Pedophile Rights?

A few years ago I heard George Grant address leaders on moral issues. He spoke of examples in history when a generation rejected certain behaviours when they felt evil had gone too far: “There are times when evil has progressed to such a point that even evil men find it too evil and resist the evil.”

Ten years ago I recall how stunned I was to hear that BC judges Mary Southin and Duncan Shaw supported pedophile rights. They inferred that attitudes towards child porn should change, stating “society's attitudes toward child pornography may prove as fleeting as views in an earlier age on homosexuality."

She dismissed charges of possession of child pornography on the basis of it being an unreasonable limit on the freedom of expression and believed that criminalization of child porn was ineffective in the restriction of child exploitation. Pardon me? What’s next - decriminalizing murder because the threat of incarceration hasn’t stopped people killing each other?

“We have to recognize that…society's view may change radically over a very short period of time.” On that point she was right. Views are changing rapidly, and sensible people need to be alarmed. We are talking about protecting a generation who cannot protect themselves.

This matter of protecting the rights of pedophiles has been bantered about on a number of fronts recently. Television ads by Victims of Violence have been regularly warning Canadians of the danger our children are in and how prevalent kiddie porn is becoming: “It shouldn’t hurt to be a child.” Bravo!

However, in February 2011, there was a parliamentary session to focus on the wording of Bill C-54, a legislative bill designed to increase or impose mandatory minimum penalties or punishment on sexual offenders of children. Psychology experts were brought in claiming that pedophilia was a sexual orientation comparable to homosexuality. Where do they find these experts?

In July, a Muslim scholar, Sheik Saleh Ibn Fawzan Al-Fawzan issued a fatwa defending Muslim child marriage. He gave an interpretation of Sharia law reinforcing that there was no minimum age for marriage and that girls can be married even if they are in the cradle. The only question was whether the child was literally physically capable of bearing the weight of her new husband.

In August, Vogue Magazine (Vogues enfants) promoted lingerie for 4-year-olds and began marketing clothing for children that sexualizes them. Simultaneously, a conference was being held in the United States to normalize pedophilia: “It’s not my fault that I feel this way.” In a twist of focus, one of their purposes was to deal with “society’s negative reactions to a love of children.”

A love of children? What kind of love are they referring to? What does the future look like? Will our children know the protection under the law that they enjoy today? Will there be anyone left to stand up and guard over their innocence? What about those who speak up against pedophilia? What of their future?

I can see a very real scenario emerging. My perspective on pedophilia, rooted into a Biblical sense of morality, may soon make me the violator of pedophile’s rights. I will be considered intolerant, and called paedophobic. It will become politically incorrect to address the issue, and if I persist, I may face legal injunctions as what I say may be perceived as hate speech.

A movement to legitimatize incest between consenting adults and children is on the horizon. I pray that Canadians never normalize this behaviour. I hope that a generation pushes back against this evil.

In the meantime, understand that silence is not golden – it is yellow.

This article is written by or on behalf of an outsourced columnist and does not necessarily reflect the views of Castanet.