Sodomy and pederasty

Homosexual activists and their enablers resent it when Christians ask, If homosexual activity (including marriage) is deemed to be morally acceptable (or even commendable), then why is pederasty deemed to be out of bounds?

Now, I don't know if homosexuals really resent that comparison. I don't know if they resent it in principle, or if they just rankle at it because it's bad PR, because it exposes a weakness in their argument. From a tactical standpoint, they'd resist the comparison even if they privately agreed with it. 

In addition, I think many homosexuals are so self-absorbed that they only consider situations which directly affect them. Consider Ryan Anderson's futile effort to make a homosexual questioner take a consistent position:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zcs1K7Gi9Pg&app=desktop

It's funny to see homosexual apologists act so offended at the comparison. How are they in any position to be so judgmental? They bitterly resent Christians making value judgments about sodomy, but then they turn right around and make value judgments about polygamy, pedophilia, and bestiality.

How can they be morally outraged by the comparison between homosexuality and pederasty or bestiality unless they think pederasty and bestiality are morally outrageous? But in that event, why aren't Christians equally entititled to view homosexuality as morally outrageous? 

Why isn't someone who practices pederasty or sadomasochism entitled to be just as morally indignant at the "bigoted" reaction of homosexual activists who defame the alternate lifestyle of the pederast or sadomasochist? 

Moreover, pederasty isn't an artificial hypothetical like the Trolley problem. Some secular academics use the same kinds of sociological data to justify pederasty as homosexual apologists use to justify sodomy and lesbianism. For instance:

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Pederasty: An Integration of Cross-Cultural, Cross-Species, and Empirical Data

Bruce Rind PhD
Page Range: 463 - 475

Pederasty, or sexual relations between men and adolescent boys, is condemned in our society as an unqualified evil that maims and destroys. In ancient Greece, samurai Japan, and numerous other cultures, pederasty was seen as the noblest of human relations, conducive if not essential to nurturing the adolescent's successful intellectual and physical maturation.

Current psychological and psychiatric theorizing have pronounced and promoted the former view, while ignoring the vast array of cross-cultural data related to the latter view. Mental health opinion has also ignored a wealth of cross-species data with important parallels. Instead, this opinion is based on feminist models of rape and incest, which are backed up by clinical research on child sexual abuse.

The current article examines empirical rather than clinical data on pederasty, and supplements this with cross-cultural and cross-species perspectives. The empirical data show that pederasty is not only not predestined to injure, but can benefit the adolescent when practiced according to the ancient Greek form. Cross-cultural and cross-species data show the extensiveness of pederasty in the natural world, as well as its functional rather than pathological nature in these societies and species.

An evolutionary model that synthesizes the empirical, cross-cultural, and cross-species data is proposed as an alternative to the highly inadequate feminist and psychiatric models. The animal data suggest that the seeds for pederasty were planted at the dawn of humanity. The human data suggest that pederasty came to serve a mentoring function.

Journal of Homosexuality

(ISSN: 0091-8369) Volume: 49 Issue: 3/4 2005

Prepublication  ISBN-13: 978-1-56023-603-0 http://www.haworthpress.com/store/product.asp?sku=5694