Pedophile Principal Arrested

???You are the one disagreeing with the view of the APA.

 

We were discussing

with no limitation to the US.

 

no, you are. You said this: "Tell that to the APA who tries to argue all the homosexual pedophiles arent homosexual..."
They aren't homosexual. You just want them to be. You are arguing with the APA.

- - - Updated - - -

Okay, explain how child rearing leads to homosexuality for anybody outside that particular tribe.

 

Pedophiles are not gay! THEY ARE PEDOPHILES! What exactly is your point and purpose in posting this garbage besides to flame troll?

 

In contrast to you who argues

 

Prove that wrong.

You blabbing about what you think the APA says is just that. Point it out where they say pedophilia is a sexual orientation.

You have to back up your crap.

 

in the case of this story, it's male on male sex and thus, homosexual

 

But the people involved are normally not homosexual.

 

And the man in question is openly heterosexual- with a wife and two children.

 

Bovine Excrement!'

Depicting gay men as a threat to children may be the single most potent weapon for stoking public fears about homosexuality — and for winning elections and referenda, as Anita Bryant found out during her successful 1977 campaign to overturn a Dade County, Fla., ordinance barring discrimination against gay people. Discredited psychologist Paul Cameron, the most ubiquitous purveyor of anti-gay junk science, has been a major promoter of this myth. Despite having been debunked repeatedly and very publicly, Cameron's work is still widely relied upon by anti-gay organizations, although many no longer quote him by name. Others have cited a group called the American College of Pediatricians to claim, as Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council did in November 2010, that "the research is overwhelming that homosexuality poses a [molestation] danger to children."

THE FACTS
According to the American Psychological Association, "homosexual men are not more likely to sexually abuse children than heterosexual men are." Gregory Herek, a professor at the University of California, Davis, who is one of the nation's leading researchers on prejudice against sexual minorities, reviewed a series of studies and found no evidence that gay men molest children at higher rates than heterosexual men.

Anti-gay activists who make that claim allege that all men who molest male children should be seen as homosexual. But research by A. Nicholas Groth, a pioneer in the field of sexual abuse of children, shows that is not so. Groth found that there are two types of child molesters: fixated and regressive. The fixated child molester — the stereotypical pedophile — cannot be considered homosexual or heterosexual because "he often finds adults of either sex repulsive" and often molests children of both sexes. Regressive child molesters are generally attracted to other adults, but may "regress" to focusing on children when confronted with stressful situations. Groth found that the majority of regressed offenders were heterosexual in their adult relationships.

The Child Molestation Research and Prevention Institute notes that 90% of child molesters target children in their network of family and friends. Most child molesters, therefore, are not gay people lingering outside schools waiting to snatch children from the playground, as much religious-right rhetoric suggests.

Some anti-gay ideologues cite the American College of Pediatricians' opposition to same-sex parenting as if the organization were a legitimate professional body. In fact, the so-called college is a tiny breakaway faction of the similarly named, 60,000-member American Academy of Pediatrics that requires, as a condition of membership, that joiners "hold true to the group's core beliefs ... [including] that the traditional family unit, headed by an opposite-sex couple, poses far fewer risk factors in the adoption and raising of children." The group's 2010 publication Facts About Youth was described by the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Psychological Association as non-factual. Francis Collins, director of the National Institutes of Health, was one of several legitimate researchers who said Facts misrepresented their findings. "It is disturbing to me to see special interest groups distort my scientific observations to make a point against homosexuality," he wrote. "The information they present is misleading and incorrect."

Read also http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/facts_molestation.html

 

in the case of this story, it's male on male sex and thus homosexual

- - - Updated - - -

in the case of this story, it's male on male sex and thus homosexual

 

'

It's abundantly apparent that you don't understand much about homosexuality, or for that matter sexuality in general. Homosexuality is not merely an sex act involving two people of the same sex. It's the ability to have an intimate, adult relationship with another adult who- in the case of gay people- is of the same sex. Pedophiles are incapable of a real, adult relationship with anyone. Is it possible that you're to ignorant to actually get that?

 

You're right. Marriage should be open to all consenting adults, whether they want plural marriage or incestuous marriage.

We know which couples are infertile though. If they get tested for infertility it is quite obvious that they are infertile, you could make it a federal law mandating that married couples try to procreate and have at least one child within several years after marriage. If they fail to produce one and it is discovered they are infertile doctors should have to report it to the government and they can start putting infertile heterosexuals on a 'Do Not Marry' list. Once they find out who is infertile they should just revoke their marriage licenses right?

 

You don't appear to have any evidence for your opinions so I am not going to take this opinion even remotely seriously.

 

sooooooooo

are you saying that male on male sex isn't homosexual sex?

