 Kore7 says: In the wake of the scandal of former Congressman Mark Foley’s inappropriate behavior involving teenage male pages, a number of conservative commentators and organizations are reviving an old charge that homosexuals are more likely to sexually abuse children.But, as the author points out, this research has been debunked for decades now and is only being resurrected again for campaigning purposes. The numerous citations of the scientific literature by social conservatives initially look impressive. However, when one examines the original studies that have been cited, one finds that the conclusions of the original studies are contrary to the claims made by those citing the studies. Most significantly, while social conservatives claim that all the cases of sexual molestation of young boys by adult males are committed by homosexuals, the scientists whom they cite explicitly reject this assertion. Let us examine the actual claims of the scientists, one by one. Timothy Dailey is particularly egregious in ignoring the conclusions of the very studies he cites: The Family Research Council’s analyst Timothy Dailey, who argues that there is a link between homosexuality and child molestation, admits that pedophiles who target boys may also have sexual relations with women. However, he implies that such men are merely closet homosexuals and refuses to admit that heterosexual men may well be attracted to women and to underage boys at the same time. This tactic leads Dailey to again distort the work of a reputable researcher, W. L. Marshall. Marshall's paper, “Sexual Offenders Against Male Children: Sexual Preferences,” discusses the results of a s... In fact, Marshall's study found that not only could heterosexual males be attracted to women and young boys simultaneously, the heterosexual males were more inclined to be attracted to the very young, whereas the homosexual offenders chose older victims:heterosexually‑oriented men characteristically chose victims who were clearly pre‑pubescent, whereas the homosexually‑oriented offenders chose pubescent boys. In their remarks to us during the course of our assessment interviews, the offenders described the features of boys which they found to be attractive. The homosexuals mentioned the early appearance of male secondary sexual features. . . . Amongst the heterosexu... This clip was so good, I just had to pop it twice!  Important! thx Kore7 Pop for later read. I'll keep this in mind as I watch NAMBLA march proudly by in the next "pride" parade. I'll keep this in mind as I watch NAMBLA march proudly by in the next "pride" parade.The fact that heterosexual males are more inclined to be attracted to the very young? Thank you, GD. Pedophilia and child sexual abuse is a large and growing problem in adult heterosexual men (the internet has only fed this trend) and we need more people to be aware of the issue. You're the first person I've heard of that goes to NAMBLA parades. To each his own, I guess. someone has to throw the rocks Sorry to mislead you with the stats, GD. While it's a growing problem, the vast majority of heterosexuals are actually innocent of these crimes. Your heart's in the right place, but throwing rocks at the crowd won't help. I recommend just throwing candy like the rest of your fellow paraders. Thanks, K7. I didn't find them misleading, stats are stats. You know nambla doesn't march in the queer parade so stuff it. Kore, as usual, makes an excellent observation. Not only is all this hullabaloo about gay men being pedophiles FALSE but it also obscures the REAL threats and the fact that the VAAAAAAST majority of sexual assaults on children are against girls and committed by their own fathers or step fathers. "However, the “slippery slope” argument is based on the false premise that the protection of children from sexual activity is a long-standing part of the Judeo-Christian ethic..." *False premise*!!!! What a bald-face lying innuendo! Unless I'm reading this wrong, this statement is attempting to equate the early marriages of young girls (with in the Judeo/Christian community) with some sinister "sexual" activity. Is there no longer any sanity or integrity in the discussion of sex? Isn't it all about trying to validate one's personal preference and invalidate the "Thou shalt not"s of the Scriptures? NAMBLA does march in "pride" parades, and, as there is apparently seems to be some doubt, sex crimes against children are the worst of crimes regardless the sex of the perp and victim, and should be a capital offense carrying the death penalty. Unless I'm reading this wrong, this statement is attempting to equate the early marriages of young girls (with in the Judeo/Christian community) with some sinister "sexual" activity.Are you saying you don't think those marriages were sexual? enbar....of course I'm not. My aunt married at 15, had 4 children and a 45 yr marriage. My neice, at 16, now has two precious children and a marriage of 10 yrs. You know it was an attempt to make a comparison between Christians marrying at young ages with pedophilia. My neice, at 16, now has two precious children and a marriage of 10 yrs. You might want to rephrase that, Jatfla @jatfla I don't get what the difference is, then. Part of the point the article is making is that Judaism and Christianity historically have not had a problem with having sex with children as young as, say, fifteen or sixteen -- or if you go back a little further in history, even younger. You seem to be agreeing. If that's true, then recent changes in people's willingness to tolerate homosexuals in society can't possibly be responsible for any upswing in sexual relations between adults and pubescent kids, since it was going on long before. Yikes!!! You're right about that Godfrey!!! @jatfla ... Let me put it a different way. Why is a person who has sex with a fifteen-year-old girl not a pedophile? dear enbar....If you don't know the difference between a married relationship entered into by willing participants, with the agreement of the parents....and just any ol' body messin' with a young girl (or boy)....I can't explain it to you. I never thought I'd say it! But I guess I have become *old-fashioned*. Why can't you explain it? Is it that complicated? No, not at all. Why would I try to explain something that is common sense? But then, it depends on what a person *wants* to see. And what most of us use to take as common sense is no longer in vogue or politically correct. That being said, for me, there is no moral equivalence. I have no idea what's in vogue or politically correct. And people have different ideas of common sense. I just think an adult male who sleeps with a fifteen-year-old girl is sick. This is common sense to me. Not as sick as someone who molests a five-year-old, but that's not the point you raised. You were saying that there's nothing in common between "Christian" marriages between young girls and older men, on the one hand, and pedophilia on the other hand -- but you never defined what pedophilia was. What makes it different? The fact that there's a legal sanction (marriage)? The fact that the parents agree? The fact that the people involved call themselves Christians? What? I'm not talking ab... Enbar, a man having sex with a 15 yr old is a case of Ephebophilia or attraction to adolescents. Pedophilia is attraction to pre-pubescent children. Just so's ya know. Awareness is crittical to getting this under control. I feel bad for those that are labeled but are innocent. They will never recover in our society. However, in this case it's better to error in favor of the child than to not act. Further research: After 17 years, real-world Scandinavian experiment fails to find a slippery slope. In fact, the opposite occurred: Gay Marriage, Social Conservatism, and Slippery Slopes. |
View the Top Clips from October 17, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
New from the makers of Clipmarks: Amplify.com - Don't just share the news...Amplify it!
|
|
