People who are attracted to prepubescent children (pedos) are not attracted to adults. They are not homosexuals. They are not heterosexuals.
A disingenuous argument since few homosexuals are exclusively homosexuals; it's a fetish,, they aren't 'born that way', and the majority have had heterosexual relations, they just overwhelmingly prefer indulging their fetish. According to the last undercover investigation of the NAMBLA organization, the front for kiddie rapers wildly popular with the 'Gay Rights' organizations and a welcome and active member of the advisory councils of the main Gay Rights activist organizations for decades, before they cost the orgs NGO status, they much preferred raping boys, but would sometimes rape a female child as a substitute, not often, maybe 2 out of 10 times, and only if boys weren't available.They very much identify as homosexuals, and not only the NAMBLA investigations but the prison studies of them also confirm they identify as homosexuals, too bad for the Democratic Party's lies and dissembling propaganda.
They're just into mindless self-indulgence, and have no place near children, and they're public health menaces as well, and have no place in food service or hospital staffs, either.
That is quite a long winded opinion piece that is short on facts . You are the one who is being disingenuous by seemingly trying to paint "homosexuals" as child preditors- despite the fact that it is well documented that gay men are no more likely to prey on children thamn straight men.
Lets pick this tripe apart....
You state that "few homosexuals are exclusively homosexuals" with out offering any evidence. The fact is that I don't know. I do know that sexual orientation exists alongh a contiuum and that many people are somewhere between gay and straight. But, so what ?? That in itself has noting to do with the issue of who are sexual predetors which is what this thread is about.
You aslo state ; "it's a fetish,, they aren't 'born that way', and the majority have had heterosexual relations, " What the hell does that mean? A fettish is inanimate object worshiped for its supposed magical powers or because it is considered to be inhabited by a spirit.
As far as the issue of "born or not born that way goes, again all that you are doing is offering an appeal to ignorance expecting others to just accept that because you say so. You dumb down the complexities of human sexuality and the volumes of evidence that point to underlying biological components to homosexuality. And NO , the fact that people are bisexual and cahnge their choice of a sexual partner from time to time DOES not mean that sexual orientation is a choice. And again, it had NOTHING to do with who sexual predetors are.
Now this NAMBLA thing is a real boatload of bigoted bovine excrement!! What recent undercover investigation?? You can't just throw shit like that out there without backing it up.
The fact is that you are a
dangerous liar . It's this type of rhetoric that has gotten gay men killed. And if you actually believe your own bullshit, you have to be either crazy or stupid.
The claim only stands up if you can prove that gay may are committing a disproportionate number of child molestations relative to the straight population-which you cannot do. You don't seem to be able to understand, that there is a difference between gay men who have healthier adult relationships with other adults as opposed to those who are fixated on minors, or have regressed for some reason in that regard.
In addition, every male who has sex with another male, whether an adult or minor is not a homosexual. I'm going to make an attempt to educate you although I'm not holding out much hope. Mostly I like doing this because even I can stand to learn more and I enjoy picking apart hateful propaganda like yours.
Let's start with your lie about NAMBLA.
It was spawned by the early gay rights movement but what is left of it today -and that isn't much - is not a gay organization and has been rejected by gay advocacy groups:
Brief history of the modern childlove movement
NAMBLA describes itself as a "
support group for intergenerational relationships," and uses the slogan "sexual freedom for all." According to the group's web site, its aim is to "support the rights of youth as well as adults to choose the partners with whom they wish to share and enjoy their bodies." Google Search of NAMBLA's IP
I vehemently disagree with their philosophy, as do the vast majority of adults, both gay and straight. Children do not have the mental or emotional capacity to make those choices and when an adult is involved, there is a high probability that the relationship will be coercive and unequal.
You will see that nowhere in this lengthy piece is NAMBLA identified as a gay organization, nor does the organization itself even mention the issue of being gay.
History Brief history of the modern childlove movement
NAMBLA emerged from the tumultuous political atmosphere of the 1970s, particularly from the leftist wing of the Gay Liberation movement which followed the 1969 Stonewall Riots in New York City. Although discussion of gay adult-minor sex did take place,
gay rights groups immediately following the Stonewall Riot were more concerned with issues of police harassment, nondiscrimination in employment, health care and other areas.