 

Its YOUR source

Then there was their last publication of the DSM that described pedophilia as “a sexual orientation or profession of sexual preference"

 

Tell that to the 17 states with "gay marriage". Special treatment for the gays, just because they are so damned special.

???? What would be the purpose? Producing children isn't the goal. More children would likely be produced without marriage. The goal is reducing the number of single mothers on their own with absent or unknown fathers. Only an issue when men and women engage in sexual relations.
And then another issue would be the thousands of years culture, tradition, societal norms and religion that condemns sexual relations between men and women outside of marriage, that your law would prevent people from fulfilling, again, for what purpose? 40 or 50 years ago virtually all heterosexual couples married because sexual relations between a man and a woman that were not married was illegal in most states. Un related men and women couldn't even cohabitate without breaking the law, without being married. Is this all to avoid offending gays who are excluded because procreation is a physical impossibility, by ensuring that we exclude any infertile heterosexual couple who also cant procreate?
As well many couples these days work and save for 5-15 years first in order to become more financially secure. To build the home nest before procreating.
As well, MOST pregnancies are not planned. If marriage is only encouraged for heterosexual couples who intend to quickly procreate, millions more unplanned pregnancies will occur to single women who would have been married, if the law instead encouraged all heterosexual couples to marry.

I just don't see any advantage to such restrictions, let alone any advantage in achieving the goal of fewer single mothers on their own with absent and unknown fathers. And see significant disadvantages to serving those interests.

 

Lets see ANY published definition of "homosexuality" that even as much as mentions the age as being a factor, OUTSIDE of the context of explaining why there are so many men who are attracted to males, molesting underage males.

"people of the same sex" and "members of the same sex" come in all ages.

 

FAIL

I didn't see anything in that literature starting child molesters have sexual orientation. In fact it did they don't have an orientation. Thanks for pricing your argument false.
"don't really have an adult sexual orientation."

"...don't really have..." Means they don't really have a sexual orientation.

The term "sexual" refers to gender, meaning male and female. orientation means to which they point or are drawn.

If you could labeltheir orientation it would be non sexual.

Again you are blabbering about nothing.

Post a link or an excerpt or you are lying.

 

No state anywhere has "gay marriage" that is strictly your fabrication. There is just marriage. Thus no special treatment for anybody.

You make up a term so you can get up on your cross and play martyr.

 

Yeah! And why don't we tell it to the other 33 that only have straight marriage because they want special treatment for those damned special heterosexuals too!

Sorry? It isn't? Then what is the goal? Giving special treatment to heterosexuals?

Umm, I don't think it's working.

Uh ok, so when kids are adopted they should be with two parents who are not allowed to marry as well? I mean, c'mon.

I don't understand your position at all. One minute it's "Gays shouldn't be allowed to marry because procreation." then it's "Well marriage is not about procreation." and I just don't get it. You are always all over the board on this issue and it makes no sense to me.

And now you've moved on to making an appeal to tradition fallacy. Female genital mutilation has been tradition in cultures everywhere for thousands of years too, that doesn't make it right.

So how does allowing gay couples and their children (adopted or otherwise) to enjoy the benefits and legal rights that come with marriage stop other people from marrying and...not being single parents I guess?

And I don't see the disadvantages of allowing gay men and women to marry, or to allow plural marriage or incestuous marriage. What are the disadvantages of allowing more people into the government recognized institution of marriage?

 

Are you seriously suggesting that a hypothesis is NOT theory? hahahahahahahahahaahhahahhahahah

http://www.wisegeek.org/what-is-a-hypothesis.htm
hmm and unfounded and untestable.....as in no proof
Theory: speculation: abstract thought or contemplation...as in no proof
You are not born homosexual. it requires a choice. and as usual, the 1% declare they are, in theory, gay, but not in absolute proof. So they chose to become homosexual.
You do know there's a third choice, abstinence............jes sayin..............

 

DIRECTLY in contradiction to your assertion that

Weve played this game before. I post the link and you will deny what is written in black and white, claiming you dont "see it".

 

But they are. The ONLY type of couple with the potential of procreation

What part of "The goal is reducing the number of single mothers on their own with absent or unknown fathers" did you not understand?

It works very well. Children born to their married mother and father are many more times likely to have the benefit of both their mother and father in the home, when compared to children born to single mothers.
But the wellbeing of children become irrelevant to you when it involves the delicate sensibilities of homosexual couples who are offended that they cant participate in the process of procreation.

 

not all pedophiles are homosexual. There are heterosexual pedophiles as well.

It would be like trying to claim that all automobiles are driven by males when we know that there are female drivers as well. For you to make the claim is just silly.