Aorist after κωλύω or after the negative?

[Stephen Hughes]

In the phrasing Ἄφετε τὰ παιδία, καὶ μὴ κωλύετε αὐτὰ ἐλθεῖν πρός με· (Matthew 19:14), is the aorist used after the negative statement μὴ κωλύετε, because the κωλύειν itself takes the aorist, or for some other reason?

Cf. Ἄφετε τὰ παιδία ἔρχεσθαι πρός με· μὴ κωλύετε αὐτά· (Mark 10:14).

[cwconrad]

In the phrasing Ἄφετε τὰ παιδία, καὶ μὴ κωλύετε αὐτὰ ἐλθεῖν πρός με· (Matthew 19:14), is the aorist used after the negative statement μὴ κωλύετε, because the κωλύειν itself takes the aorist, or for some other reason?

Cf. Ἄφετε τὰ παιδία ἔρχεσθαι πρός με· μὴ κωλύετε αὐτά· (Mark 10:14).

I think this is simply a matter of "register." There are other instances of Mark's usage being looser than that of Matthew or Luke in parallel passages.

[RandallButh]

Either the aorist or continuative would fit, depending on the point/intention of the communication.
Focussing on that specific instance would be best portrayed with the aorist.
focussing on the plurality of permitting and comings because of the plurality of objects would be best portrayed with the continuative.