Boy Scout leader arrested for; guess what to little boys?

I'm not searching through your drivel for something that I already know isn't there.

Likewise, if I post something as fact, I post a link to back that up. No one need demand , or rather ask, for anything.

You're refusal to do likewise proves you have no facts.

 

Sorry about your troubles. There is one simple fact, pedophiles go only for kids of the opposite sex UNLESS they are homosexual pedophiles. If they are homosexual pedophiles, you should keep them away from kids of the same sex as them.

Your "nice married men with wives and kids" are "married homosexuals with wives and kids" if they tamper with kids of their own sex. If they tamper with only kids of the opposite sex, then they are "married heterosexual men with wives and kids".

 

Umm...you left a lot out, and I'm sick of people like you doing this.

Couple more questions for you:

1. Are you in love with your brother?
2. Does your brother turn you on?
3. Why are you using incest as a comparison to homosexuality?

 

please note the responses given to the liberal leaning study

60% of interviewed pedo's said they were heterosexual

40% of interviewed pedo's said they were homosexual

It doesn't matter if the pedo's were male or female. You still have the 60/40 breakdown

that is straight from the horse' mouth. I'm sorry if the numbers bother you.

The number which bothers me is the 3 million cases

Do you see me getting all outraged that 1 in 110 heterosexuals commits an act of pedophilia. Now, that is assuming a 1:1 ratio but I'm sure that there are repeat offenders thus raising the ratio just like the 1 in 8 homosexuals commit an act of pedophile, I'm confident it's a wider ratio due to repeat offenders

But, we don't have those figures and for simplistic discussion, I use the same math for homosexuals and heterosexuals

So again I ask, do you see me attacking you because of the 1:110 ratio? Nope, I abhor pedophiles and am ashamed that even 1 heterosexual is a pedophile

it should be zero for both lifestyles, hetero and homo

 

again, wrong. Pedophiles are not interested in the sexuality of their victim. In fact by the very definition of the word they go for children who have not reached ANY level of sexuality either way.

Words have meanings. Pedophile means sexually attracted to prepubescent children. If we're talking about older children, then yes their attackers are in fact attracted to their sexuality and thus could be defined by homosexual or heterosexual.

Many seem to be purposely lumping the two groups together, when they are in fact separate groups.

 

Homosexual pedophiles aren't necessarily homosexuals though, that's the point. Bisexual would be more accurate - especially considering many pedophiles abuse both girls AND boys.

But that only describes the nature of their orientation towards children. Pedophilia is a strange phenomenon where sometimes males who identify as heterosexual and are attracted to adult women are also attracted to young (typically pre-pubescent) boys with high pitched voices and no body hair- "feminine" traits. I am not saying they are in fact "heterosexual" - technically any male on male sex is 'homosexual', but the main point to remember is that these people are overwhelmingly part of the "straight community", the vast majority consider themselves heterosexual, and therefore any efforts to reduce child abuse by banning openly gay people is ineffective as best and dangerous/providing a false sense of security at worst.

If law enforcers were focusing 10 times more effort profiling openly gay people as Sec's logic would suggest we do, then the result would actually be that less pedophiles would be caught and brought to justice, since they are predominately "heterosexual" for all intents and purposes...

 

What's the study that claims 40% of child abusers are homosexual?

 

HEY!!, he's posted the information a million times you leftwing loon. That's good enough for government work.

HAHAHAHA

 

I could argue the same about parents who poison their kids' minds with religion Seriously. There is bound to be a pretty long list of things that will permanently affect someone from childhood, some obviously being worse than others.

A part of this is our natural reaction to harm coming to children. That is more emotional than reasonable, though, and the arguments I'm seeing for executing child molesters are thus far clearly emotionally driven. The justice system is supposed to get us beyond that.

 

A "happily married" male w/his own children and 1 or 2 even adopted (to make himself look even more like "Father of the Year"), w/a successful career can still be a gay pedophile in hiding...... many of the gay & straight pedoes are 'happily married'. It's a ploy that works for them.... well, for awhile anyway - until they're finally caught. And so what about the background check? Sandusky was already long established at Penn State and apparently had a 'clean' one when he started and probably b/c he hadn't been caught...

And btw, fiddler, how would you know Sandusky was 'happily' married to his bride, who HAD to have known something wasn't 'quite right' thru out those yrs living w/him......

But hey! Nice of you to give Sandusky your support...... I'm sure the depraved cockroach would appreciate it.

And then there's those who say 'Oh, Michael Jackson wasn't a pedophile. He was just a little boy who never grew up..." OH BARF! The freak was a pedo......

 

First of all, DISGUSTING that you would compare religion to sexual abuse at ANY level...........

You know, actually I was going to have a second of all, but your comment disgusted me and frankly I don't wish to converse with you further after reading it.

- - - Updated - - -

NO ONE is supporting Sandusky here.

Jesus Christ, pointing out that he wasn't gay isn't supporting him .

 

Very good question.............

 

I do consider it a form of child abuse, though more mentally than physically in most cases.

 

welcome to ignore

 

The answer is that no one is pretending that the act of male on male sex isn't in fact "homosexual" in nature. If you think otherwise please provide a quote.

What we are saying is that those who identify as gay are no more likely to abuse children than those who identify as straight, therefore banning gay adults from being alone with children is simply wrong.

 

You are not understanding what I have said. I'm sorry I don't have the time to explain it to you.

 

Exactly, SEC and company are clearly trying to equate being gay with being a pedophile.

As you said, no one denies that having sex with a same sex child is a homosexual act. But what they are denying is that that pedophiles are in it for the children not for the homosexual.

Sandusky would have been just as happy to molest little girls if he could have. But not many little girls go to football camps.

Much as I suspect very few Jewish boys are molested at Mass, but no doubt those who do the molesting in Catholic churches would molest little Jewish boys if given the chance.

 

I'm not even going to read past the first sentence of your post.

That first sentence is the same as saying "Green cars aren't necessarily green."

That makes no sense.

 

My heart. It weeps.

 

michael jackson looked more like janet jackson.

Feel free to let your kids play with pedophiles, Ill keep mine safe.

 

Sure it makes sense. Not every man who sexually abuses another man is homosexual in his nature, and that includes those who abuse boys.

 

It makes complete sense, you're just not using your brain to the capacity it was designed.

Why is a "homosexual pedophile" a homosexual if he is attracted to adult women?

It's like saying an openly gay man who has sex with adult men, but then molests a little girl, is heterosexual.

Sec is promoting a ridiculous double standard. He only sees "heterosexual" and "non-heterosexual"

 

So, if a person commits one act of homosexual sex then they are homosexual even if they have had heterosexual sex to?
,
I mean I don't necessarily disagree with that statement , but am curious about your reasoning.

 

I think the above organizations already do that. But some people lie on the applications or give false names.

 

I think you're fooling yourself. You're trying to disguise the definition of homosexuality.

- - - Updated - - -

I'm sorry, but you and I aren't communicating at the same level.