[Fox News]Sex with underage boys, is it a good thing?[/Fox News]

Discuss?

[n1ck]

I call fake, hehe... for the original, see...

http://mediamatters.org/items/200602240003

Good April fools joke though

[Paul_UK]

Well, it's from encyclopediadramatica.com on 1st April. I think that covers it.

[Lexington]

If it helps the economy, defeats terrorism, and undermines the Democratic party, then of course.

Lex

[pirateninja]

I think this clip may shed some light on why it's a good thing

http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/104279/

Here is an exert from something I found while researching this topic.
http://www.livius.org/ho-hz/homosexu...sexuality.html

Take it as you will. I find this very interesting, as these philosophical figures are heroes of mine. This information, however, was unknown to me like 30 minutes ago.

""
As we have seen, the traditional image of pedagogical pederasty is simply mistaken, so what is its origin? The answer is the philosophy of the Athenian Plato. He has painted a very remarkable picture of his teacher Socrates, who is shown -in Plato's own words- as boy crazy. When Socrates was in the company of beautiful boys, he lost his senses. Some sort of mania (divine madness) took possession of him and he was almost unable to resist it. He often complained about the fact that he was helpless towards adolescents, and said that he could only cope with the situation by asking difficult questions to these beautiful boys and teaching them philosophy. So, according to Plato, Socrates sublimated his passion.

This is not just Plato's portrayal of his admired teacher. That Socrates was well-known for this attitude is more or less confirmed by another student, the mercenary leader and author Xenophon (c.430-c.354). He informs us that his master, when challenged by the presence of a good looking adolescent, remained capable of self-control, but took some measures. He did not allow the boy to embrace him, comparing his kisses to spider's bites. Sexuality and other physical contact between teacher and student were simply unacceptable. This is a bolder portrayal than that of Plato (whose Socrates sometimes yielded to the temptation), but both writers agree that their master believed that the contacts between erastes and eromenos could not only be aimed at sexual love, but also at obtaining moral wisdom and strength. A rather remarkable educational ideal.

In this context, Socrates/Plato introduces an influential metaphor. Procreation, he says, can be earthly and spiritual, just like love. After all, love can be physical -aimed at the beautiful body of a boy- and spiritual, which he believes is on a higher level. This last type of love can be described as longing for something good and possessing it. The true erastes will prefer the beauty of the soul above that of the body. Instead of a material/earthly parenthood (the procreation of children) he prefers the spiritual type, which is the creation of virtue and knowledge. According to Socrates/Plato, the eromenos' understanding grows and in the end, he will be able to see a beauty that is above all earthly standards, compared to which even the most beautiful boy is nothing. In other words, by spiritually loving a beautiful beloved, the lover reaches an understanding of absolute beauty. Philosophy is, therefore, an erotical enterprise.

It should be added that for Plato, the only type of real love is the love between two men, and he has dedicated two of his dialogues to that subject: the Symposium and the Phaedrus. After all, homo-erotic love is related to education and gaining knowledge, and this makes it superior to other types of love.
""

And another good read I found, which points out some interesting things about homosexuality in history.

http://epistle.us/hbarticles/neareast.html

[Louie]

lol funny moments.