Child Molestation and the Homosexual Movement, by Steve Baldwin

Regent University Law Review ^ | Steve Baldwin

[Axeslinger]

T,

I gotta ask: Did you actually read this whole article? The whole point of the article is the OBVIOUS and FORTHRIGHT way in which the gay community is directly tied to the molestation of boys. Read the article. It does not appear to be a fringe group of wacky deviants. The article very clearly elucidates that it is an integral part of the homosexual movement. No waffling, no if's and's or but's. It is an integral part.

And now you want me to let my son go on a camping trip with a fruit?! Sorry, don't see it happening.

[Republic]

Nope. They are not positive role models because they practice immoral behavior. They should not be allowed near children in any organized function if practicing their penchant for same sex sex. Just like priests who prey on little boys should be fired, so should admitted homosexual scout leaders, or any leader of children who is into homosexual behavior.

[THROW?]

Trust me, I know where you are coming from. I know plenty of gay people. Some of whom are like the above mentioned and some of whom are great human beings, and I do tell them that I disagree with their lifestyle and I think it is disgusting. I have let some of them watch my children, and trust them more than I would trust some other people. And no, it is not the mainstream gay population that molest children. The mainstream gay population hates these people as much as we do, and these people should be stopped which I have said over and over and over and oveer and over and over and over throughout this article. They hate these people in the same way the mainstream black population hates Jesse Jackson and the mainstream white population hates rednecks. I don't know if people are so into giving their opion on what I say that they don't take the time to read what I write before they spew their 2 cents.

I know what the article point out, and that is what I am trying to say. The article is wrong. see above

[THROW?]

Your comparison is a very bad one. 2 grown men having sex is not the same thing as a man molesting a child. This is the EXACT same bass ackwards line of reasoning in the gun control argument. Joe (the homosexual) has a gun, but Billy (the priest) killed and innocent person (the child) in a driveby, therefore guns (homosexuality) are bad.

As far as your morals go, I am sure you do plently of immoral things. Have you had premarital sex? Do you want your children learning that premarital sex is ok? I am sure you have done many things in your life that you wouldn't want your children to know about much less learn about or do themselves.

[Republic]

Oh hogwash. Homosexuals LOVE young smooth slim bodies. Just talk to a few who have managed to escape their mental sickness...like Exodus members. Most of them....and that is MOST of them...tell stories not unlike we are hearing on the news today from the now grown men who were crushed by homosexual priests seeking out young 14 yr old boys for anal and oral sex satisfaction. The sickest thing predatory homosexuals like the priests do is to tell the little ones not to tell anyone because no one will believe them, the second really common and sick thing such really psycho homosexuals tell young kids is that if they were NOT homosexuals in the first place, the so called 'sex' could have never happened. Talk about messing with kids and ruining lives. Homosexuals are a sick lot. From group orgies in steam baths (steam baths?) to hundreds of partners per year, to drilling holes in public bathroom partitions for anonymous orgasms to sick parades that are pure public porn to forcing literature into schools that is filthy and corrupt to wanting leadership roles where the buffet of little children is always present for their sick tastes (ie Scout leadership roles, priest roles, etc).

Homosexuals are deviant sexually and need to restrain their proclivities for acheiving orgasms to private clubs, private homes and out of the face of American families.

[THROW?]

And you get this information because you saw an article on abc? Listen, I am all about having a discussion about factual things and I will change my mind if you can convince me that you deserve rights, but it stops with you and people who think and act exactly like you. You have no intentions of listening to anything. You have your mind made up because of distorted "facts" that were presented to you, or maybe you were molested by a homosexual when you were young (which would be wrong and would also be wrong even if it was a heterosexual). You seem to be able to see all of the faults of the poeople who disagree with you when the people who agree with you have many of the same faults that you list.

I used to think much more like you until I started meeting gay people and many others for that fact. I learned that articles like this are just propoganda put out by homophobes just as you can find similar propoganda for femenists or the NAACP. I am not here to necessarily change people's minds. I just ask you to think about it, honestly think about it and make a rational decision. Try to read an article that disagrees with you. There are many good people in the world and many bad people in the world. Don't let a minority of any group skew your vision of the whole group. You will find promiscuous gays just as you will find them in the heterosexual community. Don't condemn the entire group becase of these people. Many of them do community service, help charities and children. I would actually bet that many of them do more to help the world than you do. What do you do in your spare time other than condemn people who disagree with you?

[THROW?]

One more thing. I could use the argument your using in saying that some gays do this therefore they all should die, go to jail, whatever, right?

I saw a gay man helping an old lady across the street, help a young boy with his homwork, and command a batallion into victory. Therefore all gays are great people and should be our leaders because the are the most compassionate and highly skilled tacticians.

