Swedish Pentecostal Pastor On Trial For Anti-Gay Hate Speech

[MissileMan]

But the 'few' hurt many more, right?

Yes, but the chances that a child will be placed with a homosexual pedophile are the same as a child being placed with a heterosexual pedophile. If you want to talk about just sheer numbers, the chances that any child will come in contact with a heterosexual pedophile vs. a homosexual one are 21:1

 

[MissileMan]

And yet they account for a number of molestations that is astronomically out of whack with their population numbers. I marvel that you see nothing disturbing about homosexuality in this, MM. With all respect and good will, you seem to have a blind spot.

It's not a blind spot. I simply refuse to lump homosexual pedophiles and homosexuals who have no desire to molest children into one pile the same as I refuse to lump heterosexual pedophiles into yours and my pile.

 

[Annie]

Yes, but the chances that a child will be placed with a homosexual pedophile are the same as a child being placed with a heterosexual pedophile. If you want to talk about just sheer numbers, the chances that any child will come in contact with a heterosexual pedophile vs. a homosexual one are 21:1

I for one, am against a child being place in any 'single household' whatever the prediliction of the adult claim. Being clearer, I don't think children should be placed with 'non-marrieds' unless the circumstances of the child make him/her unexceptable to any available married couple. Obviously we are now referring to 'foster families' not adoptive, since there are more than enough available couples within the bands of matrimony to adopt.

Look at what I AM saying here. IF the child has A PROBLEM that makes him/her not qualified for available families, a CHANCE should be taken on any single that wishes to provide care for that child. In a way, that is sad, in and of itself.

 

[MissileMan]

I for one, am against a child being place in any 'single household' whatever the prediliction of the adult claim. Being clearer, I don't think children should be placed with 'non-marrieds' unless the circumstances of the child make him/her unexceptable to any available married couple. Obviously we are now referring to 'foster families' not adoptive, since there are more than enough available couples within the bands of matrimony to adopt.

Look at what I AM saying here. IF the child has A PROBLEM that makes him/her not qualified for available families, a CHANCE should be taken on any single that wishes to provide care for that child. In a way, that is sad, in and of itself.

I know they are letting same sex couples be foster parents in Florida. I haven't heard of any negative reports.

 

[Annie]

I know they are letting same sex couples be foster parents in Florida. I haven't heard of any negative reports.

And based on the data you agreed with, that would be luck or something sadder.

 

[musicman]

It's not a blind spot. I simply refuse to lump homosexual pedophiles and homosexuals who have no desire to molest children into one pile the same as I refuse to lump heterosexual pedophiles into yours and my pile.

The sheer numbers suggest something deeply disturbing about homosexuality to me, and I shake my head in confusion that you don't see it.

The behavior was considered a perversion until our all-wise, all-knowing cultural engineers declared otherwise. Trouble is, our all-wise, all-knowing cultural engineers have been proven to be full of shit on any number of their edicts from on high. Life, and common sense, have a way of exposing the flaws in their thinking.

We must accept that either people who engage in this behavior which we no longer view as a perversion have crossed some societal line, or that the behavior - no longer a perversion, mind you - our betters have said so - produces super-predators.

I don't think either explanation portrays the behavior in a positive light.

 

[The ClayTaurus]

I know they are letting same sex couples be foster parents in Florida. I haven't heard of any negative reports.

Just think of the excuses those kids will have when they break all sorts of laws as teenagers...

 

[Annie]

Just think of the excuses those kids will have when they break all sorts of laws as teenagers...

That would be funny if the concern wasn't pedophilia.

 

[HorhayAtAMD]

No - the statement stands as a truth. 1-3% of the population perpetrates 20-40% of child molestations.

Actually, now that I think about it more, your argument falls down on another level too. The statistic does not show that 1-3% of the population perpetrates 20-40% of child molestations, ALL it shows is that 20-40% of child molestations are perpetrated by people who have the same sexual orientation as 1-3% of the population. The difference between those two statements is as huge as the difference between these 2 statements:
1. 90% of violent crimes are committed by 50% of the population.
2. 90% of violent crimes are committed by 1% of the popultion who just happen to have the same genetic makeup as 50% of the population.

 

[HorhayAtAMD]

Just as I never spoke of punishing anyone, nor do I speak of "demonizing" anyone, o constructor of strawmen.

We are both intelligent adults here, when you talk about the facts that there is something disturbing about homosexuals, you are demonizing them.

