Child and adolescent sexuality: Why sex among children is morally complex

 Most parents in this country, whether they try to appear liberal out of political correctness, don't want their teens to be having sex. Left and right, in my eyes as an advocate, represent two conflicting values systems, with only one being objectively correct, and not the left one. I do not approve of child or adolescent sexual behavior as an advocate, but in a cautious, non-punitive manner. I would not punish a child for anything relating to sexuality, ever.

First of all, let me be honest about my bias in this situation, meaning I am a non-offending pedophile. I pro-social promote children, in rights format, and that might lead to "antisocial" replacing "pro-social" when it comes to this "children's rights" promotion. Thus, I am nice to children's rights traumatics because I am a children's rights victim psychopath abuser, meaning a psychopath who was driven to appear crazy and misuse children's rights ideas. Think "let girls have sex. Stop slut shaming", but having a self-interest in such. Slut-shaming is a form of child abuse, and abuse of women in general, but I don't have a say in such a debate unless someone close to me is called that, in which case I will focking swing them straight to 633 Court Street and have you arraigned before central arraignment court for harassing me with such filthy, disrespectful talk about a teenage girl's sexuality.

I just don't agree, in general, that kids should be having sex, just like adults shouldn't be having sex outside of marriage. It says in John 7:24 KJV:

Judge not according the appearance, but judge righteous judgment.

The Greek root word translated both "judge" and "judgment" is κρινο (Latin: krino) and refers to righteous judgment, meaning discerning between good or evil in terms of legal verdict, with guilt being defined by guilty intent (mens rea) leading to guilty action (actus reus). Both components are necessary to secure a conviction, with guilty intent leading to/guided by guilty actions. Fornication is a special offense, denoted by the Greek root word πορνεία (Latin: porneia) and refers to defilement by way of misuse of sexual desire with another person outside of marriage, or imposed in the case of rape. 

Certain ages under the age of majority - 18 in most states, and 21 in Mississippi - are exempt from Divine Prosecution due to legally assumed ignorance of wrongdoing. This includes sexually-based offenses, meaning there is to be no punishment of a child for anything, meaning anything, meaning anything. For sexually dangerous behavior, the child should be diagnosed by a child psychologist with  a paraphilic disorder, and possibly placed in in-patient hospitalization, with parents offered respite as time-out for being stressed parents. This should be only on an "as needed" basis. Minor slip ups in terms of abstinence should not be a source of contention or antimosity from parents.

Basically, my parenting view is that sexual behavior, like ALL behavior from a child, should NEVER be punished nor even policed. "Policed" refers to taking things as minute as perhaps one's daughter's choice of clothing and blowing them way out of proportion, telling them that "if you dress that way, you will go to Hell". No matter how my daughter would dress, and my pedophilic reaction to it, I must shut up, be quiet, and police nothing, as I am not the police over her, but over my own sexual choices - that's what the Bible is for, not punishing children for their sexuality. 

However, sometimes children have sex. I usually imagine a daughter. I'd discourage it by gentle verbal correction of the adolescent child's sexual behavior, denoted by the Greek root word νουθεσια (Latin: nouthesia) and refers to the occasional "let's sit down and have a talk" in this case, telling the child, on their level, that "I do not like you having sex like that. Are you upset with me about something like that? Usually children are influenced by the parent of the opposite sex in their sexual choices, and girls usually want a father as well" Thus, *I* would be morally culpable, and doubly so if she placed blame on me, which would be binding legal culpability.

That might be less likely to happen, by speculation, if I was attracted to my daughter, because such relationships do happen in gentle parenting, and either the father is distant or wants to spend a lot of time with the child. Thus, her cup might already be full, and any sexual relations would have to wait - sounds a bit off-putting given my mental health diagnosis/self-diagnosis, but that might motivate me to be close to a child. It is what motivates me to give them what they need in a gentle parenting friendship, meaning the wick of attachment to children in my case is sexual in nature. That's the nature of my pedophilic disorder. A physically aggressive parent is instead more inclined to see parenting as more rules based, and is more likely to restrict the "chastity" of a teenage girl in particular, perhaps with some sexual aggression linked to the physical wick (not the same as pedophilia, but is nonetheless abuse). A pedophile focuses more on the relationship naturally, but to the point of permissiveness by nature, meaning they fear losing their "best pal", which then  is a heartbreak for them.

Is it wrong for kids to have sex? Perhaps for the parents, for being a bad influence, even in a mistaken way that is abusive in nature. Our children tend not to want to have sex with peers, here at gentle parenting. Why? Friendship with parents meets all their attachment needs, so they shouldn't need to seek validation elsewhere - because that's the point of gentle parenting. Validation. I don't think any sexual activity outside of marriage is healthy. Too many holes to close up with different protectors, that some teens may find overwhelming to understanding, perhaps even in terms of social nuances (with teens with autism). Some teens aren't even attracted to peers - think a 12th Grader stuck in 5th grade, with girls that young still being the core of his attraction. The girls in his class are boring. Should we let him have sex? No. I was that 12th Grader, and intuitively agree with my 24-year-old self, but now have more evidence to justify my intuition, and validate my self-protective instincts...Sex should not even be talked about, in my view, out in the open, except in scientific and clinical format. I do not agree with mandatory sex education because some children may have experiences that may make them feel uncomfortable sex, namely those who have had traumatic sexual experiences, and focus on the sexual aspect, in which case forcing the child to go would be a form of antisocial "education", and thus child abuse (we are talking permission slips, not mere existence of classes - maybe the child and/or parents deserve some say, in case of trauma). 

Children will never be able to consent, in my view, even among themselves, but I believe in a legal setup where the mental health authorities would step in, meaning hospitalizing a child aggressor, and arresting any parents that are uncooperative in keeping their child away from the victim. Some children simply have sex with each other, and I just don't agree with their choices, but I can't make a child do anything. Only God can, and God's Law exempts children from prosecution, and always will, no matter how severe the troubles are in the child's behavior.

I don't police the chastity of young girls. I police my own chastity and abstinence in relation to them. God abstains.