Tolerance for paedophilia anyone?

Given the way the political winds seem to blow in the Netherlands, this may not come as a surprise. The BBC is reporting that a paedophile political party will be allowed to start up and run candidates in Holland.

On the chances of success for such a party in any election, I have no comment. Whether or not this party should be allowed to exist, I have no comment. However, this does tie in with my comments to a post by H. Cameron back in June. There I was trying to point out that amoral thinking with respect to sexual conduct will eventually lead to increasing tolerance for paedophilia. Paedophilia is, quite defensibly, a “sexual orientation,” afterall.

To reiterate:

[Tolerance for paedophilia will be justified] along classic libertarian lines; well, if it’s consensual; and, well, you can’t really put a “numberâ€? on the age of sexual maturity, so if they aren’t being taken advantage of, it’s OK. …

Just as 40 years ago most would express outrage at abortion-on-demand and flagrant homosexuality there remains stern opposition to paedophilia. Eventually the liberal moral relativists in our midst will winnow it down as well on the grounds I’ve stated.

As the BBC reports:

… the Brotherly Love, Freedom and Diversity Party (PNVD) … was formed by three paedophiles in May, prompting outrage in Dutch society.

It seeks to lower the age of sexual consent from 16 to 12 and legalise child pornography and sex with animals. …

The PNVD - which has only three known members - says its aim is to break taboos and fight intolerance.

It says it wants paedophilia to be freely discussed, arguing that a ban just makes children curious.

They claim the subject has been a taboo since the 1996 Marc Dutroux child abuse scandal in Belgium.

They also want to break the “negative” stigma surrounding paedophilia by getting into parliament. …