These were desperate days for the fledgling gay rights movement. Even then, the NAMBLA was consider a fringe group within the gay community
Ostracism: This was a very different time
Some gay rights groups immediately following "Stonewall Inn", perceived age-of-consent laws as governmental tools to suppress homosexual behavior rather than as the safeguards against the sexual abuse of small children that they claimed to be. In many states that didn't explicitly criminalize homosexual behavior (the sodomy laws), age-of-consent laws were significantly lower for heterosexual couples than for homosexual couples. For example, in the state of Massachusetts, "Lawrence v. Texas", the age of consent for heterosexual couples was as low as 13 (with parental approval) but was 18 for homosexual men.
The relative acceptance or indifference to opposition of the age-of-consent began to change at the same time as accusations that gays were child pornographers and child molesters became common. Judianne Densen-Gerber, founder of the New York drug rehabilitation center Odyssey House, argued that gays were responsible for child pornography. In 1977 former beauty queen Anita Bryant staked a similar position, starting the "Save Our Children" campaign. "The recruitment of our children," she argued, "is absolutely necessary for the survival and growth of homosexuality."
You are dishonestly, or perhaps ignorantly, relying on ancient history by invoking NAMBLA
In
1980 a group called the “Lesbian Caucus – Lesbian Gay Pride March Committee” distributed a hand-out urging women to split from the annual New York City Gay Pride March because the organizing committee had supposedly been dominated by NAMBLA and its supporters. The next year, after some lesbians threatened to picket, the Cornell University gay group Gay PAC (Gay People at Cornell) rescinded its invitation to NAMBLA founder David Thorstad to be the keynote speaker at the annual May Gay Festival. And in the following years, gay rights groups attempted to block NAMBLA’s participation in gay pride parades, prompting Harry Hay to wear a sign proclaiming “NAMBLA walks with me” as he participated in a 1986 gay pride march in Los Angeles.
Thus by the mid-1980s, NAMBLA was virtually alone in its positions and found itself politically isolated. Gay rights organizations, burdened by accusations of child recruitment and child abuse, had abandoned the radicalism of their early years and had "retreat[ed] from the idea of a more inclusive politics," opting instead to appeal more to the mainstream. Support for "groups perceived as being on the fringe of the gay community," such as NAMBLA, vanished in the process. Today almost all gay rights groups disavow any ties to NAMBLA, voice disapproval of its objectives, and attempt to prevent NAMBLA from having a role in gay and lesbian rights events.
Here is more:
Gregory King of the Human Rights Campaign later said that "NAMBLA is not a gay organization ... They are not part of our community and we thoroughly reject their efforts to insinuate that pedophilia is an issue related to gay and lesbian civil rights." NAMBLA responded by claiming that "man/boy love is by definition homosexual," that "man/boy lovers are part of the gay movement and central to gay history and culture," and that "homosexuals denying that it is 'not gay' to be attracted to adolescent boys are just as ludicrous as heterosexuals saying it's 'not heterosexual' to be attracted to adolescent girls."
And more:
In 1994 the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) adopted a "Position Statement Regarding NAMBLA" saying GLAAD "deplores the North American Man Boy Love Association's (NAMBLA) goals, which include advocacy for sex between adult men and boys and the removal of legal protections for children. These goals constitute a form of child abuse and are repugnant to GLAAD." Also in 1994 the Board of Directors of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force (NGLTF) adopted a resolution on NAMBLA that said: "NGLTF condemns all abuse of minors, both sexual and any other kind, perpetrated by adults. Accordingly, NGLTF condemns the organizational goals of NAMBLA and any other such organization."
Today
More recently, media reports have suggested that for practical purposes the group no longer exists and that it consists only of a web site maintained by a few enthusiasts. NAMBLA maintains a web site at NAMBLA that shows addresses in New York and San Francisco and a phone contact in New York, and offers publications for sale, including the NAMBLA Bulletin.
NAMBLA is identified as a lobby group in Jon Stewart's America: The Book A Citizen's Guide to Democracy Inaction (2004), and is also alluded to on The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, often tagged on to an existing lobby group's acronym for the parody.
Gay rights groups opposed to NAMBLA contend that their reason for disavowing NAMBLA has always been their sharing of the general public's disdain for pedophilia and child sexual abuse (as expressed in issues statements). These gay rights groups reject NAMBLA's claims of an analogy between the campaign for gay and lesbian equality and the abolition of age-of-consent laws, and view NAMBLA's rhetoric about "the sexual rights of youth" as a cover for its members' "real agenda".
