Find Your Valentine
Slog
News & ArtsTuesday, May 19, 2009
Religion Youth Pastor Watch
Posted by Dan Savage on Tue, May 19, 2009 at 9:23 AM
A teacher, coach, mentor and youth group leader is behind bars, charged with 14 felony counts of sexually abusing a minor. Police arrested 25-year-old Jenson Eugene Seifert on Friday at Birchwood Christian School.... According to police Seifert used his role as a teacher and mentor to gain the trust of children.
"The report was that a child had disclosed that a youth pastor at the school had sexually molested him," said Sgt. Cindi Stanton with the Anchorage Police Department.
Friday police headed to Birchwood Christian School and the Crossing Church where Seifert works. He was taken in for questioning and police say he later admitted abusing the 14-year-old boy on several occasions.... Seifert he broke down, saying, "... I just want to help fix what I did wrong," eventually admitting, "there were several times when he touched the victim and ‘did what he did,'" according to court documents.
5
Tragic may he never see the light of day again. At least there's some visible progress in the reporting of child molesting cases of which the majority are grown adult males abusing underage boys like this case. Although it must be difficult to recognize this I applaud the small steps at honest reporting.
7
you got an actual statistic on that Loveschild or are you once again just pulling something out of your own ass to fit your own bigoted agenda?
8
5, I know it's not one of your strong points, (You'd rather just make stuff up) but do you ever get your facts right?
10
From the American Psychological Association:
But Lovechild, stay with your out of touch with reality world view.
CAN LESBIANS AND GAY MEN BE GOOD PARENTS?
Yes. Studies comparing groups of children raised by homosexual and by heterosexual parents find no developmental differences between the two groups of children in their intelligence, psychological adjustment, social adjustment, popularity with friends, development of social sex role identity or development of sexual orientation.
Another stereotype about homosexuality is the mistaken belief that gay men have more of a tendency than heterosexual men to sexually molest children. There is no evidence indicating that homosexuals are more likely than heterosexuals to molest children.
http://www.soulforce.org/article/643
But Lovechild, stay with your out of touch with reality world view.
12
Homosexuality and pedophilia are entirely different things. Homosexuals are not attracted to children, regardless of gender. Pedophiles are not attracted to grown people, regardless of gender.
I do not see what about this is so hard to keep, you'll excuse the expression, straight.
I do not see what about this is so hard to keep, you'll excuse the expression, straight.
16
13, Is World Net Daily, a wacko right wing website the best you can do? We're talking about a website that claims that Obama isn't a US citizen. Sorry, but that website is not a credible source.
17
Even if we were to accept Loveschild source (which in no way would I consider a 7 year old article by a right wing website to be credible) I bet dollars to donuts that every single one of those cases of homosexual abuse, the abuser identified to the world as a Heterosexual.
20
@10
Is Soulforce, a wacko left wing homosexual propoganda website, the best you can do? Sorry, but that website is not a credible source.
Is Soulforce, a wacko left wing homosexual propoganda website, the best you can do? Sorry, but that website is not a credible source.
21
20, Here is another link directly to the AMA:
http://www.apa.org/topics/sorientation.h…
Here's another website:
http://www.apa.org/topics/sorientation.h…
Here's another website:
Myth: When the sexual abuse victim is male, male homosexuals are the sex offenders.
Fact: Heterosexual men, who do not find sex with other men satisfactory, perpetrate most child sexual abuse. Many child molesters, even though they are heterosexual, abuse both boys and girls.
http://ezinearticles.com/?Common-Myths-A…
22
Bravely going where others won't...
LC, all that article even sets out to prove is that boys are more often the target of sexual abuse than girls. It fails on the count, conceding midway that all they were able to prove was that offenders who molest boys are likely to have more victims than offenders who molest girls ("'The rate of homosexual versus heterosexual child sexual abuse is staggering,' said Reisman, who was the principal investigator for an $800,000 Justice Department grant studying child pornography and violence. 'Abel’s data of 150.2 boys abused per male homosexual offender finds no equal (yet) in heterosexual violations of 19.8 girls.'" ... "'According to data from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), this claim is false,' he told WND by e-mail. 'The gay and lesbian community calls into question any dubious research which flies in the face of our own experience.' And Gary Schoener, a clinical psychologist who has been diagnosing and treating clergy abuse for 28 years, told Salon.com, 'There are far more heterosexual cases than homosexual.' In terms of sheer numbers, that may be true. But in terms of numbers of children abused per offender, homosexuals abuse with far greater frequency; and boys, research shows, are the much-preferred target." ). Pedophilia, regardless of which gender it is perpetrated against and the gender of the offender, is not equivalent with homosexuality or heterosexuality. I know you'll scoff at this, but it's worth a try. Get on some file sharing service and search for "sex." Now, notice all the titles that contain references to underage girls. Now try that with "gay" and note the significant decrease in results referring to underage boys.
One more time class: healthy homosexuals and heterosexuals prefer adults. Pedophiles molest children. There is nothing heterosexual about a man who abuses a young girl or a woman who abuses a young boy, and there is nothing homosexual about same-sex molestation.
More...
LC, all that article even sets out to prove is that boys are more often the target of sexual abuse than girls. It fails on the count, conceding midway that all they were able to prove was that offenders who molest boys are likely to have more victims than offenders who molest girls ("'The rate of homosexual versus heterosexual child sexual abuse is staggering,' said Reisman, who was the principal investigator for an $800,000 Justice Department grant studying child pornography and violence. 'Abel’s data of 150.2 boys abused per male homosexual offender finds no equal (yet) in heterosexual violations of 19.8 girls.'" ... "'According to data from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), this claim is false,' he told WND by e-mail. 'The gay and lesbian community calls into question any dubious research which flies in the face of our own experience.' And Gary Schoener, a clinical psychologist who has been diagnosing and treating clergy abuse for 28 years, told Salon.com, 'There are far more heterosexual cases than homosexual.' In terms of sheer numbers, that may be true. But in terms of numbers of children abused per offender, homosexuals abuse with far greater frequency; and boys, research shows, are the much-preferred target." ). Pedophilia, regardless of which gender it is perpetrated against and the gender of the offender, is not equivalent with homosexuality or heterosexuality. I know you'll scoff at this, but it's worth a try. Get on some file sharing service and search for "sex." Now, notice all the titles that contain references to underage girls. Now try that with "gay" and note the significant decrease in results referring to underage boys.
One more time class: healthy homosexuals and heterosexuals prefer adults. Pedophiles molest children. There is nothing heterosexual about a man who abuses a young girl or a woman who abuses a young boy, and there is nothing homosexual about same-sex molestation.
25
@18 and @24
Uh gross. Yeah, prepubescent BOY of 14 is a CHILD. 14 year old boys are shorter and have less hair than I do! (I am a petite woman).
On average boys start puberty at age 11 are just starting to get body hair at age 14 and their adult voice is not attained until age 15. Even young male adults (aged 18-21) are not done growing!!
What actions are you trying to justify?
Uh gross. Yeah, prepubescent BOY of 14 is a CHILD. 14 year old boys are shorter and have less hair than I do! (I am a petite woman).
On average boys start puberty at age 11 are just starting to get body hair at age 14 and their adult voice is not attained until age 15. Even young male adults (aged 18-21) are not done growing!!
What actions are you trying to justify?
26
First of all, 24, my post had nothing to do with the story at hand, except that it's on the same topic and board. I didn't specifically note the circumstances of the case featured, simply responded to an article posted in the comments.
Second, yes, 14 years old is a child. If you don't believe me, go talk to a 14 year old. If you ARE a 14 year old, you'll realize later in life that all those "grown-up" decisions you were making now were pretty darn childish.
Second, yes, 14 years old is a child. If you don't believe me, go talk to a 14 year old. If you ARE a 14 year old, you'll realize later in life that all those "grown-up" decisions you were making now were pretty darn childish.
27
Let's stop splitting hairs between "children" and "teenagers," or whatever you intend by saying that a 14-year-old isn't a child. A 14-year-old is too young legally to drink, drive a car, join the military, enter a contractual agreement, marry, etc., etc., etc., and, yeah, have even consentual (sp) sex with an adult, therefore for the purposes of this thread, a child.
28
Quoting WorldNutDaily as a source and expecting people not to mock you mercilessly is the funniest damned thing I've seen all day. That's like quoting the Weekly World News.
29
it would be nice to know also the ratio of incest from a father to daughter/son mother to daughter/son brother to sister and vv. and incest is another hateful crime. and yes 14 is still a child, i do not know any mechanism of defence when some body weighting double your weight , gags you and then molests/rapes you, especially if this person is some one you trust, believe me you are POWERLESS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
30
29
" i do not know any mechanism of defence when some body weighting double your weight , gags you and then molests/rapes you,"
Did you even read the story?
The 14-year-old told her, "... that Seifert had touched him in a private area during an overnight youth trip to Alyeska ..."
" i do not know any mechanism of defence when some body weighting double your weight , gags you and then molests/rapes you,"
Did you even read the story?
The 14-year-old told her, "... that Seifert had touched him in a private area during an overnight youth trip to Alyeska ..."
31
Why is this a 'Youth Pastor Watch'?
This creep is a teacher:
"According to police Seifert used his role as a teacher and mentor to gain the trust of children,..."
This creep is a teacher:
"According to police Seifert used his role as a teacher and mentor to gain the trust of children,..."
35
32, 33, 34, Nobody is claiming that there aren't men who molest boys. Statistically speaking though, it's far more common for heterosexuals to do it.
37
35
But what does Dan want us to take from this?
He posted it.
What are we to conclude from the actions of these homosexual men in positions of trust abusing that trust about the suitability of homosexuals to function as foster parents, Scout Masters, coaches or other positions where they would deal with teenagers and young men?
But what does Dan want us to take from this?
He posted it.
What are we to conclude from the actions of these homosexual men in positions of trust abusing that trust about the suitability of homosexuals to function as foster parents, Scout Masters, coaches or other positions where they would deal with teenagers and young men?
38
37, If you haven't understood the point, after it's already been explained over, and over, and over, you're not gonna get it now.
39
In actuality and statistically speaking it is far more likely for PEDOPHILES to do it. Not heterosexual men, not homosexual men, but people who are interested in children and only children. Once a child goes beyond looking like a child they move on to a younger victim. Gay men prefer GAY MEN, fully grown gay men. Straight men prefer straight woman, fully grown straight woman.
Get it through your head. There is quite an obvious distinction.
Get it through your head. There is quite an obvious distinction.
40
39
Some of these 'children' in the links are 16 and 17.
Is the Mayor of Portland a heterosexual pedophile because he made out with a 17 year old 'child'?
Some of these 'children' in the links are 16 and 17.
Is the Mayor of Portland a heterosexual pedophile because he made out with a 17 year old 'child'?
41
@38
Come on Rob,
explain it one more time-
We know it has something to do with kosher lunchroom food but the details are hazy...
Come on Rob,
explain it one more time-
We know it has something to do with kosher lunchroom food but the details are hazy...
42
@40 Dude, make up your mind on what you want to argue. Either your argument is that Gay men are more likely to abuse CHILDREN sexually, or your argument is that above a certain age they are no longer children and are able to consent. So which is it??? Because I will argue against either one.
And I am sure that we can find just as many links to stories about PEDOPHILES sexually abusing children of the opposite sex as well.
And I am sure that we can find just as many links to stories about PEDOPHILES sexually abusing children of the opposite sex as well.
43
PS: In case you didn't catch that ... I stick to my guns ... PEDOPHILES are of an entirely different sexual stripe than homosexuals or heterosexuals. They are not one or the other. They prefer children. Not adults.
44
Thanks for the great links 32 33 34 and 36.
I'll make sure to share them with people who are more concerned about child molestation and receptive to learn the truth than those here.
People here are so fixated in defending their 'cause' that they will deny this reality even with all the tragic news links you provided, heck, they would deny it even if the victims came up to them and told them so. They would probably call the victim a bigot for daring to come forth to tell the story.
Whoever you've been wiser than me by remaining anonymous. You knew these people here better than I did.
I'll make sure to share them with people who are more concerned about child molestation and receptive to learn the truth than those here.
People here are so fixated in defending their 'cause' that they will deny this reality even with all the tragic news links you provided, heck, they would deny it even if the victims came up to them and told them so. They would probably call the victim a bigot for daring to come forth to tell the story.
Whoever you've been wiser than me by remaining anonymous. You knew these people here better than I did.
45
Loveschild, please, stop this. No child deserves to be abused, the people who attack them are sick. But, that doesn't remove your responsibility to become educated on the subject of child molestation.
