Do NOT Discriminate Against Straight Men

[definition]

I've read it - many times. You've brought nothing new to the discussion. You can parse, you can slice, you can bloviate, you can try to redefine the terms "homosexual" and "pedophile"; it is all for naught. At the end of the day, the fact remains that - while homosexuals comprise only 1-3% of the population, they commit 20-40% of all child molestations. That's a damning statistic, and you can't knock it down.

That is factually not true. You know it is a bold faced lie. And it has been unequivocally proven as such.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

That is factually not true. You know it is a bold faced lie. And it has been unequivocally proven as such.

got a link?

 

[insein]

But in the real word, parades need permits. And the city concedes to the parade when they approve the permit. Whoodathunk that definition would be a word parsing dipstick.

Not a very strong argument with the parade, RWA. I'd have gone after the insistence of gay marriage when marriage is a religious sacrament and most religions dont recognize homosexuality as a virtuous lifestyle. They may be hypocrits in the individual but the faith in almost all religions does not believe in homosexuality. So to legalize gay marriage is forcing religions to recognize a union between a man and a man or a woman and a woman as the same as a man and a woman which just isnt true. You can have a "civil union" done by the state just like the state does "marriages" for straight couples that don't want to be joined by a church. But its not a real marriage.

Also a major concession is the writing of Hate Speech laws. Gays have just as much if not more to do with this unconstitutional debacle as blacks do. Its to the point that the word gay itself is considered by some to be a "hateful" remark worthy of punishment by the law. Freedom of speech is freedom of speech. the founding fathers NEVER intended people to face retribution from the government based on what they said to individuals. That was one of the main reasons they left their original countries. They feared death for speaking out against the King or any of his loyalists. Now someone fears incarcaration for speaking out against certain ethnic groups or sexual minorities. That to me is one of the worst things gays have done to this country. They have forced people to accept them when in reality, most people tolerated them. When people are forced to accept something, they like it even less.

 

[musicman]

That is factually not true. You know it is a bold faced lie. And it has been unequivocally proven as such.

Where? How? What's next - are you going to redefine the term "population"?

 

[definition]

Where? How? What's next - are you going to redefine the term "population"?

I haven't redefined anything. You are the one equivocating. You haven't addressed a single point in the post that I put up to respond to this nonsense. You obviously don't have an argument to support your claim. There is NO study anywhere that backs up your claim that Gay men commit 20-40 percent of the child molestation. In fact, I have cited sources that show 1 percent of child molestations are committed by Gay men. I have cited a source that shows that Paul Cameron LIED and made up information in his review.

 

[definition]

So to legalize gay marriage is forcing religions to recognize a union between a man and a man or a woman and a woman as the same as a man and a woman which just isnt true.

How do hell, do you reason that legalizing Gay marriage would make ANY religion recognize Gay marriage?

 

[musicman]

definition:

While child molestation of any type is monstrous and tragic, the instance of molestation by females - in the greater scheme of things - descends into relative statistical insignificance. Therefore:

1. almost all child molestations are committed by men.

2. 20-40% of victims are boys.

Thus, the only way around the statement, "while homosexuals comprise only 1-3% of the population, they commit 20-40% of all child molestations", is to somehow quibble over the terms "homosexual', or "molestation', or "while", or "of", or "%". In other words, you bring nothing new or substantive to this well-hashed discussion. You're quibbling and parsing; it's really all you - or, indeed, loaded, political junk science itself can manage against the awful truth. It's old already.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Not a very strong argument with the parade, RWA. I'd have gone after the insistence of gay marriage when marriage is a religious sacrament and most religions dont recognize homosexuality as a virtuous lifestyle. They may be hypocrits in the individual but the faith in almost all religions does not believe in homosexuality. So to legalize gay marriage is forcing religions to recognize a union between a man and a man or a woman and a woman as the same as a man and a woman which just isnt true. You can have a "civil union" done by the state just like the state does "marriages" for straight couples that don't want to be joined by a church. But its not a real marriage.

Also a major concession is the writing of Hate Speech laws. Gays have just as much if not more to do with this unconstitutional debacle as blacks do. Its to the point that the word gay itself is considered by some to be a "hateful" remark worthy of punishment by the law. Freedom of speech is freedom of speech. the founding fathers NEVER intended people to face retribution from the government based on what they said to individuals. That was one of the main reasons they left their original countries. They feared death for speaking out against the King or any of his loyalists. Now someone fears incarcaration for speaking out against certain ethnic groups or sexual minorities. That to me is one of the worst things gays have done to this country. They have forced people to accept them when in reality, most people tolerated them. When people are forced to accept something, they like it even less.

A parade is a concession too. Thanks for your input, however.

