CHILD MOLESTATION & THE GAY AGENDA - PART 1

by Perry 64 Replies latest members adult

• 

  Southland

  Perry,

  I'm somewhat uncomfortable that I can't determine your motives (and passion) on this posting. I think it's not going out on a limb to say that 99.5% of us here condemn child molestation in all shapes and forms, and have complete sympathy for the poor children. Just because we do not iterate it over and over repeatedly on the many different posts on here does not mean we have lost sight of it.

  I know I have limited time to look/post here and am unable to participate as fully as I would like. I have to make a living, keep a household running, etc. Such is my challenge. It's too tiring to try to disprove anything out there that I don't agree with. So, I choose my battles wisely. Until I know better what your motives are, I'm not sure I want to spend energy on this one.

  This all being said, I think it's fair enough to say that the majority of people and organizations steer clear of NAMBLA, KKK, and any of the other fringe groups, and try to avoid having them linked to them in any way. The fact that a few slip through doesn't warrant a battle cry for me. I don't feel that it's as big of a problem that you are making it out to be. That's my belief. You, of course, have the right to your beliefs.

  Take care.
• 

  Crazy151drinker

  b. all gay functions and parades banned child molesters

  How would you propose that they do this? Should the signup sheets ask if they are molesters? Would you propose the same thing for all straight functions and parades?? Maybe you ment to say "all gay functions and parades banned vocal supporters of child molestation...ie...NAMBLA"

  Either way, you are still making the claim that all gays are supportive of child molestation which is just plain wrong.
• 

  Perry

  Joelbear,

  This guy presented a lot of quotes, studies, and facts that indicate that child molestation IS accepted more readily in some gay circles ie. articles in gay publicatiions, outspoken gay journalists and leaders, and tolerance in some gay functions. Those are the allegations that disturb me. So far no one disproved any of the quotes and allegations.

  To whatever degree that are true....it is an outrage.

  Alot of people have an agenda to promote atheism. It's easy to see a bias. However, it would be unwise to attack the mesenger rather than the message. That is tantamount to credulity. The same applies in this case in my opinion. Of course, you are welcome to yours and I appreciate your comments.
• 

  Perry

  Southland,

  I mostly agree with your post about most steering clear of destructive groups like KKK and NAMBLA. However, when a group, newspaper, respected leader etc.; aligns itself with one of these, there should be a public outcry. Why should a group dedicated to the diminishment of one's groups rights, be more or less reprehensible than another one?

  Evidently for some, the gays rights agenda is looked at more worthily than the rights of parents and children. You know full well that we are not talking about "all gay's" being supportative of child molestation. It is only the policies of some leaders that are being scrutinized here. And, it appears to be more than a lone nut case. That alone should cause our sense of right and wrong to be disturbed and ruffle our civic feathers.

  Please tell a child who hase been molested that "it doesn't warrant a battle cry".

  Edited by - Perry on 3 August 2002 8:57:16
• 

  Perry

  How would you propose that they do this? Should the signup sheets ask if they are molesters? Would you propose the same thing for all straight functions and parades??

  151,

  That sounds like a strawman. You know what we are talking about here. It is the openess of the molesters that is tolerated in the examples cited in the paper than is disgusting. You know better than to make a ridiculous statement like that.

  I think that straight functions and parades should ban open molesters as well....I think it's safe to say that they would get a real unwelcome there. Can you imagine the leading web-site for heterosexual dating, advertising a molester organization? I didn't think so. Why does the leading gay web-site do that apparently without impunity from its traffickers? Check out the Queer Resource Directory for yourself at www.qrd.org . If by some miracle you could provide an example of a heterosexual counterpart, I'd be equally happy to condemn them as well.

  It's really a very simple issue. I believe there are people who are gay+molester, bi-sexual+molester, and hetero+molester. I don't see evidence of hetero+molesters organizing and gaining ground like the other two. A molester is a molester regardless of their sexual orientation.

  If we say that one group is disgusting, then that disgust should equally apply to the other two. Some seem to get ruffled that gays get any scrutiny at all. When unwarranted, I agree. When it's substatianted, as in the paper's quotes from some gay leaders, newspapers, web-sites etc.; then it's a public duty to look at it whether you like it or not. .

  You're wrong. I never said anything about "all gays". You are allowing your bias to override your civic and moral responsibility to protect children.

  Edited by - Perry on 3 August 2002 9:31:44

  Edited by - Perry on 3 August 2002 10:29:10