosexual sexual predator proves nothing. In fact, it is quite irrelevant. Consider: I don’t know any sexual offenders; therefore, using your criterion, they must not exist at all. Right?

– Mark L. Chance.

I was just saying, there is a difference between homosexuality and pedophilia, that they aren’t often comparable. I thought you inferred that homosexuals were more likely to be pedophiles, so my apologies for my sarcastic tone. I also hear the whole “homosexuality is bad because they’re all pedophiles” way too much. Yes, homosexuality is wrong, but because it goes against God’s design. Doesn’t mean they’ll harm children, just because they’re attracted to the same sex.

I don’t “know” any personally, I’ve just done a lot of research on the subject and was trained to work in rape crisis. Many victims of that nature were young girls, their perpetrators older men (usually relatives). Although I do know men who were abused by men as boys and women who were abused by women as girls.

The difference is the age of concent.

Homosexual men are more likely to be sex offenders than heterosexual men, being over-represented among such populations by several times the occurence of homosexuality among the general male population. This doesn’t indicate any necessary cause-and-effect. It’s not that “homosexual man = pedophile” but rather “more homosexual men as a percentage of the general population of sex offenders are pedophiles than one would expect given the low incidence of male homosexuality.”

Consider the much-talked-about clergy sex scandal: Something like 70-80% of the documented incidents involved male clergy and male victims, most of them adolescents. Maybe I’m old-fashioned, but a grown man who has sex with teenage boys is both a homosexual and a pedophile.

Unfortunately, the politically-correct climate that pervades too much discourse refuses to consider nuance or careful distinctions. Instead, it’s just “Homosexuality and pedophilia are two different things! How dare you say a homosexual could be a pedophile!?”

– Mark L. Chance.

The question is not one of consent. The question is what motivates a person to engage in activity that can or will result in them being ostracized or even imprisoned. Consent of the other party is not part of the decision-making process.

It is a good question.

The United States has one of the highest ages of consent in the world, generally 16 to 18 depending on the state. Many countries have much lower ages of consent. The age of consent in Mexico is 12 for boys and 18 for girls for all types of sexual contact. In Canada, the age of consent for heterosexual sex is 14 and 18 for homosexual sex. See this link for ages of consent around the world.

Organizations like NAMBLA, with the help of the ACLU, are trying to lower the age of consent. The reason for this is simple, legalization is the first step to acceptance. Such as it was with homosexuality. At one time, sodomy was illegal in the USA and most countries. Despite it being legal, people who engaged in it were still social outcasts. Then the maudlin and exagerated tales about families being torn apart because a son or daughter engages in sexually deviant behavior. Skip ahead a generation, now people who express disgust and dismay at homosexual acts are called “bigots”. People who hate people who maintain the moral teachings of the Church are called enlightened and tolerant. While the Church, declaring quite correcty that homosexual activity is wrong yet homosexual people are to be treated with the same dignity and respect as others is labeled homophobic and is the target of attack by those who want to indulge their sexual appetites with no one telling them that there is such a thing as sin.

Such will it be with pedophilia. I give it about 30 years. By that time, to tell a 50 year old man that haveg sex with a 12 year-old boy is wrong will be as socially unacceptable as telling a woman she cannot marry another woman is now.

Unless the Lord returns first.

I am struggling with this one for two reasons: (1) The entire thrust of the homosexual argument is that it is not possible for a homosexual to exercise his or her will to change the behavior, since the selection of the preference is genetic. Is it possible not to consent to homosexual behavior? Then is consent freely given? (2) In a sexual encounter, there is a power relationship between the two parties. One is influenced by the other to engage through various means of persuasion. Does the relative dominance of one party over the other, the influence exerted, etc., not effect the reality of two fully consenting adults? I question this concept of “consenting adults” in heterosexual relations as well, and think the manipulation involved in relations outside marriage provides a good understanding of why the Church pronounces as it does that sex outside marriage without an openness to producing children is inherently immoral.

Furthemore, when we ask the pedohile question, why do we stop at pedophilia? I would be interested in understanding how we can define the whole range of paraphilias - i.e. necrophilia, fetish, autoeroticism, pederasty, etc. - as disordered but exempt homosexuality. I have never understood an argument that finds homosexuality a genetic preference, therefore normal, but then can go on to take any normative stand on the range of other sexual behaviors.

Usually it’s a difference of age and gender. Many pedophiles want to have sex with a child of the opposite gender, and at a very young age, usually without the capacity for consent. With homosexuals it’s between two consenting adults of the same gender However, this isn’t always the case either, such as the group called NAMBLA.

But usually children are unable to consent. While adults can.

In other words, molesters cannot be meaningfully described as homosexuals, heterosexuals, or bisexuals (in the usual sense of those terms) because they are not really capable of a relationship with an adult man or woman. Instead of gender, their sexual attractions are based primarily on age. These individuals – who are often characterized as fixated – are attracted to children, not to men or women.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.