Which is exactly what has been said all along.
My interpretation would be:
#1- person, someone who can look at a child and have a loveual reaction. #2-child molester, that is the person who has gone to the next level...they have the child picked out and are 'working' on the child. Little hugs, compliments..whatever that person thinks will get him-her to the next level. #3-rapist, that is the child molester who has accomplished what he-she set out to do, have love with a child.
I have a definite feeling that you are personally involved with pedophilia, and have the ability, in your own mind, to separate the actions of a person from those of a child molestation and child rapist.
And no - there is nothing sick with homoloveuals, although their actions are not what I would call conducive to the betterment of the human race.
Bit off topic, aren't you?
The only logical explanation for your atbreastude is that you are either a person yourself, or you are personally and intimately involved with one.
Practicing or not is unknown, but your continual acceptance of the practice can only led to one conclusion.
Your ability to objectively separate the actions of a practicing person from the actions of child molestation is frighteningly sick.
To even suggest that a young child (and we are talking about children under 10 years old here) can be consensual in a loveual act instigated by an older man, is truly distressing.
I know that you will be able to justify to yourself that a 1 to 10 year old child has the maturity to understand a full on loveual relationship - in fact you'll probably use the age old terminology of all persons, 'that you and the child truly love each other'.
That's justification for you.
The conclusions are obvious.
You have a bolt loose, Pal.
Time for your next tune up.
Artie...