It seems appropriate to repost this with it's link
The Work of Dr. A. Nicholas Groth
A. Nicholas Groth is a pioneer in the scientific study of sexual offenders against women and children, who has treated over 3000 child molesters over the course of two decades.12 A former director of the Sex Offender Program at the Connecticut Department of Corrections, Groth is the author of Men Who Rape: Psychology of the Offender,13 a work widely regarded as a classic textbook on the psychology of sexual violence. In his work, Groth has found that approximately one‑third of all cases of child molestation involve an underage boy and an adult male14, a statistic which has been used incessantly by certain conservative activist groups in an effort to prove that homosexuals are disproportionately responsible for acts of child molestation. However, Groth explicitly states that it is a myth that men who molest boys are homosexual.
According to Groth, child molesters can be divided into two types: “fixated” and “regressed.” The fixated offender is attracted primarily to children and has little or no interest in adult relationships; such a person is known in clinical terms as a “pedophile.” The regressed offender is interested in and capable of adult sexual relationships; however, this person may on occasion regress to sexual encounters with children, often as a result of difficulties and frustration in his adult relationships.15
Groth writes that the fixated offender, or pedophile, tends to select boys more often than girls, but for reasons having nothing to do with homosexuality:
In general, fixated child molesters are drawn to children sexually in that they identify with the child and appear in some ways to want to remain children themselves. It is for this reason that the trend for fixated offenders is to target boys as victims. . . . They see the boy as a projected representation of themselves. They feel themselves to be more child than adult – more boys than men – and therefore find themselves more comfortable (especially sexually) in the company of children. . . .16
Groth stresses that “these same individuals are uninterested in adult homosexual relationships. In fact, they frequently express a strong sexual aversion to adult males, reporting that what they find attractive about the immature boy are his feminine features and the absence of secondary sexual characteristics such as body hair and muscles.”17 The second type of offender, the regressed offender, is predominantly heterosexual. However, he may temporarily turn to boys or girls as a result of complications in his adult relations.18 Although regressed offenders are more likely to choose girls than boys as victims, writes Groth, what attracts the regressed male offender to boys are the feminine characteristics of pre‑ pubescents. Groth found no cases of boy molestation in which the offender had an adult homosexual orientation. Concludes Groth,
Homosexuality and homosexual pedophilia are not synonymous. In fact, it may be that these two orientations are mutually exclusive, the reason being that the homosexual male is sexually attracted to masculine qualities whereas the heterosexual male is sexually attracted to feminine characteristics, and the sexually immature child’s qualities are more feminine than masculine. . . . The child offender who is attracted to and engaged in adult sexual relationships is heterosexual. It appears, therefore, that the adult heterosexual male constitutes a greater sexual risk to underage children than does the adult homosexual male.19
http://www.internationalorder.org/scanda…
More...
It seems appropriate to repost this with it's link
The Work of Dr. A. Nicholas Groth
A. Nicholas Groth is a pioneer in the scientific study of sexual offenders against women and children, who has treated over 3000 child molesters over the course of two decades.12 A former director of the Sex Offender Program at the Connecticut Department of Corrections, Groth is the author of Men Who Rape: Psychology of the Offender,13 a work widely regarded as a classic textbook on the psychology of sexual violence. In his work, Groth has found that approximately one‑third of all cases of child molestation involve an underage boy and an adult male14, a statistic which has been used incessantly by certain conservative activist groups in an effort to prove that homosexuals are disproportionately responsible for acts of child molestation. However, Groth explicitly states that it is a myth that men who molest boys are homosexual.
According to Groth, child molesters can be divided into two types: “fixated” and “regressed.” The fixated offender is attracted primarily to children and has little or no interest in adult relationships; such a person is known in clinical terms as a “pedophile.” The regressed offender is interested in and capable of adult sexual relationships; however, this person may on occasion regress to sexual encounters with children, often as a result of difficulties and frustration in his adult relationships.15
Groth writes that the fixated offender, or pedophile, tends to select boys more often than girls, but for reasons having nothing to do with homosexuality:
In general, fixated child molesters are drawn to children sexually in that they identify with the child and appear in some ways to want to remain children themselves. It is for this reason that the trend for fixated offenders is to target boys as victims. . . . They see the boy as a projected representation of themselves. They feel themselves to be more child than adult – more boys than men – and therefore find themselves more comfortable (especially sexually) in the company of children. . . .16
Groth stresses that “these same individuals are uninterested in adult homosexual relationships. In fact, they frequently express a strong sexual aversion to adult males, reporting that what they find attractive about the immature boy are his feminine features and the absence of secondary sexual characteristics such as body hair and muscles.”17 The second type of offender, the regressed offender, is predominantly heterosexual. However, he may temporarily turn to boys or girls as a result of complications in his adult relations.18 Although regressed offenders are more likely to choose girls than boys as victims, writes Groth, what attracts the regressed male offender to boys are the feminine characteristics of pre‑ pubescents. Groth found no cases of boy molestation in which the offender had an adult homosexual orientation. Concludes Groth,
Homosexuality and homosexual pedophilia are not synonymous. In fact, it may be that these two orientations are mutually exclusive, the reason being that the homosexual male is sexually attracted to masculine qualities whereas the heterosexual male is sexually attracted to feminine characteristics, and the sexually immature child’s qualities are more feminine than masculine. . . . The child offender who is attracted to and engaged in adult sexual relationships is heterosexual. It appears, therefore, that the adult heterosexual male constitutes a greater sexual risk to underage children than does the adult homosexual male.19
http://www.internationalorder.org/scanda…
46
Loveschild, this important. You're bearing false witness here. So, read it again.
According to Groth, child molesters can be divided into two types: “fixated” and “regressed.” The fixated offender is attracted primarily to children and has little or no interest in adult relationships; such a person is known in clinical terms as a “pedophile.” The regressed offender is interested in and capable of adult sexual relationships; however, this person may on occasion regress to sexual encounters with children, often as a result of difficulties and frustration in his adult relationships.15
Groth writes that the fixated offender, or pedophile, tends to select boys more often than girls, but for reasons having nothing to do with homosexuality:
In general, fixated child molesters are drawn to children sexually in that they identify with the child and appear in some ways to want to remain children themselves. It is for this reason that the trend for fixated offenders is to target boys as victims. . . . They see the boy as a projected representation of themselves. They feel themselves to be more child than adult – more boys than men – and therefore find themselves more comfortable (especially sexually) in the company of children. . . .16
According to Groth, child molesters can be divided into two types: “fixated” and “regressed.” The fixated offender is attracted primarily to children and has little or no interest in adult relationships; such a person is known in clinical terms as a “pedophile.” The regressed offender is interested in and capable of adult sexual relationships; however, this person may on occasion regress to sexual encounters with children, often as a result of difficulties and frustration in his adult relationships.15
Groth writes that the fixated offender, or pedophile, tends to select boys more often than girls, but for reasons having nothing to do with homosexuality:
In general, fixated child molesters are drawn to children sexually in that they identify with the child and appear in some ways to want to remain children themselves. It is for this reason that the trend for fixated offenders is to target boys as victims. . . . They see the boy as a projected representation of themselves. They feel themselves to be more child than adult – more boys than men – and therefore find themselves more comfortable (especially sexually) in the company of children. . . .16
47
Loveschild, are you understanding these are two separate issues?
Homosexuality and homosexual pedophilia are not synonymous. In fact, it may be that these two orientations are mutually exclusive, the reason being that the homosexual male is sexually attracted to masculine qualities whereas the heterosexual male is sexually attracted to feminine characteristics, and the sexually immature child’s qualities are more feminine than masculine. . . . The child offender who is attracted to and engaged in adult sexual relationships is heterosexual. It appears, therefore, that the adult heterosexual male constitutes a greater sexual risk to underage children than does the adult homosexual male.19
http://www.internationalorder.org/scanda…
Homosexuality and homosexual pedophilia are not synonymous. In fact, it may be that these two orientations are mutually exclusive, the reason being that the homosexual male is sexually attracted to masculine qualities whereas the heterosexual male is sexually attracted to feminine characteristics, and the sexually immature child’s qualities are more feminine than masculine. . . . The child offender who is attracted to and engaged in adult sexual relationships is heterosexual. It appears, therefore, that the adult heterosexual male constitutes a greater sexual risk to underage children than does the adult homosexual male.19
http://www.internationalorder.org/scanda…
48
44
The open-minded 'liberals' on slog don't really deal with opinions different from their own very gracefully.
I think we all first come here planning to play it strait but soon learn better.
Anyone who disagrees with the liberal orthodoxy is a 'troll'.
I admire your courage and persistance in the face of nauseating incivility.
Hang in there.
The open-minded 'liberals' on slog don't really deal with opinions different from their own very gracefully.
I think we all first come here planning to play it strait but soon learn better.
Anyone who disagrees with the liberal orthodoxy is a 'troll'.
I admire your courage and persistance in the face of nauseating incivility.
Hang in there.
49
47
Is the Mayor of Portland a homosexual pedophile?
He preyed on a 17 year old.
Dan did not find anything wrong with that.
Is the Mayor of Portland a homosexual pedophile?
He preyed on a 17 year old.
Dan did not find anything wrong with that.
50
48 Thanks. It's really sad when you think about it. I came here originally seeking a better understanding of the other side but all I have been receiving is name calling as you have alluded too. Please forgive me if I ever did the same to you in the hopes of trying to become more amicable with others here.
51
Hahaha
Loveschild. Shutting off your ears when someone gives you clear facts to the contrary of statements that you make in no way shows that are you doing anything but being insulting. If you really want to understand the "other side" as you put then you would ask honest questions about peoples' opinions and why they felt that way, etc. instead of just slinging insults and telling everyone that they are wrong. How do you expect to learn anything or open up any dialogue when you open with speech that you know the "other side" is going to find offensive? Don't kid yourself.
Loveschild. Shutting off your ears when someone gives you clear facts to the contrary of statements that you make in no way shows that are you doing anything but being insulting. If you really want to understand the "other side" as you put then you would ask honest questions about peoples' opinions and why they felt that way, etc. instead of just slinging insults and telling everyone that they are wrong. How do you expect to learn anything or open up any dialogue when you open with speech that you know the "other side" is going to find offensive? Don't kid yourself.
52
@50 as a PS side note: in all of this understanding that you are trying to gain of the "other side" did you read any of what Kim in Portland posted? Or is this another of those "close your mind to anything that disagrees with you" situations?
53
47 It's really sad that even with the links provided (recent sad incidents) you're still unable to admit what has been presented here. I'm sure if 36 wanted to he/she could find ten more horrendous news like the ones he provided. Yet you would still say that people like him and me are 'bearing false witness here', how? by simply providing the links to legitimate news sources (no bias) that refute what others here like to say as the gospel truth? You have cited politically correct opinionated research, 36 has cited reality (news), the vast majority of them are committed by grown men against boys. 36 nor I take pleasure in this (I do not want this ever to happen, no where ) but trying to brush it off so that we don't hurt the feelings of a group of adults would be giving tacit approval to this sort of crime. And to me the welfare of children come first before the welfare of any adult, be that adult straight or of an alternative proclivity . Because I know that the safety I want for those kids is the same I want for mine. I want them to be able to enjoy their childhood, their early pre teen years without having to worry about the predator next door. That's the worst nightmare of any parent, that due to political correctness their child ends up in the perverted hands of the men in 36's links. That's why I care about this issue. How am I the one who's wrong on this issue when you are the one who accepts the labeling of pedophilia (just as you do with homosexuality) as an "orientations", how is that type of reasoning beneficial for our society? what do we gain with legitimizing the perversity of these people by calling it an 'orientation'? Tragic incidents likes the ones above that's what.
How can you call into question my adherence to a basic tenet of Christianity, especially when I'm telling the truth? it makes no sense.
More...
How can you call into question my adherence to a basic tenet of Christianity, especially when I'm telling the truth? it makes no sense.
54
52 I have respect for people that I disagree with when they are able to admit the reality that's presented to them, did you read my first comment? I gave Mr Savage some props for being upfront and presenting this story, I acknowledge that it must have been somewhat uncomfortable for him but it showed that he cared more about the safety of children more than adult sexual activities. When someone here has done something right regardless of what their ideology is I have gone out of my way to let them know that I think so.
I always read Kim's links even if I don't agree with the conclusions in them. She and you as most here though are sadly to quick to discard what's presented from the other side as something bias or below you. That's fine, I know that people like anonymous 36 and me are the minority here and that we are looked inferiorly by your sophisticated arrogant intellects. Thankfully by the grace of our Creator, outside this blog there's a real world were your arrogance is the one in the minority. Even so I would never view facts that you would present to me as inferior, facts and not opinions cannot be discarded.
55
@53 ... Ummm, who's defending Pedophiles? No one. We all agree that Pedophiles should be punished.