NOR IS IT NECESSARY THAT THEY DO. THE RAW NUMBERS DON'T MATTER. IT IS CLEARLY EVIDENT THAT HOMOSEXUALS MOLEST CHILDREN IN ASTRONOMICALLY HIGHER INTANCES PROPORTIONATE TO THEIR POPULATION NUMBERS. IT IS NOT SOCIETY'S OBLIGATION TO AGONIZE OVER THE MINUTAE OF THE STATISTICS. IT IS SOCIETY'S OBLIGATION TO PROTECT ITSELF. IT IGNORES UNPLEASANT TRUTHS AT ITS PERIL.

How do you suggest that society can best protect itself from homosexuals?

 

[musicman]

Actually, now that I think about it more, your argument falls down on another level too. The statistic does not show that 1-3% of the population perpetrates 20-40% of child molestations, ALL it shows is that 20-40% of child molestations are perpetrated by people who have the same sexual orientation as 1-3% of the population. The difference between those two statements is as huge as the difference between these 2 statements:
1. 90% of violent crimes are committed by 50% of the population.
2. 90% of violent crimes are committed by 1% of the popultion who just happen to have the same genetic makeup as 50% of the population.

You're babbling, Horhay. Better think about it some more yet.

Worded any way you wish, doesn't that statistic INDICATE SOMETHING TO YOU???

 

[Annie]

While I may not be sure why, it seems that both Horhay and Missile Man have become quiet on the point that 'a few' commit crimes disproportionate to their numbers. Their victims unfortunately are children, which make it sort of difficult to argue that the tendency towards frequency should not get mixed up with the raw numbers of perps.

 

[musicman]

We are both intelligent adults here, when you talk about the facts that there is something disturbing about homosexuals, you are demonizing them.

Very good, Horhay - straight out of the PC handbook! Any statement which does not reflect liberal socialist dogma is - by definition - demonization.

Hillary would be SO proud...

How do you suggest that society can best protect itself from homosexuals?

It's interesting - the way you worded that. Actually, I believe that society must protect itself from behaviors which are demonstrably harmful to it. Homosexuality certainly qualifies. Society can stop by halting the legitimization - indeed, the GLORIFICATION - of this perversion.

Homosexuals are victims in this, too. I don't hate them.

 

[MissileMan]

While I may not be sure why, it seems that both Horhay and Missile Man have become quiet on the point that 'a few' commit crimes disproportionate to their numbers. Their victims unfortunately are children, which make it sort of difficult to argue that the tendency towards frequency should not get mixed up with the raw numbers of perps.

For the same reason you don't hold everyone in a specific group to blame for the actions of a few among their numbers. Let's take Catholic priests for example. There are a higher percentage of Catholic clergy molesting children than any of the other denominations. The high numbers alone suggest that Catholicism is dangerous to children. Can't you see how this information says something disturbing about Catholics?

 

[Annie]

For the same reason you don't hold everyone in a specific group to blame for the actions of a few among their numbers. Let's take Catholic priests for example. There are a higher percentage of Catholic clergy molesting children than any of the other denominations. The high numbers alone suggest that Catholicism is dangerous to children. Can't you see how this information says something disturbing about Catholics?

Have you heard any Catholics arguing to give the accused more access to children?

 

[GotZoom]

For the same reason you don't hold everyone in a specific group to blame for the actions of a few among their numbers. Let's take Catholic priests for example. There are a higher percentage of Catholic clergy molesting children than any of the other denominations. The high numbers alone suggest that Catholicism is dangerous to children. Can't you see how this information says something disturbing about Catholics?

Actually it would suggest that Priests are dangerous to children.

Maybe we need a poll. You have to leave your 8 year old son with a babysitter. Your choices of the babysitter are:

1. A homosexual
2. A straight male


Who would you pick?

 

[MissileMan]

Have you heard any Catholics arguing to give the accused more access to children?

No, but I also haven't heard anyone suggest that Catholics aren't fit to adopt children either.

 

[MissileMan]

Actually it would suggest that Priests are dangerous to children.

Maybe we need a poll. You have to leave your 8 year old son with a babysitter. Your choices of the babysitter are:

1. A homosexual
2. A straight male


Who would you pick?

Same question, except it's your 8 year-old daughter.

 

[Annie]

No, but I also haven't heard anyone suggest that Catholics aren't fit to adopt children either.

Ok, now you are just being prejudiced. There is a hell of a lot of difference between pedophile priests and Catholics in general. Fuck you.

 

[GotZoom]

Same question, except it's your 8 year-old daughter.

Easy. My son - straight male. My daughter - Homosexual.

As a responsible parent, I would be incredibly uncomfortable with either one, but if I had to make a choice, there you go.

It kind of falls into that question, Why are nearly all babysitters female?

Most parents don't trust their little boys/girls with males.