If it were not tragic it would be funny seeing the defenders of civil union for homossexual pairs be put against the wall on their own arguments for this.
What the "intergenerationalists" would say is probably something like this:
"Listen you pedophobic, if you are not mature enough to see that this child already has sexual drive than you are the immature one here, and a hateful one at that, full of Christian reactionary prejudices. Intergenerational sex has happened since the dawn of time! Look at Greece, the philosophers and their ephebos! Look at the animal kingdom, are they perverts too just because they don't share your cultural limitations? Who do you think you are to put limits to love? Your hate is the only perversion here! Would you rather this child be in a house with abusive parents or with an adult whom he loves and who loves him? What is worse, be beaten everyday or have a sexual organ rubbed on occasion for pleasure? You want to enslave this child for your own nasty conservative republican agenda, to see him grow to be a pedantic pedophobic like you! This is just gay prejudice in disguise, what you really don't like is the fact it is love between two men who just happen to have been born in different years. Here is a list of people who had sex as child and grew up just fine - after the concept of "just fine" was changed once again. Pedophobic, bully, medieval....you, you... Christian! (forgive me oh Marx for using such an awful word!) I don't want to see children as victims of violence either! But only a sick mind would think that sex has to be violent. It can be tender and full of love and respect. Don't adults with different body shapes have to care not to hurt their partners eithers? It's just the same here. Stop being a bore, being uncool, accept progress. In the future you will be seen just like those fighting against slavery, you reactionary!"