What people are doing is trying help you gain this knowledge that you are trying to seek and helping you to see that Homosexuality is not PEDOPHILIA. That pedophiles are of a specific sexual orientation and that yes it is not acceptable. But you do acknowledge that extreme difference between GROWN MEN and LITTLE BOYS right? I mean, you don't see them as the same thing right? So you can see how a man being attracted to another grown man is not the same thing a sick adult being attracted to a little boy. I mean you do see that right?
We all agree that Pedophiles are harmful. They also tend to hide out in your church on a fairly regular basis, so are you going to stop taking your children there now?
What people are doing is trying help you gain this knowledge that you are trying to seek and helping you to see that Homosexuality is not PEDOPHILIA. That pedophiles are of a specific sexual orientation and that yes it is not acceptable. But you do acknowledge that extreme difference between GROWN MEN and LITTLE BOYS right? I mean, you don't see them as the same thing right? So you can see how a man being attracted to another grown man is not the same thing a sick adult being attracted to a little boy. I mean you do see that right?
We all agree that Pedophiles are harmful. They also tend to hide out in your church on a fairly regular basis, so are you going to stop taking your children there now?
56
@54 Why would this story be difficult for Dan to post?
See that is where you have a problem. You cannot seem to see the difference between being attracted to ADULT MEN and being attracted to LITTLE BOYS.
I am a woman. I am very attracted to ADULT MEN I would never be attracted to LITTLE BOYS.
The problem that people are having here with seeing your view is not that you are ant-pedophile, we are all in agreement there. The problem is that you cannot seem to see the difference between ADULT MEN and LITTLE BOYS.
See that is where you have a problem. You cannot seem to see the difference between being attracted to ADULT MEN and being attracted to LITTLE BOYS.
I am a woman. I am very attracted to ADULT MEN I would never be attracted to LITTLE BOYS.
The problem that people are having here with seeing your view is not that you are ant-pedophile, we are all in agreement there. The problem is that you cannot seem to see the difference between ADULT MEN and LITTLE BOYS.
57
53,
I never said that there were not monsters, every ethnic group, every religious group, every country, every nationality, and every sexual orientation has monsters. No group exists, that I know of, can claim they are without a single case of child molestation. I don't deny the links provided by 36. What I dislike is your blanket condemnation, and that is how I and many others read your post, that link homosexuality with pedophila. For every post you find about a homosexual molester, you will find a significantly larger number of heterosexual molesters, because heterosexuals outnumber homosexuals.
"How am I the one who's wrong on this issue when you are the one who accepts the labeling of pedophilia (just as you do with homosexuality) as an "orientations", how is that type of reasoning beneficial for our society? what do we gain with legitimizing the perversity of these people by calling it an 'orientation'?"
Who the heck said anything about legitimizing pedophilia, I didn't. I pointed out that homosexuality and pedophilia are two different things. I don't know anyone who is for legitimizing pedophilia, I know of some who want to claim that (you included) homosexuals want to legitimize pedophilia.
I never said that there were not monsters, every ethnic group, every religious group, every country, every nationality, and every sexual orientation has monsters. No group exists, that I know of, can claim they are without a single case of child molestation. I don't deny the links provided by 36. What I dislike is your blanket condemnation, and that is how I and many others read your post, that link homosexuality with pedophila. For every post you find about a homosexual molester, you will find a significantly larger number of heterosexual molesters, because heterosexuals outnumber homosexuals.
"How am I the one who's wrong on this issue when you are the one who accepts the labeling of pedophilia (just as you do with homosexuality) as an "orientations", how is that type of reasoning beneficial for our society? what do we gain with legitimizing the perversity of these people by calling it an 'orientation'?"
Who the heck said anything about legitimizing pedophilia, I didn't. I pointed out that homosexuality and pedophilia are two different things. I don't know anyone who is for legitimizing pedophilia, I know of some who want to claim that (you included) homosexuals want to legitimize pedophilia.
58
54,
You can take issues with the source of my information, and you can claim it is biased. I try to avoid sources that are known for their biases. But, you can't discount my life.
My childhood, was one that included verbal abuse, physical violence, and sexual molestation. All done by heterosexuals, by actual blood relatives and proclaimed Christians.
You can take issues with the source of my information, and you can claim it is biased. I try to avoid sources that are known for their biases. But, you can't discount my life.
My childhood, was one that included verbal abuse, physical violence, and sexual molestation. All done by heterosexuals, by actual blood relatives and proclaimed Christians.
59
Yes, Take it all in , I know there are some honest men that regardless their proclivities would refrain from harming a child. But that doesn't take from the vast number of incidents that go without reporting in here of men who molest boys. I'm glad to know that someone like you whom I disagree with thinks that pedophiles should be punished. There's no place in our society for such behavior. It shows that there's is goodness here that I can agree with even if I do not with other views that are expressed in this blog .
61
58
Kim, I am sorry for the trials you had to endure. The person I love dearest had the same childhood experiences and it is a lifelong burden no one should have to bear.
I disagree with you on most things but I have nothing but respect for your efforts to follow the example of Christ, as you see it.
Kim, I am sorry for the trials you had to endure. The person I love dearest had the same childhood experiences and it is a lifelong burden no one should have to bear.
I disagree with you on most things but I have nothing but respect for your efforts to follow the example of Christ, as you see it.
62
The point is not that homosexuals are pedophiles but that some homosexual men will abuse a position of trust to exploit young men they deal with just like some heterosexual men may exploit teenage girls and some church youth workers may exploit their position.
It would be wrong to conclude from the linked articles about homosexual teachers abusing teenage boys that all homosexual teachers would do the same and can not be trusted.
Just like it IS WRONG to draw general conclusions about youth pastors or religion based on the tales Dan posts here, outrageous as they are.
It would be wrong to conclude from the linked articles about homosexual teachers abusing teenage boys that all homosexual teachers would do the same and can not be trusted.
Just like it IS WRONG to draw general conclusions about youth pastors or religion based on the tales Dan posts here, outrageous as they are.
63
@59 The fact of the matter is that if you cannot see the difference between GROWN MEN and LITTLE BOYS then there is no sense in taking this argument further.
We agree that CHILDREN are off limits and that pedophiles are monsters. PEDOPHILES.
The next step in this process is for you to see that GROWN MEN and LITTLE BOYS are different. And that just because a PEDOPHILE likes LITTLE BOYS does not somehow mean that homosexuals like LITTLE BOYS.
I will disagree with a man who CLAIMS to be a homosexual and then turns around a diddles little boys just as much as I disagree with a person who CLAIMS to be heterosexual turning around diddling little boys or girls. I disagree with child sexual abuse no matter how you want to spin. The fact of the matter is that THESE particular people, no matter what they claim, do not have a normal sex life. Their preference is children, not adults, and that has nothing to do with the sexual orientation of responsible adults.
We agree that CHILDREN are off limits and that pedophiles are monsters. PEDOPHILES.
The next step in this process is for you to see that GROWN MEN and LITTLE BOYS are different. And that just because a PEDOPHILE likes LITTLE BOYS does not somehow mean that homosexuals like LITTLE BOYS.
I will disagree with a man who CLAIMS to be a homosexual and then turns around a diddles little boys just as much as I disagree with a person who CLAIMS to be heterosexual turning around diddling little boys or girls. I disagree with child sexual abuse no matter how you want to spin. The fact of the matter is that THESE particular people, no matter what they claim, do not have a normal sex life. Their preference is children, not adults, and that has nothing to do with the sexual orientation of responsible adults.
64
Oh now there goes the person with love in their name spouting on about gays again. Honey your pseudo dignified manner cannot hide the fact that you are a bigot. Really, using crimes against children to attack gays. You should be ashamed!
65
Loveschild, if you are concerned about children, maybe you should face the facts? From a state that voted down gay marriage:
Oh right, it's racist for me post facts and statistics, yet it's okay for you to make up crap? As I said earlier, your community's metaphorical house is burning down. Your children are screaming for help, but where are you? Down the street picketing the gay couples house, trying to keep them from getting married.
When are you going to face the facts, and do something of value for your community?
Child abuse and neglect cases disproportionately involve children of color, particularly African American/Black children, both in the Bay Area and statewide.
http://www.kidsdata.org/topictrends.jsp?…
Oh right, it's racist for me post facts and statistics, yet it's okay for you to make up crap? As I said earlier, your community's metaphorical house is burning down. Your children are screaming for help, but where are you? Down the street picketing the gay couples house, trying to keep them from getting married.
When are you going to face the facts, and do something of value for your community?
66
Maybe Blacks need to Act Up to throw blame and responsibility for their problems on someone else's shoulders?
67
CDC "Statistics" for Rob
HIV Incidence Estimate
Incidence is the number of new HIV infections that occur during a given year.
In 2008, CDC estimated that approximately 56,300 people were newly infected with HIV in 20061 (the most recent year that data are available). Over half (53%) of these new infections occurred in gay and bisexual men.
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/surveillan…
HIV Incidence Estimate
Incidence is the number of new HIV infections that occur during a given year.
In 2008, CDC estimated that approximately 56,300 people were newly infected with HIV in 20061 (the most recent year that data are available). Over half (53%) of these new infections occurred in gay and bisexual men.
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/surveillan…
70
67, I noticed you edited the next sentence from your copy and paste:
Why the selective editing?
HIV Incidence Estimate
Incidence is the number of new HIV infections that occur during a given year.
In 2008, CDC estimated that approximately 56,300 people were newly infected with HIV in 20061 (the most recent year that data are available). Over half (53%) of these new infections occurred in gay and bisexual men. Black/African American men and women were also strongly affected and were estimated to have an incidence rate than was 7 times as high as the incidence rate among whites.
Why the selective editing?
71
70, I noticed you edited the next section from your copy and paste, a chart showing that male-on-male sex accounts for 65% of all AIDS in men...
Why the selective editing?
Why the selective editing?
72
@70
Blacks have a rate 7x whites.
Homosexuals have a rate 50x heterosexuals.
Are you sure this is a line you wish to pursue?
Blacks have a rate 7x whites.
Homosexuals have a rate 50x heterosexuals.
Are you sure this is a line you wish to pursue?
73
70 How much of the AIDS in the Black community is the result of lying cheating homosexual men infecting women?
74
71, The next section doesn't say that, but regardless, yes, HIV and AIDS are issues for which gay men must address, but that has nothing to do with child abuse. How does Loveschild's rants against gay people and gay marriage help anyone, as opposed to if she actually worked in her own community helping the children in need? So again, your point?
75
74
AIDS Cases by Transmission Category:
Male-to-male sexual contact 16,749
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/surveillan…
AIDS Cases by Transmission Category:
Male-to-male sexual contact 16,749
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/surveillan…
76
74
How do your and Dan's rants against religion and blacks and "youth pastors" help anyone, as opposed to if you actually worked in her own community helping the children in need? So again, your point?
How do your and Dan's rants against religion and blacks and "youth pastors" help anyone, as opposed to if you actually worked in her own community helping the children in need? So again, your point?
77
75, that's not what you said.
76, It helps to rally the troops behind gay rights, and it calls attention to the flaws in religious bigot's arguments against gay rights. I'll ask again, how does Loveschild's rants against gay people and gay marriage help children in her community?
76, It helps to rally the troops behind gay rights, and it calls attention to the flaws in religious bigot's arguments against gay rights. I'll ask again, how does Loveschild's rants against gay people and gay marriage help children in her community?
80
So, has the thread moved to discussing HIV/AIDS amongst children <13 years? That is a depressing reality first thing in the morning. I think I'll go hug my kids.
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/surveillan…
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/surveillan…
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/surveillan…
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/surveillan…
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/surveillan…
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/surveillan…
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/surveillan…
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/surveillan…
81
80, no it's a little side track that this person has taken to avoid answering the real questions.
82
77
Q- "How do your and Dan's rants against religion and blacks and "youth pastors" help anyone, as opposed to if you actually worked in her own community helping the children in need? So again, your point?"
A- "It helps to rally the troops behind gay rights"
Standard demagoguery diversion from the actual issues is to demonize a minority group and blame them.
Blacks are homophobes!
Youth Pastors threaten our children!
Christians are bigots!
Mormons passed Prop 8!
Q- "How do your and Dan's rants against religion and blacks and "youth pastors" help anyone, as opposed to if you actually worked in her own community helping the children in need? So again, your point?"
A- "It helps to rally the troops behind gay rights"
Standard demagoguery diversion from the actual issues is to demonize a minority group and blame them.
Blacks are homophobes!
Youth Pastors threaten our children!
Christians are bigots!
Mormons passed Prop 8!
83
82. There is a lot of homophobia among blacks. Loveschild is a fine example, but nobody said that all African Americans were. That is you making stuff up.
