The issue of parental rights came up over in a post on Tom O'Carroll's blog recently:

http://tomocarroll.wordpress.com/2014/04/12/an-open-letter-to-frank-furedi/

I made a few responses I think are pretty good. My main point being that for the most part, how we feel about the substantive issue in question influences what we think about parental rights regarding that particular issue.

You don't literally want 2 votes out of 3 because then the parents and the state could tell the child who they have to have sex with, however irrelevant that may seem in practice in today's western world. On the other hand, a typical (?) pro-contact pedophile doesn't want the state and parents together to be able to veto a minor's sexual activity.

For instance I think it's horrible that if an abused minor runs away, the authorities' default response is to drag them back their abusive parent(s). I would like to see the minor appointed and attorney and given a chance to make their case that they would be better off on their own.

When you phrase it that way, no one could disagree. But the Court is then subject to a deluge of hearings by confused, angry teens who actually do belong back with their parents and stuck with sorting them all out. (Yes, Dante and many others will disagree with me on this. I would predict he would say the minor should be able to just run away for whatever reason he wants, no hearing required. Another instance of a disagreement we've aired at length already.)