zurew

What love means in practice will be very different for people, based on a thousand different things. The "what is good" and "what is good for us" parts are not clear cut and not the same for everyone and that will be a problem in your system , where no outside input (vote) will be on the table for people, who would be considered not holistic thinkers or uneducated people. Also what about people who value freedom the most? Your system completely goes against their 1st priority of value, and that will eventually manifest in outbursts and protests etc. So how is your system better, where a group of people make decisions for everyone, where that group of people have all the power in their hands, where they can misuse their power easily , because no one hold them accountable for their actions (under the assumption that they will only seek the best for all people), and where if you disagree with the system and if they exploit you, you and basically no one outside of that group have any say and need to obey to their order without any question or say.

How would you know why people vote for what? They could vote for personality every time or they could vote for that person because of the facts, but how would you determine which one is the case? What would this mean in practice though? We can have almost perfect calculations and equations about physics, but thats not the case about politics at all. There is no one perfect equation or way to do it, all political action requires a lot of contemplation, and rethinking of the methods and the creation of new methods and new ways to solve things etc. It would be too reductive to try to make a perfect equation, because the world is in constant change, people are changing our values are changing , our tools to solve problems are changing etcetc. Also, your statement assumes, that all of us have the same values, but thats also not the case. Sure everyone loves the word "freedom" and "healthcare for everyone" etc, but everyone has his/her own hierarchy of values, and when it comes to the distribution of goods and services and power, then all disagreements comes automatically . For some people freedom might be 1st in priority,but for others it might only be the 4th or 5th on list. This is not mutually exclusive with voting. You can have all these things and voting as well.

@D2sage You should have shared a link like this, and you would have proven your theory. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/338563093_Migrants_and_Crime_in_Sweden_in_the_Twenty-First_Century

Good argument

Its there But this not proves your theory about immigrants though.

Even if I take this part for granted (even though, I haven't seen anything that would support this or would confirm this), I still wouldn't be okay with some kid's life getting totally fucked up, because of the groomers, because again, the harm is not comparable to a kid to kid relationship. If these relationships are standard, then again, I don't see how this would be good or beneficial for the kids, when kids can have normal relationship with each other, where the potentiality for harm is not as high. @integral Can you list your reasons how such a relationship would be generally good for a kid (if we take into account the potential harm as well)?

Question is why would we allow the worst case possible scenario, when it is not necessary. We have to judge this issue from a potential harm vs benefit issue, I don't think the potential benefits that such a relationship could bring to a child could ever outweigh the potential harm.

Its not standard. The potentiality for harm is different, because adults have an upperhand physically, financially, cognitively etc, so they can abuse their power much more easily and in a different ways, compared to a normal relationship where a kid is dating a kid. Its also an assumption, that they are not being taken advantage of. - I mean its not rare ,when adults groom children. Also, we are not necessarily talking about stupidity but more about maturity and being able to see that certain actions can lead to certain unwanted consequences. There is no one perfectly good way to measure maturity, however one thing is sure, that you need to live and experience things and learn about yourself, in order to get more mature - this is why there is age of consent.

I don't have any particular stats on this particular part, so I admit that I don't know, but even in theory I don't see how could you get around the massive power difference part. Is this an assumption, or you have some source, that can verify this?

I don't think its safe to assume, that a relationship like that is a good idea in general. There might be very few exceptions where such relationship was beneficial to the youngster, but I don't think we should use exceptions to make a rule. I think that the potential benefit vs potential harm ratio is just bad.

Do you think minors can give proper consent to adults, when there is a massive power difference?

There is a difference between being okay retrospectively with an event that happened to you vs being okay with it morally on a societal level.

Veganism to me - is about moral and environmental considerations. I think there are very strong arguments in favour of veganism.

Yeah it is, but delusional people don't think the same way about this, thats why they called delusional. Some pedos think that the child is attracted to them and it would be good to have a relationship with them, but of course, there are other pedos who know that its a problem.

It would, if you would think, that what you do is good for that person.

So in your mind its impossible to imagine or super unlikely, that someone is ready to kill or ready to commit a crime or ready to do horrible stuff out of love?

Here is a weak study on "Sexual Attraction and Falling in Love in Persons with Pedohebephilia". https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32086644/

So generally, you don't think that people in a family love each other? Because again, most crimes and hurt are happening between family members.

Oh thats definitely not true. Most violence and crime and most hurt are behind family doors. Also don't forget that it doesn't have to be intentional.

How do you know that? Can you absolutely exclude the love for the child in all instances?

In that case, there is 0% chance that anyone will change his/her opinion on this matter.

Can you write down specifically where Carl is wrong?

I will provide a link (This won't say anything about immigrants, this just shows a basic crime stat comparison between the US and Sweden): https://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/compare/Sweden/United-States/Crime/table Relevant stats: Total crimes per 1000 | Sweden:138.35 Ranked 2nd. (3 times more than United States) > US: 41.29 Ranked 22nd. Violent crime -> Gun crime -> Guns per 100 residents | Sweden:31.6 Ranked 10th. < US: 88.8 Ranked 1st. (3 times more than Sweden) Violent crime -> Murder rate per million people |Sweden: 9.7 (Ranked 75th.) < US: 42.01 Ranked 43th. (4 times more than Sweden) Violent crime -> Rapes per million people | 635.52 Ranked 3rd. (2 times more than United States) > US: 274.04 Ranked 9th. Murders with firearms per million | Sweden:6.5 Ranked 24th. < US: 32.57 Ranked 10th. (5 times more than Sweden) Violent crime -> Murders per million people |Sweden: 9.7 Ranked 75th. < US: 42.01 Ranked 43th. (4 times more than Sweden) Murders -> Per 100,000 people |Sweden: 2.4 Ranked 87th. < US: 5.9 Ranked 63th. (2 times more than Sweden) Prisoners -> Per capita|Sweden: 75 per 100,000 people Ranked 108th. < US: 715 per 100,000 people Ranked 1st. (10 times more than Sweden) Car thefts per 1000 |Sweden: 6.87 Ranked 3rd. (59% more than United States) > US: 4.33 Ranked 11th.

Do they have a choice not to play it?

@SQAAD Why would you hate hot woman specifically , when Narcissism as a trait is not exclusive to them Not all hot woman are narcissistic So at the end of the day, according to your logic, you shouldn't hate hot woman, but you should scan for narcissistic traits ,regardless of the hotness aspect.