Some youth pastors do threaten children, Nowhere has it been said that all youth pastors are pedophiles. (again you putting words in the mouths of others because you know you don't have a real argument.)
Many Christians are bigots when it comes to gay people, but not all.
Mormons had a big hand in promoting prop 8.
Can you actually pose an argument on what has really been said, rather than what you imagined in your head?
Some youth pastors do threaten children, Nowhere has it been said that all youth pastors are pedophiles. (again you putting words in the mouths of others because you know you don't have a real argument.)
Many Christians are bigots when it comes to gay people, but not all.
Mormons had a big hand in promoting prop 8.
Can you actually pose an argument on what has really been said, rather than what you imagined in your head?
85
@76: Exposing these stories helps to highlight the hypocrisy and the fallacy of the arguments used to by those who claim that the only good and stable home is one with a heterosexual man and woman AND proclaim the believe that children are safer with "Christian Youth Group" settings - with the implication being that since they (the Xtain group) doesn't allow or 'tolerate' gays, that somehow the children are safer because they're only around straight people.
These stories show that children are at risk because of the prevailing view that "Christian + Straight identified = Safe". Which is very much not the case.
That mindset leads to blindly trusting a stranger with a child because they claim to be religious, while at the same time implying that an individual that is gay is somehow less trustworthy around children - an assertion that is refuted by facts.
These stories show that children are at risk because of the prevailing view that "Christian + Straight identified = Safe". Which is very much not the case.
That mindset leads to blindly trusting a stranger with a child because they claim to be religious, while at the same time implying that an individual that is gay is somehow less trustworthy around children - an assertion that is refuted by facts.
86
84, No, I looked at facts and statistics. You should try it sometime, rather than you just making stuff up.
87
82,
One can honestly argue that is the purpose of Dan's rants, especially without his chiming in on every thing he posts without stating his reasons for the individual post. And, if you follow all of Loveschild's post clear back into "Shh ... We're Silencing the Christians" you will see she is guilty of the same crime. If we are going to argue that Dan is guilty of demonizing a minority group, then we have to acknowledge that Loveschild is also guilty. One could argue that Dan started it, and that Loveschild is only responding. I'd say that it is true, this is blog on The Stranger a paper which he is the editor. Still, Dan's starting it doesn't give Loveschild a free pass. If the table was flipped and this was a blog by Leonard Pitts, JR., discussing the disproportion of African American children diagnosed with HIV/AIDS as reported by the CDC, and Dan came on demonizing African American mothers who pass HIV to their unborn child, she would be pissed (as would I). His demonizing would not further the discussion. Just as her posts rarely further the discussion here. They both have agendas. At least Dan is keeping his agenda where it belongs, his blog. We can't say the same for Loveschild.
One can honestly argue that is the purpose of Dan's rants, especially without his chiming in on every thing he posts without stating his reasons for the individual post. And, if you follow all of Loveschild's post clear back into "Shh ... We're Silencing the Christians" you will see she is guilty of the same crime. If we are going to argue that Dan is guilty of demonizing a minority group, then we have to acknowledge that Loveschild is also guilty. One could argue that Dan started it, and that Loveschild is only responding. I'd say that it is true, this is blog on The Stranger a paper which he is the editor. Still, Dan's starting it doesn't give Loveschild a free pass. If the table was flipped and this was a blog by Leonard Pitts, JR., discussing the disproportion of African American children diagnosed with HIV/AIDS as reported by the CDC, and Dan came on demonizing African American mothers who pass HIV to their unborn child, she would be pissed (as would I). His demonizing would not further the discussion. Just as her posts rarely further the discussion here. They both have agendas. At least Dan is keeping his agenda where it belongs, his blog. We can't say the same for Loveschild.
88
“If we are honest with ourselves, we’ll acknowledge that our own community has not always been true to King’s vision of a beloved community. We have scorned our gay brothers and sisters instead of embracing them.” - Barack Obama to 2,000 worshippers Sunday at Atlanta’s Ebenezer Baptist Church, where King once preached.
90
87
I appreciate what you've said.
Do you feel that a prominent national spokesperson
with a wide audience
and lots of credulous adoring fans
and his own newspaper
(on which he serves as editor and a journalist)
and his own blog
should hold himself
and be held
to a higher standard for responsible discourse
than an anonymous poster?
I appreciate what you've said.
Do you feel that a prominent national spokesperson
with a wide audience
and lots of credulous adoring fans
and his own newspaper
(on which he serves as editor and a journalist)
and his own blog
should hold himself
and be held
to a higher standard for responsible discourse
than an anonymous poster?
92
90, 91,
Yes, I understand it is a rhetorical question. The answer is, yes, I would appreciate a less inflamatory discourse for Dan. But, I also hold the proclaimed Christian, Loveschild, to a higher standard, because she claims to follow the Bible. The Bible is clear that bearing false witness, slandering, uttering threats, etc, are not appropriate of a child of God. The command to love your neighbor as yourself is very clear, especially as the neighbor Christ is refering to is not your friend, it is the one you would consider your enemy. She is the one who is commanded to turn the other cheek.
Yes, I understand it is a rhetorical question. The answer is, yes, I would appreciate a less inflamatory discourse for Dan. But, I also hold the proclaimed Christian, Loveschild, to a higher standard, because she claims to follow the Bible. The Bible is clear that bearing false witness, slandering, uttering threats, etc, are not appropriate of a child of God. The command to love your neighbor as yourself is very clear, especially as the neighbor Christ is refering to is not your friend, it is the one you would consider your enemy. She is the one who is commanded to turn the other cheek.
93
90, 91,
I would also add that Loveschild is not an anonymous poster. Not only is she registered, she also shared that she is a woman, a mom of 2 or 3 children, 2 being boys each already six feet tall, she's African American, she's in her twenties, she was born and raised in Texas, and that she is a Christian. And, until yesterday's dedication post, I have never read Dan say anything bad about or to Loveschild, but she has been attacking him, and his family for a few months now.
I would also add that Loveschild is not an anonymous poster. Not only is she registered, she also shared that she is a woman, a mom of 2 or 3 children, 2 being boys each already six feet tall, she's African American, she's in her twenties, she was born and raised in Texas, and that she is a Christian. And, until yesterday's dedication post, I have never read Dan say anything bad about or to Loveschild, but she has been attacking him, and his family for a few months now.
94
For what it's worth, here's my take on what Dan is up to with this series of posts:
Dan knows that the truth lies in the middle---that people of both sexes, of all sexual persuasions, ages and religious/non-religious backgrounds commit vile acts against others of all ages backgrounds, sexes, etc.
For one thing, nowhere will you find Dan directly making the argument that religious people are responsible for most child abuse. In fact, with all the cases he highlights in his Youth Pastor Watch, Every Child Requires a Mother and Father and There is No Morality Without Religon series of Slog posts, he never makes any kind of argument about the relative prevalence of abusiveness among any of the groups mentioned.
Listen to him on national and local media, read his articles and read his books---you won't ever see him reaching conclusions about whom is more likely to harm whom there either.
What he is doing by highlighting a onesided selection of cases though, is attempting to counter the perception that true goodness, and culturally acceptable affilation (of a man with a woman, a parishoner with a church, an acolyte with a moral code), are always, inevitably going to be the same thing. I understand (and believe many others understand too) his point is to show that some culturally sanctioned, traditionally virtuous customs are no more or less likely to conceal abusiveness than given non-culturally sanctioned ones. His is an ironic way to say that love, faith and nurturing is love faith and nurturing, whether it exists within same or opposite sex relationships, within or without a church, or under a written moral code, or not.
Dan knows that the truth lies in the middle---that people of both sexes, of all sexual persuasions, ages and religious/non-religious backgrounds commit vile acts against others of all ages backgrounds, sexes, etc.
For one thing, nowhere will you find Dan directly making the argument that religious people are responsible for most child abuse. In fact, with all the cases he highlights in his Youth Pastor Watch, Every Child Requires a Mother and Father and There is No Morality Without Religon series of Slog posts, he never makes any kind of argument about the relative prevalence of abusiveness among any of the groups mentioned.
Listen to him on national and local media, read his articles and read his books---you won't ever see him reaching conclusions about whom is more likely to harm whom there either.
What he is doing by highlighting a onesided selection of cases though, is attempting to counter the perception that true goodness, and culturally acceptable affilation (of a man with a woman, a parishoner with a church, an acolyte with a moral code), are always, inevitably going to be the same thing. I understand (and believe many others understand too) his point is to show that some culturally sanctioned, traditionally virtuous customs are no more or less likely to conceal abusiveness than given non-culturally sanctioned ones. His is an ironic way to say that love, faith and nurturing is love faith and nurturing, whether it exists within same or opposite sex relationships, within or without a church, or under a written moral code, or not.
95
Thank God I was given the ability to think for myself!
I won't let some grotesquely misguided cult lead me astray.
It is not the idea of "God" or "Jesus" that I am against, it is the perversion of modern religion.
And I am thankful that there are strong roll models out there (like Dan Savage) for young men and woman, be they gay, straight, black, white, transgender, bisexual, sexually curious or whatever. Otherwise they would have to go through life with pieces of shit trying to "save" them and only causing them misery and pain.
If you want to save somebody learn that acceptance and positive guidance is not only for those who think and believe the same as you.
Fucktards.
I won't let some grotesquely misguided cult lead me astray.
It is not the idea of "God" or "Jesus" that I am against, it is the perversion of modern religion.
And I am thankful that there are strong roll models out there (like Dan Savage) for young men and woman, be they gay, straight, black, white, transgender, bisexual, sexually curious or whatever. Otherwise they would have to go through life with pieces of shit trying to "save" them and only causing them misery and pain.
If you want to save somebody learn that acceptance and positive guidance is not only for those who think and believe the same as you.
Fucktards.
96
Kim, I've never seen any post of yours where you have taken issue with any racist incitement from Mr Savage nor any other slogger like Rob (who indulges in eugenics) You claim to be a Christian yet constantly like to bring up past errors of mine for which I have apologized for. You dear need to search deeper in your heart and further your learning of the scriptures before you take issue with those of us who try to follow the words of life.
Mr Savage more than often edulges in villifying people like Christians, African Americans and any other group that differs from his ideological standing. If you believe differently and are active in securing your beliefs you become fair game to him. I 've never attacked Mr Savage, light hearted jokes about him without any malice towards him and when serious I have commented on my values and beliefs regarding the most appropriate scenarios for child rearing that I think we as a society with our eyes set on the future should encourage and not go for the least of options from the onset just to please some groups of adults. That's not an attack on Mr Savage or his pairings, and only someone with a myopic understanding would construe it as an attack on children under such (custodials like the one he has become a surrogate for) in places where that has been allowed. Every single post of mine has involved at minimum one question (always left unansewered ) on the topic which I have sought to understand.
The understanding I have gotten from this blog has been obtained by my reading of what has been posted here not by something I have 'invented' as you think but by reading Mr Savage's posts.
97
@96, thank you for adding a touch of surrealism to my blog-reading experience. Reading your comments is like being transported into an alternate dimension where reason never existed and perverse imagination reigns supreme.
Apologies don’t matter much if you repeat the same hateful mistake over and over. You attack Kim’s faith when I imagine she’s the most positive, loving representation of Christianity most of us has seen in a long time. Had you any sense at all, you’d be doing your best to learn from her example. I don’t share her faith and most likely never will, but I can almost believe in a loving god when I hear her perspective.
Apologies don’t matter much if you repeat the same hateful mistake over and over. You attack Kim’s faith when I imagine she’s the most positive, loving representation of Christianity most of us has seen in a long time. Had you any sense at all, you’d be doing your best to learn from her example. I don’t share her faith and most likely never will, but I can almost believe in a loving god when I hear her perspective.
98
96,
Is this an example of your light hearted jokes, with no malice?
The American people time and time again have spoken when given a chance through the democratic process. They have rejected the wishes of gays to destroy the family by cheapening it with their mock weddings. Government cannot sanction two people of the same gender wanting to play house.
Posted by Loveschild on February 15, 2009 at 2:35 PM
http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archive…
>More gentle humor?
All males, without a female in the room.
There's a reason why gay adoption bans are necessary.
Posted by Loveschild on February 22, 2009 at 1:50 PM
35: "The Gay Lifestyle", means a way of living. There are no females on the picture. I'm not presuming anything.
Posted by Loveschild on February 22, 2009 at 2:29 PM
http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archive…
Is this an example of your light hearted jokes, with no malice?
The American people time and time again have spoken when given a chance through the democratic process. They have rejected the wishes of gays to destroy the family by cheapening it with their mock weddings. Government cannot sanction two people of the same gender wanting to play house.
