Interesting article on pedophilia

http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/21/opinion/cantor-pedophila-sandusky/index.html?hpt=hp_t3

It makes sense to help people not get to the point where they are molesting children, doesn't it?

The thing that has me most intrigued about this article, though, is that there is evidence that pedophilia is a biological condition (genetic? I've wondered for years if it was genetic, since there is anecdotal evidence of it running in families). It certainly changes our approach if we find this is a handicap combined with bad choices rather than simply bad choices.

If pedophilia is genetic, and so is homosexuality.....

I find it really fascinating that we say, for the good of society and children, that pedophiles just need to spend their entire lives resisting their deviant sexual urges.  Society used to say that to homosexuals, for the same reasons. Now that's unpopular. But clearly there is a double standard here, based on a culturally-defined view of what constitutes deviancy (NOT a scientifically-based or culturally-based view on what is good for society and children, it seems).

Bottom line, though, is that underlying argument (unspoken, but the assumption does underlie the arguments in the whole debate) that we all must accept homosexuality because sexual urges are so powerful that they cannot be resisted and our lives are ruined if we don't give in to them is clearly false. The idea seems to be that we cannot be happy and still follow the commandments if our biology dictates otherwise, and that doesn't really make sense to me--especially if you understand that God is our father and His instructions are designed to help us be happy, not just ideas made up by men to control other men. Because we expect pedophiles (and other socially-labeled sexual deviants) to control themselves and not let their drives run their lives.  And we expect teenagers to--especially teenage girls, it seems, since they're the ones who end up stuck with a baby if they don't. And nobody condemns religious people for expecting unmarried women to. But not men? And especially not gay men?

That seems a little absurd, doesn't it?

Personally, I like this guy's approach: http://www.joshweed.com/2012/06/club-unicorn-in-which-i-come-out-of.html and I'm glad it's working for him.

I am not about to say that all gay people should be condemned for their choices, or that God is condemning them for their choices. I have no idea. I think all people should be treated with respect and compassion. But I do wonder how a biological information, combined with a recognition that we all make choices and are not completely slaves to our biology--how does that inform the debate? How does that change how we approach people and treat things like pedophilia?

Did I just read that?

From 9News in Denver: "Authorities search for missing disabled tee"   http://www.9news.com/news/article/272596/188/Authorities-search-for-missing-disabled-tee

I wonder if they mean the letter or the shirt?

Maybe because Carina says it, I don't have to

I guess we're not the only ones?

http://www.jetsetcarina.com/2012/06/great-recession.html

Caleb says,

"Mom, has it ever occurred to you that the sun might have already gone out?"

Because, he explains, the light takes so long to get here.....