Stacy McCain has an excellent (if somewhat long) post up, titled The Problem With Sexual Rights, from which I will quote the key part I’d like to expound upon:
[The possibility] “…that persons need not act on their idiosyncratic sexual impulses – is entirely rejected by the rights-oriented legal philosophy that inspired Justice Kennedy’s Lawrence decision or Judge Wolf”s ruling in the Kosilek case. Both Kennedy and Wolf seem to presume that people have a right to satisfy their sexual desires, and there was an entire caucus at the Democrat convention dedicated to defending such rights.”
“The possibility” that people need not act on their sexual impulses, if you want a summary, refers to researchers in Canada focusing on pedophiles, and how pedophiles are just as likely to be “born that way” as other sufferers of deviant sexual orientations. There’s already a group of people in the US petitioning psychiatrists to take pedophilia off the list of people who are f’ed up in the head and need treatment, since that strategy worked so well for the homosexuals.
So let’s consider this newfound “right” to satisfy one’s sexual desires. Does such a right exist, and if it did, would it be compatible with civil society?
The answer, which should be immediately obvious to every member of the species Homo sapiens sapiens past the age of puberty, is Hell No!
There is, and can never be, a “right” to satisfy one’s sexual desires, for anyone. Consider the whole point of the institution of marriage as applied solely to heterosexual individuals. Women are required to deny their innate sexual desire to have intercourse with the most attractive male they can find at any given time she feels like having sex, and instead pick one only. Men are required to deny their innate sexual desire to have intercourse with every attractive woman they can find, and pick one only. As an example of what happens to civilization when this restriction on the sexual desires of heterosexual adults is suspended, even with the safety net of the modern welfare state, I shall merely point you in the direction of the nearest black ghetto, if you live in America. Lest you think this is unfair, the same behavior and subsequent lack of civilization is found in Britain among the white underclass. Heterosexual populations that go all-in for the right to satisfy their sexual desires are quite literally parasitical, totally dependent upon a host society of people who are controlling themselves. They build nothing, produce nothing but yet more uncivilized spawn trapped in a cycle of poverty and ignorance, and are incapable of even maintaining the infrastructure of previous generations. The only way for an individual to prosper in safety and peace, if she is unfortunate enough to be born into such a population, is to learn elsewhere how to behave in a civilized manner, and get the hell out. Which is damned difficult when you have no social capital to draw upon because your slutty female ancestors have been sleeping around with deadbeats and gangsters and drawing government benefits for producing bastard spawn for the last four generations, instead of building stable family structures in which to accumulate wealth and provide “advantage” and “privilege” to the next generation.
So no, such a right does not exist. And it’s not just the pedophiles, sexual deviants, etc. that have to actively suppress their sexual impulses in order to live in and preserve a wealthy, peaceful society – it’s quite literally everyone. NO ONE has the “right” to satisfy their every sexual desire – all the experts agree that humanity has had at least several thousand years to work on this, and every time it comes down to the inescapable truth: if you want prosperity and civilization, you’re going to have to deny yourself animal pleasures and engage in some self-control.