Posted by Loveschild on February 15, 2009 at 2:35 PM
http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archive…
>More gentle humor?
All males, without a female in the room.
There's a reason why gay adoption bans are necessary.
Posted by Loveschild on February 22, 2009 at 1:50 PM
35: "The Gay Lifestyle", means a way of living. There are no females on the picture. I'm not presuming anything.
Posted by Loveschild on February 22, 2009 at 2:29 PM
http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archive…
99
No Kim, those are legitimate concerns. By stating them I have had no intention of hurting anyone, on the contrary by doing so I have expressed my care about this. I don't take the welfare of children who are the future of our nation lightly. And I would like to believe that none here regardless of their ideology does either.
100
This would be more of your gentle humor, without malice?
I would also add: can gays refrain from practices that lead to disease.
Answer is no of course, but gays do want to have their cake and eat it too.
Most gays I know don't care about children because having kids is something opposed to the lifestyle they want to pursue. The only ones I have heard saying they want gay parenting to be legal are the agitators. Trophy is the best description I've heard so far for how they view those kids.
I bet that if they ever succeed in what they want those kids will neglected in favor of the more enticing "sexual freedoms" and the party scene.
Posted by Loveschild on February 25, 2009 at 5:27 PM
http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archive…
More humor?
41 homosexual relationships are of a harmful nature they do not provide any benefits to society as opposed to what all societies have recognized as marriage. One man and one woman unions produce: bonding of men and women,
birth and rearing of children, proper relationships of fathers and sons, nurturing of a clear healthy masculine identity, nurturing of a concise transformation of children into responsible adults.
Children need mothers and fathers so that they two become mothers and fathers. Marriage is the best vehicle to educate children into the proper way to follow through with this once they become adults themselves.
Posted by Loveschild on April 3, 2009 at 8:47 AM
Besides degrading a time honoured institution by being an empty pretense that lacks the mutual needs of male and female it opens the doors to aberrant sexual behavior like polyamory and any other arrangement that the human brain can come up with. Homosexual mockery of marriage are of a short lived and transitory nature as studies made in countries were homosexual marriage has been allowed show. Gay relationships average durations are of one and a half years. In those that last longer promiscuity tends to be the rule were an average of eight sexual partners outside of the relationship per year is all too common.
Surely children need better homes than this and not be exposed to such examples.
Posted by Loveschild on April 3, 2009 at 9:18 AM
http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archive…
More...
I would also add: can gays refrain from practices that lead to disease.
Answer is no of course, but gays do want to have their cake and eat it too.
Most gays I know don't care about children because having kids is something opposed to the lifestyle they want to pursue. The only ones I have heard saying they want gay parenting to be legal are the agitators. Trophy is the best description I've heard so far for how they view those kids.
I bet that if they ever succeed in what they want those kids will neglected in favor of the more enticing "sexual freedoms" and the party scene.
Posted by Loveschild on February 25, 2009 at 5:27 PM
http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archive…
More humor?
41 homosexual relationships are of a harmful nature they do not provide any benefits to society as opposed to what all societies have recognized as marriage. One man and one woman unions produce: bonding of men and women,
birth and rearing of children, proper relationships of fathers and sons, nurturing of a clear healthy masculine identity, nurturing of a concise transformation of children into responsible adults.
Children need mothers and fathers so that they two become mothers and fathers. Marriage is the best vehicle to educate children into the proper way to follow through with this once they become adults themselves.
Posted by Loveschild on April 3, 2009 at 8:47 AM
Besides degrading a time honoured institution by being an empty pretense that lacks the mutual needs of male and female it opens the doors to aberrant sexual behavior like polyamory and any other arrangement that the human brain can come up with. Homosexual mockery of marriage are of a short lived and transitory nature as studies made in countries were homosexual marriage has been allowed show. Gay relationships average durations are of one and a half years. In those that last longer promiscuity tends to be the rule were an average of eight sexual partners outside of the relationship per year is all too common.
Surely children need better homes than this and not be exposed to such examples.
Posted by Loveschild on April 3, 2009 at 9:18 AM
http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archive…
101
99,
Your words.
"That's not an attack on Mr Savage or his pairings, and only someone with a myopic understanding would construe it as an attack on children under such (custodials like the one he has become a surrogate for) in places where that has been allowed. Every single post of mine has involved at minimum one question (always left unansewered ) on the topic which I have sought to understand."
Where are your questions, in the above copied comments of yours? I'd say your every comment above is/was an attack on Mr. Savage's family.
Keep trying to cover yourself with "those are legitimate concerns. By stating them I have had no intention of hurting anyone, on the contrary by doing so I have expressed my care about this."
I'm not buying it. Perhaps, Savage is?
Your words.
"That's not an attack on Mr Savage or his pairings, and only someone with a myopic understanding would construe it as an attack on children under such (custodials like the one he has become a surrogate for) in places where that has been allowed. Every single post of mine has involved at minimum one question (always left unansewered ) on the topic which I have sought to understand."
Where are your questions, in the above copied comments of yours? I'd say your every comment above is/was an attack on Mr. Savage's family.
Keep trying to cover yourself with "those are legitimate concerns. By stating them I have had no intention of hurting anyone, on the contrary by doing so I have expressed my care about this."
I'm not buying it. Perhaps, Savage is?
102
99,
Think about it. You come on Savage's blog and bash his family. If he did that on your blog, you would throw a fit. You call us all racist for disagreeing with you and for seeing paralles between the Gay civil rights movement and the African-American civil rights movement.
"77 Are you Matt? You can scream it from the top of the highest mountain nearest to you but it doesn't make it true, gay marriage is not a Civil Right.
Skin color and ethnicity cannot be hidden and cannot be compared to with choosing to engage in sexual practices like sodomy.
All other BS comments about comparing gays with people of African ancestry and going back to Africa, I just have one recommendation for you all, just join you nearest KKK chapter and get it over with. Not only do you hate people of African ancestry but you try every way that you can think of to take away their gains, achievements and uniqueness and make it your own.
Well I've got some news to all you gay KKK types, It ain't gonna happen.
Posted by Loveschild on April 20, 2009 at 7:52 PM
http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archive…
It seems only your opinion is to be respected. I disagree.
Think about it. You come on Savage's blog and bash his family. If he did that on your blog, you would throw a fit. You call us all racist for disagreeing with you and for seeing paralles between the Gay civil rights movement and the African-American civil rights movement.
"77 Are you Matt? You can scream it from the top of the highest mountain nearest to you but it doesn't make it true, gay marriage is not a Civil Right.
Skin color and ethnicity cannot be hidden and cannot be compared to with choosing to engage in sexual practices like sodomy.
All other BS comments about comparing gays with people of African ancestry and going back to Africa, I just have one recommendation for you all, just join you nearest KKK chapter and get it over with. Not only do you hate people of African ancestry but you try every way that you can think of to take away their gains, achievements and uniqueness and make it your own.
Well I've got some news to all you gay KKK types, It ain't gonna happen.
Posted by Loveschild on April 20, 2009 at 7:52 PM
http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archive…
It seems only your opinion is to be respected. I disagree.
103
99, You prove my point in 102, with your opening in 96. (thanks for choosing to be disrespectful with respectful words).
"Kim, I've never seen any post of yours where you have taken issue with any racist incitement from Mr Savage nor any other slogger like Rob (who indulges in eugenics) You claim to be a Christian yet constantly like to bring up past errors of mine for which I have apologized for. You dear need to search deeper in your heart and further your learning of the scriptures before you take issue with those of us who try to follow the words of life."
I don't agree that either Dan or Rob are racists and I have said that before. And you have called me a racist (so no need to repeat it). I do not believe pointing actual facts, backed up by real news sources, that show that the African American community is suffering is racist. I think that they are facts, sad facts, but every commuinity has issues. And when you choose to attack another community you open yourself up for a returned attack.
"Kim, I've never seen any post of yours where you have taken issue with any racist incitement from Mr Savage nor any other slogger like Rob (who indulges in eugenics) You claim to be a Christian yet constantly like to bring up past errors of mine for which I have apologized for. You dear need to search deeper in your heart and further your learning of the scriptures before you take issue with those of us who try to follow the words of life."
I don't agree that either Dan or Rob are racists and I have said that before. And you have called me a racist (so no need to repeat it). I do not believe pointing actual facts, backed up by real news sources, that show that the African American community is suffering is racist. I think that they are facts, sad facts, but every commuinity has issues. And when you choose to attack another community you open yourself up for a returned attack.
104
96,
For somebody who wrote the following.
"I'm not that religious but I know that society will not be able to stand all the ills recognizing those unions equally with that of heterosexual couples like yours and mine will bring to our children and to an already fragile society at large."
Posted by Loveschild on February 16, 2009 at 9:37 PM
Three months of Bible reading doesn't make you an authority. I applaud your studing it, keep it up, and work on your own planks.
For somebody who wrote the following.
"I'm not that religious but I know that society will not be able to stand all the ills recognizing those unions equally with that of heterosexual couples like yours and mine will bring to our children and to an already fragile society at large."
Posted by Loveschild on February 16, 2009 at 9:37 PM
Three months of Bible reading doesn't make you an authority. I applaud your studing it, keep it up, and work on your own planks.
105
104 How curious that you (not being an African American) are more than happy to point out 'sources' to show the 'suffering' (code word perhaps?), don't know what you mean by it, of the African American community yet you take issue when I and others have pointed actual legitimate links to news sources that have exposed the byproduct of the gay lifestyle by labeling such exposures as 'attacks' on such a group. When you fail to see that Mr savage has gone out of his way before I ever knew about this blog to blame the African American community for the shortcomings of his group, and when you choose day after day to ignore Rob's racist pseudo eugenic comments then it becomes clear that you have sadly been suckered and blinded by whatever it is that you get out of being liked by lesbians and homosexuals and are not really into a serious examination of the consequences from some aspects of the agendas that some homosexuals groups are trying to enshrine into law.
106
105,
That is the point. Don't you see. You come here on a gay person's blog and point out crisis in the gay community, and Rob returns by pointing out crisis in the African American community. You belive, that because Rob is gay and that he isn't African American he has no business bringing the subject up. Yet, you refuse to acknowledge that you, because you are not gay, have no business bring up your issues in the gay either. His reasons are as valid as yours. His statistics are from the more legitimate source as well, The Center for Disease Control, New York Times, etc.
Your pissed because Dan brought up the subject of homophobia in the African American community, lets be honest there is homophobia in every community, and yet there are African Americans here on Slog who acknowledge homophobia in the African American community, as does President Obama. Yet, because Dan is mostly of Irish decent, he can't discuss it or be hurt by it. But, you a heterosexual woman has the right to attack his family, and his desire to be seen as fully equal under the laws. And, you have the audacity to do it day in and day out on his blog.
Despite, the name calling (which I don't support) most people, including Dan, are pretty tolerant of you. They don't block you from commenting.
That is the point. Don't you see. You come here on a gay person's blog and point out crisis in the gay community, and Rob returns by pointing out crisis in the African American community. You belive, that because Rob is gay and that he isn't African American he has no business bringing the subject up. Yet, you refuse to acknowledge that you, because you are not gay, have no business bring up your issues in the gay either. His reasons are as valid as yours. His statistics are from the more legitimate source as well, The Center for Disease Control, New York Times, etc.
Your pissed because Dan brought up the subject of homophobia in the African American community, lets be honest there is homophobia in every community, and yet there are African Americans here on Slog who acknowledge homophobia in the African American community, as does President Obama. Yet, because Dan is mostly of Irish decent, he can't discuss it or be hurt by it. But, you a heterosexual woman has the right to attack his family, and his desire to be seen as fully equal under the laws. And, you have the audacity to do it day in and day out on his blog.
Despite, the name calling (which I don't support) most people, including Dan, are pretty tolerant of you. They don't block you from commenting.
107
105,
The people you are talking about are gay, GAY. They are not a bunch of straight people choosing to act gay. They are gay, it isn't a choice from them. Even Obama, belives it isn't a choice. If your so convinced it a choice please enlighten us all, tell us about your decision to become a heterosexual. When was your moment, when did you decide? Odds are you didn't have one, you never really thought about it, one day you just discovered that you thought a boy was handsome. You couldn't explain why, you just knew it would be nice to hold his hand. That's how it happened for me, I never had a say in the matter. It came easily and naturally. Still, please enlighten us, tell us how you came to make your decision. Why did you choose to become a heterosexual?