 

[definition]

definition:

While child molestation of any type is monstrous and tragic, the instance of molestation by females - in the greater scheme of things - descends into relative statistical insignificance. Therefore:

1. almost all child molestations are committed by men.

2. 20-40% of victims are boys.

Thus, the only way around the statement, "while homosexuals comprise only 1-3% of the population, they commit 20-40% of all child molestations", is to somehow quibble over the terms "homosexual', or "molestation', or "while", or "of", or "%". In other words, you bring nothing new or substantive to this well-hashed discussion. You're quibbling and parsing; it's really all you - or, indeed, loaded, political junk science itself can manage against the awful truth. It's old already.

No, it is called understanding the psychopathology of pedophillia. It has nothing to do with politics. It is a psychosexual reality that pedophiles commit their crimes against children because of their interest inchildren not their interest in the child's gender. It is a psychosexual reality backed up by the facts already cited that men with adult homosexual oreintations rarely, if ever sexually abuse children. You keep making the same ostentatious error in reasoning that Paul Cameron did to assume that all male to male molestations are committed by homosexuals --- when few are. It demonstrates a poor understanding of the psychopathology of sexual offenders to presume that homosexual orientation should be confused with pedophillic interests in boys by male child molesters. Again pedophiles are most likely to molest those children they have access to, as most pedophiles are men and most men have access to boys more often than girls then it should be no surprise that men molest boys on a regular basis. To describe those men as homosexual flies in the face of reason --- they aren't homosexuals --- they are pedophiles. You once again failed to address any of the arguments presented in my earlier post. Instead,you are employing churlish dismissiveness and perverted logic to stick with claims that you deep down inside know are factually false. You are being incredibly dishonest.

 

[musicman]

definition:

I'm going to make this very quick and simple - not for your sake, but for my long-suffering USMB friends, who have watched this same discussion play itself out about 782 times in the past couple of years.

If you cannot - or will not - concede that, since:

A) male/male sex = homosexuality, and,

B) adult/child sex = pedophilia, it is self-evident that,

C) male adult/male child sex = homosexual pedophilia,

you and I have no further basis for discussion. You have no interest in the truth, but instead seek to twist language and numbers until they say what you want to hear.

 

[definition]

definition:

I'm going to make this very quick and simple - not for your sake, but for my long-suffering USMB friends, who have watched this same discussion play itself out about 782 times in the past couple of years.

If you cannot - or will not - concede that, since:

A) male/male sex = homosexuality, and,

B) adult/child sex = pedophilia, it is self-evident that,

C) male adult/male child sex = homosexual pedophilia,

It would be an act of "homosexual" pedophillia in that homosexual does refer to sexuality between two people of the same sex, but that does not in any way, shape or form, support the view that such acts are committed by men with adult homosexual oreintaions, or Gay men.

 

[musicman]

It would be an act of "homosexual" pedophillia in that homosexual does refer to sexuality between two people of the same sex, but that does not in any way, shape or form, support the view that such acts are committed by men with adult homosexual oreintaions, or Gay men.

I'm sure that will provide a great comfort to the young victims of homosexual rape. Thank you for more of your exquisite quibbling. I rest my case.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

definition just got gang raped by a group of guys. But it wasn't a "gay" thing.

 

[Mr. P]

I see a clear distinction between “homosexuality” and “pedophilia”, I do not understand why you guys can’t.

 

[The ClayTaurus]

I see a clear distinction between “homosexuality” and “pedophilia”, I do not understand why you guys can’t.

PC APPEASER!

 

[musicman]

I see a clear distinction between “homosexuality” and “pedophilia”, I do not understand why you guys can’t.

Of course there's a clear distinction. That doesn't mean the terms are mutually exclusive, though. A man who rapes a boy is a homosexual pedophile. That's the awful truth all these apologists are trying to hide amid all the parsing and verbiage.

 

[musicman]

definition just got gang raped by a group of guys. But it wasn't a "gay" thing.

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to rtwngAvngr again.

 

[Mr. P]

Of course there's a clear distinction. That doesn't mean the terms are mutually exclusive, though. A man who rapes a boy is a homosexual pedophile. That's the awful truth all these apologists are trying to hide amid all the parsing and verbiage.

See that is what I mean. It is pedophilia, and by definition a "homosexual act", but that does not make the perpetrator homosexual.

 

[dmp]

It would be an act of "homosexual" pedophillia in that homosexual does refer to sexuality between two people of the same sex, but that does not in any way, shape or form, support the view that such acts are committed by men with adult homosexual oreintaions, or Gay men.

At least make 'smart' arguments...lol. Try..Please try.

 

[The ClayTaurus]

Are Selma Blair and Sarah Michelle Gellar homosexuals?