> Except paedophilia isn't a crime, child abuse (and rape) is. The reasoning is similar with the reason why we ban even entry-level drugs: it's insurance, prev

> Except paedophilia isn't a crime, child abuse (and rape) is. The reasoning is similar with the reason why we ban even entry-level drugs: it's insurance, preventing weak people to become criminals about more powerful stuff. The line of thought is that it's ok to deny people freedoms that might lead the poor-minded folks into more damaging behavior. And be it either: (1): homosexuals that might escalate to raping other men, (2): people with weird fetishes that might end up doing child abuse, (3): or LSD people that might end up as heroin addicts, we've seen thought the history of time that it's ok to punish otherwise-acceptable behavior as long as it acts as an insurance in order to prevent more harmful acts. For me, (1) and (2) are the most dangerous as they prohibit the thoughts and sexual desires of human beings just because they might have the potential to turn into something dangerous. It's a form of punishment just because statistically there were specific criminals in the past that escalated them into harmful acts. And as our society progresses, we'll have to decide if it's ok to do that for the greater good: if it's ok to snoop credit card bills for fast food purchases in order to charge a higher medical insurance fee each month. I sure hope that the answer will be no, or at least that nobody will go to jail just as an insurance for his potential future criminal behavior.