The people you are talking about are gay, GAY. They are not a bunch of straight people choosing to act gay. They are gay, it isn't a choice from them. Even Obama, belives it isn't a choice. If your so convinced it a choice please enlighten us all, tell us about your decision to become a heterosexual. When was your moment, when did you decide? Odds are you didn't have one, you never really thought about it, one day you just discovered that you thought a boy was handsome. You couldn't explain why, you just knew it would be nice to hold his hand. That's how it happened for me, I never had a say in the matter. It came easily and naturally. Still, please enlighten us, tell us how you came to make your decision. Why did you choose to become a heterosexual?
108
105,
This isn't a popularity contest. This isn't about being liked either. This is about working to ensure that all Americans have equal rights and benefits under the law. It is about equality. You will never be able to make separate become equal. There are no lesser humans, we are all fully human.
"Oppressed people cannot remain oppressed forever!" MLK JR
This isn't a popularity contest. This isn't about being liked either. This is about working to ensure that all Americans have equal rights and benefits under the law. It is about equality. You will never be able to make separate become equal. There are no lesser humans, we are all fully human.
"Oppressed people cannot remain oppressed forever!" MLK JR
109
108 Oppressed? who's denying Mr Savage access to public facilities? Who is racial profiling Mr Savage? Who is stopping Mr Savage on the road if he happens to be in a good car or if he's in a neighborhood where people like him are the minority? How oppressed is Mr Savage when a bill has passed by the legislature expanding the benefits and wording in the already existing domestic partnerships to be equal under state law to marriages in WA?
Let me explain something to you, if you believe that's oppression then you might as well hurl an obscenity every time MLK jr or the Civil Rights Movement is mentioned. There is no link between the demands for social approval of a lifestyle made mostly by a group of white adults and the history of persecution, killings, denials at public facilities and the institutionalized racist culture in departments such as the police. None .
Poor Mr Savage he's so oppressed, good thing he has the African American community to blame for such an oppression and then insult them further by taking their heroes and legitimate struggles in history to further his agenda. That's oppression in world.
Let me explain something to you, if you believe that's oppression then you might as well hurl an obscenity every time MLK jr or the Civil Rights Movement is mentioned. There is no link between the demands for social approval of a lifestyle made mostly by a group of white adults and the history of persecution, killings, denials at public facilities and the institutionalized racist culture in departments such as the police. None .
Poor Mr Savage he's so oppressed, good thing he has the African American community to blame for such an oppression and then insult them further by taking their heroes and legitimate struggles in history to further his agenda. That's oppression in world.
110
@109, I don’t really know why I’m bothering because your ears/heart/mind are sealed air-tight, but…
No one is saying all oppression is the same. No one is trying to establish a hierarchy of suffering. However, if you have to worry about being murdered simply because you’re gay, you’re oppressed.
In another “lighthearted” post of yours, you commented that two brothers holding hands should’ve been more careful…that it wasn’t surprising they were attacked because they risked being perceived as gay. So obviously even you are aware that being gay makes you a target. If revealing your identity puts you at risk for slaughter, you’re oppressed. I don’t know why you bother arguing otherwise.
Besides, it’s not a contest to figure out who gets to be the most oppressed. No one is minimizing the horrendous violations of African-American’s civil rights when they say this is also a civil rights issue. It’s a broad category: one group’s struggle for civil rights doesn’t diminish another group’s fight. The violations will continue until people realize that everyone is entitled to live without fear of hatred, persecution, and death.
No one is saying all oppression is the same. No one is trying to establish a hierarchy of suffering. However, if you have to worry about being murdered simply because you’re gay, you’re oppressed.
In another “lighthearted” post of yours, you commented that two brothers holding hands should’ve been more careful…that it wasn’t surprising they were attacked because they risked being perceived as gay. So obviously even you are aware that being gay makes you a target. If revealing your identity puts you at risk for slaughter, you’re oppressed. I don’t know why you bother arguing otherwise.
Besides, it’s not a contest to figure out who gets to be the most oppressed. No one is minimizing the horrendous violations of African-American’s civil rights when they say this is also a civil rights issue. It’s a broad category: one group’s struggle for civil rights doesn’t diminish another group’s fight. The violations will continue until people realize that everyone is entitled to live without fear of hatred, persecution, and death.
111
109,
Would you tell this African American man, and partner with MLK JR, that his experiences weren't real.
A master strategist and tireless activist, Bayard Rustin is best remembered as the organizer of the 1963 March on Washington, one of the largest nonviolent protests ever held in the United States. He brought Gandhi’s protest techniques to the American civil rights movement, and helped mold Martin Luther King, Jr. into an international symbol of peace and nonviolence.
Despite these achievements, Rustin was silenced, threatened, arrested, beaten, imprisoned and fired from important leadership positions, largely because he was an openly gay man in a fiercely homophobic era. Five years in the making and the winner of numerous awards, BROTHER OUTSIDER presents a feature-length documentary portrait, focusing on Rustin’s activism for peace, racial equality, economic justice and human rights.
http://rustin.org
Would you say the same to:
Rodney Powell, MD -Civil Rights Leader
Duanna Johnson
Latesha Green
H. Alexander Robinson - Who as a child learned that the body of a deacon at a neighboring church in Richmond, Virgina, was found in a church closet. When the deacon's homosexuality was discovered, the people in the church tied him up, cut off his penis, stuck it in his mouth, and stuffed him in the closet, where he bled to death.
Rev. Irene Monroe
Martha Shelley
Birdie Rivera
Deborah Johnson
Dr. Zandra Rolon
Their lives defy your statement.
"There is no link between the demands for social approval of a lifestyle made mostly by a group of white adults and the history of persecution, killings, denials at public facilities and the institutionalized racist culture in departments such as the police."
More...
Would you tell this African American man, and partner with MLK JR, that his experiences weren't real.
A master strategist and tireless activist, Bayard Rustin is best remembered as the organizer of the 1963 March on Washington, one of the largest nonviolent protests ever held in the United States. He brought Gandhi’s protest techniques to the American civil rights movement, and helped mold Martin Luther King, Jr. into an international symbol of peace and nonviolence.
Despite these achievements, Rustin was silenced, threatened, arrested, beaten, imprisoned and fired from important leadership positions, largely because he was an openly gay man in a fiercely homophobic era. Five years in the making and the winner of numerous awards, BROTHER OUTSIDER presents a feature-length documentary portrait, focusing on Rustin’s activism for peace, racial equality, economic justice and human rights.
http://rustin.org
Would you say the same to:
Rodney Powell, MD -Civil Rights Leader
Duanna Johnson
Latesha Green
H. Alexander Robinson - Who as a child learned that the body of a deacon at a neighboring church in Richmond, Virgina, was found in a church closet. When the deacon's homosexuality was discovered, the people in the church tied him up, cut off his penis, stuck it in his mouth, and stuffed him in the closet, where he bled to death.
Rev. Irene Monroe
Martha Shelley
Birdie Rivera
Deborah Johnson
Dr. Zandra Rolon
Their lives defy your statement.
"There is no link between the demands for social approval of a lifestyle made mostly by a group of white adults and the history of persecution, killings, denials at public facilities and the institutionalized racist culture in departments such as the police."
112
110 I support the matthew shepard act even if I disagree with the name and do I abhor all violence? absolutely (so much for my ears/heart/mind being sealed air-tight) that however is not what Kim means by 'oppression' and she mischaracterizes a legitimate concern on the part of the majority of the people of this nation. I'm glad to see that you can at least acknowledge the difference and we can agree that no harm should be done to any american citizen regardless of their ideology, race, or point of view.
113
112,
Bullshit, that is what I mean. I also include the fact that in some states gays can be fired, because of their sexual orientation. In some places they can still be denyed housing, etc. and more.
I'm going to have say that I agree with Riz, with out the profanity about your ignorance on African American history, and your continual equating consensual same-sex relationships with pedophilia (which what you were doing earlier in the post). And, I would delete the F word if I could. His opinion as an African American is of greater value than mine on this subject. You need to learn that your opinion isn't the only valid one, and that you don't know everything.
FUCK YOU..fuck you to you and your ilk..
fuck you loveschild.. fuck your for your haughty misrepresentation of god's love to your obessesions over whether gays ought to be married, to your fake ass gay friends who really aren't interested in gay marriage, for your ignorance of your own fucking history ( read the fucking book on him or watch the fucking film atfilmhttp://rustin.org/ ) and your smug romanticism with your fake ass black oppresions, for your wildly and wholly unchristian judgments ( read that fucking book too while you're at it .. read it with your fucking open heart and your open mind.. try it f..just once ) fuck your equation of normal, healthy and natural love between consenting adults with bestiality, pedophilia, pornagraphy and child abuse...
Bullshit, that is what I mean. I also include the fact that in some states gays can be fired, because of their sexual orientation. In some places they can still be denyed housing, etc. and more.
I'm going to have say that I agree with Riz, with out the profanity about your ignorance on African American history, and your continual equating consensual same-sex relationships with pedophilia (which what you were doing earlier in the post). And, I would delete the F word if I could. His opinion as an African American is of greater value than mine on this subject. You need to learn that your opinion isn't the only valid one, and that you don't know everything.
FUCK YOU..fuck you to you and your ilk..
fuck you loveschild.. fuck your for your haughty misrepresentation of god's love to your obessesions over whether gays ought to be married, to your fake ass gay friends who really aren't interested in gay marriage, for your ignorance of your own fucking history ( read the fucking book on him or watch the fucking film atfilmhttp://rustin.org/ ) and your smug romanticism with your fake ass black oppresions, for your wildly and wholly unchristian judgments ( read that fucking book too while you're at it .. read it with your fucking open heart and your open mind.. try it f..just once ) fuck your equation of normal, healthy and natural love between consenting adults with bestiality, pedophilia, pornagraphy and child abuse...
114
@112, I’m glad we agree on that. Considering Kim’s 111 post, I think that is exactly what she means by “oppression.” And I don’t believe that the murders will taper off until gays are perceived as being equal in all respects, and that includes marriage. As long as gays are considered a subordinate class, undeserving of the same benefits heterosexuals take for granted, they will be at risk.
Putting anyone in the category of “other and lesser” is an attempt to diminish that person’s humanity.
Putting anyone in the category of “other and lesser” is an attempt to diminish that person’s humanity.
115
As a parent, I take the point of Dan's Youth Pastor Watch posts to expose a problem that for years and years (Irish Clergy in the press for the most recent example) has been swept under the rug by religious leadership while law enforcement and church members turned a blind eye.
This example is a teacher (and how many teachers have preyed on their students? Given the amount of women teachers convicted of fucking their male students I cannot believe the whole gay vs. straight bruhaha going on here) but the point is to expose the problem of adults in positions of power over children abusing that power and hurting children.
If we keep this problem at the forefront of our collective consciousness, keep it in the news, publicize these cases in the media and TALK ABOUT IT then our children are much less likely to be victimized because other adults find it easier to turn a blind eye than to help them.
Dan is shining a spotlight on a dirty little secret and that light will help keep kids safer than the secretive and prudish sex-is-not-to-be-discussed attitudes of the past.
Thanks Dan.
This example is a teacher (and how many teachers have preyed on their students? Given the amount of women teachers convicted of fucking their male students I cannot believe the whole gay vs. straight bruhaha going on here) but the point is to expose the problem of adults in positions of power over children abusing that power and hurting children.
If we keep this problem at the forefront of our collective consciousness, keep it in the news, publicize these cases in the media and TALK ABOUT IT then our children are much less likely to be victimized because other adults find it easier to turn a blind eye than to help them.
Dan is shining a spotlight on a dirty little secret and that light will help keep kids safer than the secretive and prudish sex-is-not-to-be-discussed attitudes of the past.
Thanks Dan.
116
@ 122,
Glad to see you changed your mind on the hates crime bill, because as of May 6 were against it. http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archive…
"Sadly it's true,
"THE HOUSE APPROVED federal hate crimes legislation (H.R. 1913), by a decisive 249- 175 margin. But in a shocking move, Democrats killed language that would have excluded pedophiles from receiving protections afforded in the measure. Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) added the amendment during Judiciary Committee hearings, which stated that sexual orientation in the bill specifically be defined as not including pedophiles.
According to Ted Pike, director of the National Prayer Network, Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wisc.) objected, saying that King’s amendment was “unnecessary and inflammatory.” Ms. Baldwin claimed that sexual orientation, as defined by the Hate Crimes Statistics Act of 1990, means consensual heterosexual or homosexual sex. That definition, she claimed, is sufficient to exclude pedophiles, Pike added. Judiciary Chairman John Conyers (Ill.) then quickly cut off debate—before any conservatives on the committee could respond—and called for a vote.
“When Republicans objected,” said Pike, “Conyers said he had not noticed them wanting to debate Baldwin’s position, an absurd, unbelievable lie.” Pedophilia is a problem, contends Pike, and is something that should be addressed in this legislation to avoid protecting those who break the law. It is inexplicable why Democrats on the committee would seek to provide federal protections to homosexual individuals and groups that promote pedophilia, while “straight” pedophiles would remain without specially protected status, punishable under conventional law.