I don't mean for that to sound mean, I just want you to see your argument from a different perspective.

[Maelstrom]

Since the thought that people could be born gay -- it's much easier to demonize people when they "choose" to be something, I guess -- wipes out all their arguments, they would rather believe the lie than believe all the gay people in the world.

People aren't born gay.

I asked.

I asked a lot. Homosexuals only claim to be "born gay" if given a direct question about it. The vast majority don't "realize" they're gay until after some initial sexual abuse, such as molestation, or seduction by a homosexual leading to physiological ejaculation.

It's a mental disorder, a learned addictive behavior with several negative consequences.

[Maelstrom]

You aren't agreeing with what I've said, I merely pointed out where we do agree.

Where we disagree:
1)Homosexuality is a learned behavior.
2)Homosexuality is an addictive behavioral disorder
3)Homosexuality is highly correlated with other sexual dysfunctions generally recognized as criminal, including pedophilia, even with the opposite sex.
and possibly:
4)Homosexuality can be treated like any addictive behavioral disorder.

[Maelstrom]

Re: post #65.

He's right. It's difficult to obtain good data because, in today's world, homosexuality is as much a political movement as it is a mental disorder, but "Republic" is absolutely right.

[mercy]

BUMP!!!

[MrNeutron1962]

Yes, and when I was growing up in the 1970's, just about every boy over the age of 13 in Boy Scouts was a real good target for recruitment into their "Club". The 14 and over guys in Boy Scouts were almost all the chronic geek losers, after the 8th grade most of the self-assured kids played sports, started wild teenage behavior, or began dating girls. All that was left were the Brainiacs, poofs, and fat kids.

Little wonder they want to be in charge of Scout Troops, its like the dating game for Gay Child Hunters. If you look, it’s always the same, boy is neglected or chronic looser, fruitcake guy makes move on needy kid, needy kid trades zug-zug for friendship until the shame makes him blab, kid needs years of psychotherapy to function properly. Of course, on occasion, and I’m sure we never hear much about these cases, fag hits of kid with confused sexuality who then jumps right into the old sack with him. Pervo goes into fruit heaven, and the kid makes a life choice he might never have made without friendly scout leader helping him see the beauty of being gay.

[THROW?]

You are wrong again. I do agree with your points numbered 1,3,and most of 4. It is not, however, addictive. You may be meaning something different than addicitve, but for there to be an addiction, the act that is causing the addiction would have to cause some kind of chemical imbalance other than the obvious imbalances sexual arousal would cause. Also the withdrawl of said substance would cause a withdrawl and yet another chemical imbalance.

[Clint N. Suhks]

Incest, bestiality, and pedophilia all have at least one or more members that either don't, or can not CONSENT. So therefore it can and does hurt people.

Ridiculous!

[THROW?]

What is the ridiculous part? The fact that it hurts someone? Come on, I know that you have a bigger vocabulary than that. Explain yourself, if you actually have a valid argument.

[Maelstrom]

For physical addiction, yes.

However, it's a very weak argument since there are a great number of self-destructive addictive behaviors. Your argument is so weak in fact, that I daresay it's a strawman. Consider it knocked down.

Meanwhile, we have bulemia, anorexia, head-beating, Tarot's, not to mention the many drug addictions that do not show the physical addiction you've described.

[THROW?]

Anorexia = disorder

bulemia = disorder

never heard of head-beating and i guess you think you can get addicted to getting your forune read through tarot cards. The only thing that I can think that you mean is turrets syndrome = sickness. None of these are addictive, so WRONG AGAIN. You are more than welcome to give it another try though.

Also, if my straw man argument is so weak as you claim, then give the evidence to knock it down.

[THROW?]

Drug addictions do show a chemical imbalance when they are used. That is why it is a DRUG. That is what it does. People do also suffer from withdrawl when not using them which is also another thing that I listed. Do you look at what you write before you post or just put down half thoughts that pop into your head? Or, do you just try to put as much information out as you can until you say something correct and then go tell your friends how smart you are?

[Ben Bolt]

Your reply is rather typical . How about you telling me in public that you dont agree with this program , and spare me the cut and paste gig .Your so gracious to believe that all folks have rights ! Hmm , thats been documented already by people far more wiser than you or I sport . They do not . Its not a matter of poking holes in your comments my man .I see it as a simpleton matter of uninstalling those chat programs you have and joining the real world .

[Clint N. Suhks]

What is the ridiculous part?

That consent is not possible.

The fact that it hurts someone?

How?

Come on, I know that you have a bigger vocabulary than that. Explain yourself, if you actually have a valid argument.

Legal consent is simple acquiescence.