>>2314
>Do you think it is healthy to jumpstart the "sexual discovery" at 9 years old?
Who knows? Even people that dedicate their whole life to study psychology can't answer this. From a evolutionary psychology perspective, pedophilia is kinda "normal" and a trace from Bonobos primates:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Sex_at_Dawn#Pedophilia

That does not mean, of course, that we need to accept it just because it's a trace of our evolution.

>children simply do not have a moral or ethic foundation on which to base their decisions on.
They don't need "moral or ethic foundation" to take this decision. If it's a pleasure for them and it's not coersive, there's nothing to be against.
Prohibit something based on personal believes or in false informations without anything to back up (like that sex at this age could "confuse" their psyche) is just non sense.

>if a child was really angry and wanted to kill itself (or someone else), that is acceptable. "But that's hurting someone else", you might say
And they have the right to kill herself. It's their life, not the others (that's the same discussion with assisted suicide[1]). Life is not a permanent bag that you have to carry, if you want to end your life, without hurting other people, it's your right to do so.
Now, of course, if the kid want to kill or hurt someone else, them that's wrong and someone should stop them.

>Well, so does pushing a degenerate's lust and disgust on to said 9 year old too
That's a non sequitur. Care to elaborate more? I can't see how this have to do with non-agression principle.