During the last several minutes of the hearing, Rep. Louis Gohmert (R-Texas) tried to object to the committee’s burying of language that would have excluded child-molesting homosexuals, but it was a lost cause.
The Judiciary voted to pass the hate bill without protective language so that any homosexual can claim special protection even when it comes to children. What other forms of dangerous practices will be afforded federal protections under the law? Before the debate was ended, Gohmert wondered aloud if parents, who attacked a homosexual pedophile who had been preying on their child, could now be prosecuted under federal hate crime laws.
Says Pike: “If the hate bill threat has not moved you to pick up your phone and protest to Congress, the fact that H.R. 1913 protects even pedophiles should cause you to react with outrage.”
Call 1-877 851-6437 toll free and tell your Senators in Congress to vote against this bill. "
http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/vo…
I was in favor of this bill but not anymore, some of our elected officials priorities seem to be screwed up when they give more protection to homosexuals than kids."
More... ...Less
More...
Glad to see you changed your mind on the hates crime bill, because as of May 6 were against it. http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archive…
"Sadly it's true,
"THE HOUSE APPROVED federal hate crimes legislation (H.R. 1913), by a decisive 249- 175 margin. But in a shocking move, Democrats killed language that would have excluded pedophiles from receiving protections afforded in the measure. Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) added the amendment during Judiciary Committee hearings, which stated that sexual orientation in the bill specifically be defined as not including pedophiles.
According to Ted Pike, director of the National Prayer Network, Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wisc.) objected, saying that King’s amendment was “unnecessary and inflammatory.” Ms. Baldwin claimed that sexual orientation, as defined by the Hate Crimes Statistics Act of 1990, means consensual heterosexual or homosexual sex. That definition, she claimed, is sufficient to exclude pedophiles, Pike added. Judiciary Chairman John Conyers (Ill.) then quickly cut off debate—before any conservatives on the committee could respond—and called for a vote.
“When Republicans objected,” said Pike, “Conyers said he had not noticed them wanting to debate Baldwin’s position, an absurd, unbelievable lie.” Pedophilia is a problem, contends Pike, and is something that should be addressed in this legislation to avoid protecting those who break the law. It is inexplicable why Democrats on the committee would seek to provide federal protections to homosexual individuals and groups that promote pedophilia, while “straight” pedophiles would remain without specially protected status, punishable under conventional law.
During the last several minutes of the hearing, Rep. Louis Gohmert (R-Texas) tried to object to the committee’s burying of language that would have excluded child-molesting homosexuals, but it was a lost cause.
The Judiciary voted to pass the hate bill without protective language so that any homosexual can claim special protection even when it comes to children. What other forms of dangerous practices will be afforded federal protections under the law? Before the debate was ended, Gohmert wondered aloud if parents, who attacked a homosexual pedophile who had been preying on their child, could now be prosecuted under federal hate crime laws.
Says Pike: “If the hate bill threat has not moved you to pick up your phone and protest to Congress, the fact that H.R. 1913 protects even pedophiles should cause you to react with outrage.”
Call 1-877 851-6437 toll free and tell your Senators in Congress to vote against this bill. "
http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/vo…
I was in favor of this bill but not anymore, some of our elected officials priorities seem to be screwed up when they give more protection to homosexuals than kids."
More... ...Less
118
I grew up with that guy in Birchwood. My house was directly across the street from the church where this happened. Total Jesus freak and a major douche. Never the less, I am still a bit shocked by it. Also anyone working with kids with eyebrows like that is a highly questionable individual, I should have noticed all those years I knew him.
119
116 Precisely my concern with that particular bill is not that it reinforces protections against violence for homosexuals ( I support that) but that it also seems to affords them for child molesters. The same inability or unwillingness to distance themselves from those amongst them that are child molesters is what infuriates me the most. It bewilders me how you being also a mother don't feel the same.
Oh... and at least you've taken the first step ( quoting Riz's profanities aside) in sorta admitting your lack of real understanding of the African American community. It's a beginning.
Oh... and at least you've taken the first step ( quoting Riz's profanities aside) in sorta admitting your lack of real understanding of the African American community. It's a beginning.
120
114 Thank you Just Blue, I know we can find common ground if we a truly are able to hear and analyze the concerns of others we don't agree with. I can assure you that I don't view any human being as lesser than me but as a child of God just as I am.
121
119,
I never claimed to understand the African American community. Are you saying that Riz doesn't understand his own community? Are you saying Bayard Rustin didn't understand the African American community? Heck, are you saying my aunt doesn't understand her own community? Does my cousin not understand her own community? Because you appear to deny understanding to African Americans who don't have your exact perceptions about the African American community. In essence, you say only your preception counts. Sorry, yours is but one perception and it is not superior to any others.
I never claimed to understand the African American community. Are you saying that Riz doesn't understand his own community? Are you saying Bayard Rustin didn't understand the African American community? Heck, are you saying my aunt doesn't understand her own community? Does my cousin not understand her own community? Because you appear to deny understanding to African Americans who don't have your exact perceptions about the African American community. In essence, you say only your preception counts. Sorry, yours is but one perception and it is not superior to any others.
122
121 No Kim that's not what I'm saying, what I have commented here is that the things that Riz's gives importance to (those that you happen to favor) are diametrically different from those that I have heard my gay friends from my community say they care about, like I have said gay marriage plays little to no interest in their concerns. Poverty, employment, hate crimes, those do.
123
119,
Did you actually read HR 1913 (http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h19…), or did you take the word of Ted Pike of the National Prayer Network? If you read the actual text, then you know it does not offer any protection to child molesters. So, you don't need to be bewildered by me, because I actually understand that difference between ADULT MEN having a consensual relationship and pedophiles molesting children. You on the other hand are equating consensual relationships between ADULT MEN with pedophilia. They are two entirely distinct things. I'm bewildered by your inability to recognize that ADULT MAN romantically involved with ADULT MAN does not equal pedophilia. Whereas, ADULT MAN sexually attracted to CHILD does equal pedophilia. No one here, including me, is talking about legitimizing pedophilia. No one here, supports it becoming legitimized and we all agree it is a heinous crime.
Did you actually read HR 1913 (http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h19…), or did you take the word of Ted Pike of the National Prayer Network? If you read the actual text, then you know it does not offer any protection to child molesters. So, you don't need to be bewildered by me, because I actually understand that difference between ADULT MEN having a consensual relationship and pedophiles molesting children. You on the other hand are equating consensual relationships between ADULT MEN with pedophilia. They are two entirely distinct things. I'm bewildered by your inability to recognize that ADULT MAN romantically involved with ADULT MAN does not equal pedophilia. Whereas, ADULT MAN sexually attracted to CHILD does equal pedophilia. No one here, including me, is talking about legitimizing pedophilia. No one here, supports it becoming legitimized and we all agree it is a heinous crime.
124
122,
How do you know that poverty, employment, hate crimes are not important to Riz or any of the rest of us. I can't speak for Riz, but it is important to me, and my family.
How do you know that poverty, employment, hate crimes are not important to Riz or any of the rest of us. I can't speak for Riz, but it is important to me, and my family.
125
119
http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/ht…
The empirical research does not show that gay or bisexual men are any more likely than heterosexual men to molest children. This is not to argue that homosexual and bisexual men never molest children. But there is no scientific basis for asserting that they are more likely than heterosexual men to do so. And, as explained above, many child molesters cannot be characterized as having an adult sexual orientation at all; they are fixated on children.
http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/ht…
The empirical research does not show that gay or bisexual men are any more likely than heterosexual men to molest children. This is not to argue that homosexual and bisexual men never molest children. But there is no scientific basis for asserting that they are more likely than heterosexual men to do so. And, as explained above, many child molesters cannot be characterized as having an adult sexual orientation at all; they are fixated on children.
126
119
Loveschild. I am honestly confused by several of your posts. If you don't mind, indulge me a little here ...
#1 As Kim points out in post 123 HR 1913 doesn't say anything about Pedophiles. Not once. There is nothing that offers them any protections. What so ever. So ... if perhaps you have read the link that Kim provide, you can enlighten us as to where it says anything about offering protection to pedophiles
#2 You say that "The same inability or unwillingness to distance themselves from those amongst them that are child molesters is what infuriates me the most." What exactly do you mean by that? We already determined by actually reading HR 1913 that it is DISTANCED from child molesters. Is it your "gay friends" that you claim to have that will not distance themselves from people that you know for fact to be child molesters? Because ... ummm ... if you know of people that are child molesters maybe you should report it to the police? And why in God's name would you be associating with people that you believed to be okay with molesting children? AND if this statement was to somehow insinuate that homosexuals in general are unwilling to distance themselves from baby rapers, where .... exactly ... is your true factual evidence of that? Do you often hang out with homosexuals and inquire about their other friends' love of children?
and last by certainly not least as I have asked you this question many times and your inability to answer it is very disturbing to me.
#3 Do you know the difference between LITTLE BOYS and GROWN MEN?
Loveschild. I am honestly confused by several of your posts. If you don't mind, indulge me a little here ...
#1 As Kim points out in post 123 HR 1913 doesn't say anything about Pedophiles. Not once. There is nothing that offers them any protections. What so ever. So ... if perhaps you have read the link that Kim provide, you can enlighten us as to where it says anything about offering protection to pedophiles
#2 You say that "The same inability or unwillingness to distance themselves from those amongst them that are child molesters is what infuriates me the most." What exactly do you mean by that? We already determined by actually reading HR 1913 that it is DISTANCED from child molesters. Is it your "gay friends" that you claim to have that will not distance themselves from people that you know for fact to be child molesters? Because ... ummm ... if you know of people that are child molesters maybe you should report it to the police? And why in God's name would you be associating with people that you believed to be okay with molesting children? AND if this statement was to somehow insinuate that homosexuals in general are unwilling to distance themselves from baby rapers, where .... exactly ... is your true factual evidence of that? Do you often hang out with homosexuals and inquire about their other friends' love of children?
and last by certainly not least as I have asked you this question many times and your inability to answer it is very disturbing to me.
#3 Do you know the difference between LITTLE BOYS and GROWN MEN?
127
126 There seems to be a communication problem here, I take issue with the following ->
"killed language that would have excluded pedophiles from receiving protections afforded in the measure. Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) added the amendment during Judiciary Committee hearings, which stated that sexual orientation in the bill specifically be defined as not including pedophiles."
That's what I mean by the unwillingness of some homosexuals to distance themselves from those within their group who have the added proclivity of child molesting. I would want believe the gay people I know do not engage in such a crime, they have given me no reason to believe otherwise, they seem pretty prudent people but I can assure you if I ever had the slightest doubt I would take action on the matter. What I want for my kids (protection against possible predators and a happy childhood and teenage years) I want for all kids.
Regarding your question which I have answered previously I believe that it is fair to call the widespread cases of sick men presented in this post and the other links here as homosexual pedophiles since they're men going after male children. By stating that I in no way am making a blanket statement that all homosexuals are child molesters, just as I wouln't with (the equally monstrous) cases of men going after female children. Both are equally bad, both are crimes that should be punished harshly and not tolerated at all. But refusing to acknowledge how more common the former is within a certain group just so that feelings are not hurt is to me not only a lost opportunity to stop such atrocities from happening in the future but also a crime unto itself to every potential victim which can be any of our kids. To recap, I do not believe all homosexuals are child molesters but I also believe that there's a defining silence and unwillingness to address this problem by most homosexuals groups, and homosexuals of prominence like Mr Savage who rarely cites the weekly sometimes daily horrible incidents like the one he posted in here (to his credit), it seems as though he brushes them off in favor of trying to find any bizarre marriage or family rupture to further his agenda.
More...
"killed language that would have excluded pedophiles from receiving protections afforded in the measure. Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) added the amendment during Judiciary Committee hearings, which stated that sexual orientation in the bill specifically be defined as not including pedophiles."
That's what I mean by the unwillingness of some homosexuals to distance themselves from those within their group who have the added proclivity of child molesting. I would want believe the gay people I know do not engage in such a crime, they have given me no reason to believe otherwise, they seem pretty prudent people but I can assure you if I ever had the slightest doubt I would take action on the matter. What I want for my kids (protection against possible predators and a happy childhood and teenage years) I want for all kids.
Regarding your question which I have answered previously I believe that it is fair to call the widespread cases of sick men presented in this post and the other links here as homosexual pedophiles since they're men going after male children. By stating that I in no way am making a blanket statement that all homosexuals are child molesters, just as I wouln't with (the equally monstrous) cases of men going after female children. Both are equally bad, both are crimes that should be punished harshly and not tolerated at all. But refusing to acknowledge how more common the former is within a certain group just so that feelings are not hurt is to me not only a lost opportunity to stop such atrocities from happening in the future but also a crime unto itself to every potential victim which can be any of our kids. To recap, I do not believe all homosexuals are child molesters but I also believe that there's a defining silence and unwillingness to address this problem by most homosexuals groups, and homosexuals of prominence like Mr Savage who rarely cites the weekly sometimes daily horrible incidents like the one he posted in here (to his credit), it seems as though he brushes them off in favor of trying to find any bizarre marriage or family rupture to further his agenda.
128
@127, to argue that a perpetrator's sexuality is defined by the gender of his victims is to imply molestation is sex. It is not.
I suggest you consider this article in The Journal of the American Medical Association:
http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/ful…
"One study noted that 98% of these male perpetrators self-identified as heterosexual." This is in the article and it deals only with pedophiles who target boys.
By your logic, it would be more rational to ban men who consider themselves straight from adopting children.
Any hate crime legislation, for anything...race, disability, etc...would have to include a caveat that heterosexual pedophiles be excluded.
I suggest you consider this article in The Journal of the American Medical Association:
http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/ful…
"One study noted that 98% of these male perpetrators self-identified as heterosexual." This is in the article and it deals only with pedophiles who target boys.
By your logic, it would be more rational to ban men who consider themselves straight from adopting children.
Any hate crime legislation, for anything...race, disability, etc...would have to include a caveat that heterosexual pedophiles be excluded.
129
@127 Loveschild, thank you for indulging me and answering my questions. It certainly goes a long way to clarification ...
And just to clarify on my part, the reason that I constantly stress for you that you acknowledge the difference between little boys and grown men is so that you can see how a person attracted to grown men is not the same as a person attracted to little boys, in the same way that a person attracted to woman is different from someone attracted to men. Sexually little boys are quite different from grown men. Just as sexually woman are different from men. So if you can acknowledge, for instance, a man attracted to men has a different sexual orientation than a man that is attracted to woman, than is it so difficult for you to see that a man attracted to LITTLE BOYS has a different sexual orientation than a man attracted to GROWN MEN?
It is not that people are protecting child molesters, or ignoring them, or sweeping them under the carpet, it is that they do not associate their sexuality with child molesters. Most people with normal, healthy sexual attraction to people of their own age are appalled by pedophiles and child molesters of all stripe. I would be incredibly offended if someone were to equate my sexuality with a woman's whose preference was to diddle little boys.
That is where people have a problem with what you are saying. Homosexuals are just as appalled by sexual abuse, pedophiles and child molesters as you are, it is offensive for you to insinuate that their healthy sexual attraction to people of their own age is in any way similar to that of people who abuse children and men who abuse LITTLE BOYS specifically.
And just to clarify on my part, the reason that I constantly stress for you that you acknowledge the difference between little boys and grown men is so that you can see how a person attracted to grown men is not the same as a person attracted to little boys, in the same way that a person attracted to woman is different from someone attracted to men. Sexually little boys are quite different from grown men. Just as sexually woman are different from men. So if you can acknowledge, for instance, a man attracted to men has a different sexual orientation than a man that is attracted to woman, than is it so difficult for you to see that a man attracted to LITTLE BOYS has a different sexual orientation than a man attracted to GROWN MEN?
It is not that people are protecting child molesters, or ignoring them, or sweeping them under the carpet, it is that they do not associate their sexuality with child molesters. Most people with normal, healthy sexual attraction to people of their own age are appalled by pedophiles and child molesters of all stripe. I would be incredibly offended if someone were to equate my sexuality with a woman's whose preference was to diddle little boys.
That is where people have a problem with what you are saying. Homosexuals are just as appalled by sexual abuse, pedophiles and child molesters as you are, it is offensive for you to insinuate that their healthy sexual attraction to people of their own age is in any way similar to that of people who abuse children and men who abuse LITTLE BOYS specifically.
130
@127
Also, the fundamental problem here is a misunderstanding about the nature of hate crime legislation. Being a member of a protected group does not mean that any assault against you will be charged as a hate crime.
For example, if someone assaults an African-American who is also a pedophile, it’s not automatically a hate crime. I’m in no way implying a link between race and pedophilia. I’m only employing this hypothetical situation to illustrate how hate crime legislation works and I removed the “gay” variable because it creates confusion. For this example, any member of a group with protected status will do.
If the person committing the assault attacked him because he is a pedophile, it cannot be charged as a hate crime. Although his victim was African-American, the attacker was not motivated by racism.
If the person attacked him because he is African-American, then it is a hate crime. Even though his victim happens to be a pedophile, this does not change the fact the crime was racially motivated.
And in all cases, assault and pedophilia are illegal.
Also, the fundamental problem here is a misunderstanding about the nature of hate crime legislation. Being a member of a protected group does not mean that any assault against you will be charged as a hate crime.
For example, if someone assaults an African-American who is also a pedophile, it’s not automatically a hate crime. I’m in no way implying a link between race and pedophilia. I’m only employing this hypothetical situation to illustrate how hate crime legislation works and I removed the “gay” variable because it creates confusion. For this example, any member of a group with protected status will do.
If the person committing the assault attacked him because he is a pedophile, it cannot be charged as a hate crime. Although his victim was African-American, the attacker was not motivated by racism.
If the person attacked him because he is African-American, then it is a hate crime. Even though his victim happens to be a pedophile, this does not change the fact the crime was racially motivated.
And in all cases, assault and pedophilia are illegal.
131
Just Blue and Take it all in,
Good luck, actual legitimate scientific evidence and the work of Dr. Nicolas Groth A. Nicholas Groth is a pioneer in the scientific study of sexual offenders against women and children, who has treated over 3000 child molesters over the course of two decades. A former director of the Sex Offender Program at the Connecticut Department of Corrections, Groth is the author of Men Who Rape: Psychology of the Offender, a work widely regarded as a classic textbook on the psychology of sexual violence. Groth explicitly states that it is a myth that men who molest boys are all homosexual. But, she won't believe it. She is clinging to the debunked studies (http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/ht…) that nationaly recognized hate groups cling, too. If you read her posts (scroll up to # 53) you'll see that she believes homosexuals are heterosexuals making a choice to live the "gay lifestyle". Her thoughts are inflexible on the subject, many of us have provided legitimate links and journels (AMA, Journal of Pediatrics, Child Development, NY Times, CDC and much more) on the subject of sexual molestation, sexual orientation, children being raised in same-sex families growing up to be normal healthy adults, etc., but she brushes them aside as biased and written by gay activists. She claims to be here to learn, but read her comments, she rarely ever asks questions.
I appreciate your both dialoging with her about it. Perhaps you both will have more success then I ever have.
Have a good and safe weekend. I'm off to lovely Oak Harbor, WA.
Good luck, actual legitimate scientific evidence and the work of Dr. Nicolas Groth A. Nicholas Groth is a pioneer in the scientific study of sexual offenders against women and children, who has treated over 3000 child molesters over the course of two decades. A former director of the Sex Offender Program at the Connecticut Department of Corrections, Groth is the author of Men Who Rape: Psychology of the Offender, a work widely regarded as a classic textbook on the psychology of sexual violence. Groth explicitly states that it is a myth that men who molest boys are all homosexual. But, she won't believe it. She is clinging to the debunked studies (http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/ht…) that nationaly recognized hate groups cling, too. If you read her posts (scroll up to # 53) you'll see that she believes homosexuals are heterosexuals making a choice to live the "gay lifestyle". Her thoughts are inflexible on the subject, many of us have provided legitimate links and journels (AMA, Journal of Pediatrics, Child Development, NY Times, CDC and much more) on the subject of sexual molestation, sexual orientation, children being raised in same-sex families growing up to be normal healthy adults, etc., but she brushes them aside as biased and written by gay activists. She claims to be here to learn, but read her comments, she rarely ever asks questions.
I appreciate your both dialoging with her about it. Perhaps you both will have more success then I ever have.
Have a good and safe weekend. I'm off to lovely Oak Harbor, WA.
133
@131 I always admire your well thought out, eloquent, evidence baring comments.
It is so hard not to try and show logical rational thinking.
And she still has not just said "Yes I see the difference between Little Boys and Grown Men" I think that part of her knows that once she acknowledges in a straightforward way that they are different then she will have to acknowledge that there is a different motivation behind those who are attracted to children vs. adults.
Have a wonderful weekend!
It is so hard not to try and show logical rational thinking.
And she still has not just said "Yes I see the difference between Little Boys and Grown Men" I think that part of her knows that once she acknowledges in a straightforward way that they are different then she will have to acknowledge that there is a different motivation behind those who are attracted to children vs. adults.
Have a wonderful weekend!
134
@131, I don’t expect to have any luck at all. I read Slog far more often than I comment and I’m aware of all the patient, well-thought out arguments people have presented to Loveschild that she simply dismissed. And surely if someone is able to exhaust your almost limitless patience, I will fare no better.
Mostly I just disregard the comments of people whom I have good reason to believe are unwilling to engage in open-minded, honest debate. I’m having a lapse. When I develop a headache from the brick wall, I’ll resume following my usual policy.
I hope you enjoy your time in Oak Harbor!
Mostly I just disregard the comments of people whom I have good reason to believe are unwilling to engage in open-minded, honest debate. I’m having a lapse. When I develop a headache from the brick wall, I’ll resume following my usual policy.
I hope you enjoy your time in Oak Harbor!
135
@130, thanks! Although I don’t have high hopes for changing anyone’s mind via online debate, at least the excellent points brought up here by you and others underscore the perseverance of reason. I also think it helps lay bare the motivations of those who oppose civil rights protections for GLBT folks.
After all, if those who tout the traditional family as the only acceptable model really meant it when they said it’s all about protecting kids from pedophilia, they’d soon realize that the statistically safest family would involve no males at all, especially relatives and straight-identified men. Obviously it would be ridiculous to lobby for that, and if their concerns were truly as stated, they’d drop that argument completely.
After all, if those who tout the traditional family as the only acceptable model really meant it when they said it’s all about protecting kids from pedophilia, they’d soon realize that the statistically safest family would involve no males at all, especially relatives and straight-identified men. Obviously it would be ridiculous to lobby for that, and if their concerns were truly as stated, they’d drop that argument completely.
136
39 and 45-47, I think I'm going to copy your comments and save them for the next time I come across some idiot who doesn't understand this. You both said it better than I could.
137
@127- I actually understand Loveschild! Thank you for clarifying where you get the pedophile argument.
If you consider it thoughtfully you'll understand the "distance" homosexuals rightfully want between them and pedophiles. It isn't a harboring issue at all. People, like you, want to hold onto ancient propaganda and scare tactics which include creating this false association. Having a person, such as a Republican from Iowa, tarnish what could have been a banner day for gay rights by perpetuating such hateful nonsense is insulting and disgraceful. For you to hold that up as reason to withhold your support is exactly the motive. I don't think you want to be so easy to fool.
If you consider it thoughtfully you'll understand the "distance" homosexuals rightfully want between them and pedophiles. It isn't a harboring issue at all. People, like you, want to hold onto ancient propaganda and scare tactics which include creating this false association. Having a person, such as a Republican from Iowa, tarnish what could have been a banner day for gay rights by perpetuating such hateful nonsense is insulting and disgraceful. For you to hold that up as reason to withhold your support is exactly the motive. I don't think you want to be so easy to fool.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
Liveblogging the Washington State House Debate and Vote
onIN FAVOR OF GAY MARRIAGE by Eli Sanders -
SL Letter of the Day: Life Sentence by Dan Savage
-
SL Letter of the Day: Daddy Loves Who? by Dan Savage
-
Required Listening: Howard Stern on Ellen, JC Penney, Bullied Gay Kids, Rosie, Santorum, Bachmann, et al by Dan Savage
-
Jeff Bezos' Racist, Pro-Life, Anti-Evolution, Rape-Apologist Search Engine by Goldy
-
Crowdsourcing Uncut Police Video from the Dec. 12 Occupy Protest at the Port of Seattle by Eli Sanders
-
State Legislator Testifies That His Opposition to Same-Sex Marriage Came to Him from a Commercial for Jack in the Box by Christopher Frizzelle
-
"Let me be the first one to say: My business will refuse to participate in a same-sex marriage ceremony," by Republican Representative Matt Shea of the Spokane Valley by Eli Sanders
-
The Onion Is on a Roll: "Iran Worried U.S. Might Be Building 8,500th Nuclear Weapon" by Charles Mudede
-
"I don't know if I want to be here [if gay marriage passes]," by Republican State Senator Jay Rodne of North Bend by Eli Sanders
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (137) RSS