Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Constitutional right to violate children? Why liberals love pedophiles
WorldNetDaily.com ^ | Saturday, August 5, 2006 | Kevin McCullough

Posted on 08/05/2006 12:44:14 AM PDT by JohnHuang2

Liberals love pedophiles, because they must do so to keep their own belief system intact.

Consider the bizarre case just this week of thirty-four year old Phillip Distasio.

Distasio runs a ''school'' called Class Cutters near Cleveland Ohio. The goal of the school is to somehow counter the ''No Child Left Behind Act'' by getting kids to rush through a few academic excercises each day on the computer and then to spend the majority of the time performing some sort of ''community service.'' It seems to be set-up to help the child find ''productive'' use of their time during after-school hours. On Distasio's website he even makes mention that even kids who attend a traditional school can join the program for the ''after-school activities.''

A disturbing element also seems to be that Distasio seeks parent's involvement in ''choosing the curriculum'' that their child engages in. They even have a chatroom blog to log into the program with.

What's really horrifying is that Distasio is an admitted pedophile of 20 years who doesn't even have the decency to be ashamed of his craving for sexual activity with boys.

In fact, he embraces it.

Presently Distasio is finding himself facing 74 charges of molestation of boys in his ''program.'' Instead of denying his guilt, he's trying a new approach – claiming his sexual intent is a civil right.

In my new book ''MuscleHead Revolution: Overturning Liberalism with Commonsense Thinking,'' I point out how painfully obvious it has become to us all that the clear-headed absolutes of right and wrong and good and evil were thrown out with the modern-feminist bathwater of the 1960s. But few of us ever thought it would get to the point that we are now seeing – pedophiles claiming constitutional civil rights protections for their desire to engage in homosexual pedophilia.

So where does Distasio get the boldness to make such ludicrous claims?

How about modern liberalism, academia, and the Clinton administration?

As I document in ''MuscleHead Revolution,'' Judith Levine, the academic who released the book, ''Harmful to Minors: The Perils of Protecting Children from Sex,'' argues that it is harmful to protect children from sexual activity. As I point out, she goes so far as to encourage adults to not think prudishly about sexual activity between adults and children. She even advocates for the ''rights'' of children to be able to ''give their consent'' for ''legal'' and ''healthy'' sexual activity with adults.

One might think that Levine is just a nutcase, except that she was published by the University of Minnesota Press. Her book was endorsed by Dr. Jocelyn Elders who also wrote its forward. Elders was the Clinton era, surgeon general.

Taking his cues from Levine/Elders, Distasio argued in court this week:

''I'm a pedophile. I've been a pedophile for 20 years. The only reason I'm charged with rape is that no one believes a child can consent to sex. The role of my ministry is to get these cases out of the courtrooms.'' Also adding, ''Not all pedophilia is bad, and sex [with boys] can be healthy.''

Sounds like a liberal on a mission; just like Levine.

Since modern liberalism's true goal is the actual eradication of God, moral values, and the ideas of absolute right vs. wrong, it should surprise no one that not a single leftist politician in America has denounced Distasio. Nor did they denounce Levine. The truth is, liberals seek sexual utopia where no rules apply. Restraint has in fact become a dirty word to them. Self control – a throughly foreign concept.

Waging the revolution for all that is true, just, and good involves every single one of us who know better to actively demonstrate this by preventing such an agenda from becoming reality.

For liberals to denounce pedophiles, ultimately they would have to denounce, lesbianism, homosexuality, and their particular favorite – adultery. And that's just not going to happen.

At the end of the day there are such things as moral values, and liberals despise them – because as they see it – those moral values limit their sexual freedoms. And if this is ''America,'' isn't it all about the freedom to get your groove on?

Liberals love pedophiles.

Isn't it shameful?

And don't we all wish they loved the well-being of children more?

Kevin McCullough is heard daily in New York City, Pennsylvania, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Delaware and New Jersey on WMCA 570/970 from 2-5 p.m., and he blogs at muscleheadrevolution.com.


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Editorial; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: homosexualagenda; liberal; liberalagenda; liberals; pedophile

1 posted on 08/05/2006 12:44:15 AM PDT by JohnHuang2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
McCullough is using hyperbole to plug a book--which, in case the reader missed it the first two times, is entitled "MuscleHead Revolution: Overturning Liberalism with Commonsense Thinking".

Because of the nature of my profession (the arts), I'm usually the sole conservative in any given gathering of my peers, most of whom are smugly convinced absolutely everyone running in this particular professional circle thinks as they do. The proverbial fly on the wall, I listen to a lot of wrong-headed things, but not once have I heard one of my liberal acquaintances extol the virtues of child molestation. While it may be comforting to think the worst of one's idealogical enemies, it doesn't follow that abortion advocates, say, are also proponents of pedophilia. Liberals might view the pedophile as sick, needing treatment for mental illness, and argue the point with someone like me, who believes recidivist child molesters should be executed, but the vast majority of people, whatever their political views, are disgusted and outraged by crimes against children.

Moonbat liberalism isn't overturned by 'commonsense thinking' if the logic displayed in the article is an example.
2 posted on 08/05/2006 1:53:16 AM PDT by Rembrandt_fan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2

There is a difference between "shamefull" and "dude needs killing".


3 posted on 08/05/2006 2:00:14 AM PDT by wyattearp (Study! Study! Study! Or BONK, BONK, on the head!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
A bullet in the head would cure him.
4 posted on 08/05/2006 2:04:22 AM PDT by Dallas59
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
Distasio runs a ''school'' called Class Cutters near Cleveland Ohio. The goal of the school is to somehow counter the ''No Child Left Behind Act'' by getting kids to rush through a few academic excercises each day on the computer and then to spend the majority of the time performing some sort of ''community service

Like sex with the teacher

5 posted on 08/05/2006 2:14:16 AM PDT by GeronL (http://www.mises.org/story/1975 <--no such thing as a fairtax)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rembrandt_fan

That's "ideological"

The point of the article is not that liberals favor pedophilia, but that they fail to condemn it. The same liberals who are all for `gay' rights.

Kind of like `moderate Muslims' who fail to condemn Islamofascist terrorism. Silence equals assent.

And outside that courtroom there should have been enraged parents of this goblin's victims, gathered to do rough justice.


6 posted on 08/05/2006 3:38:57 AM PDT by elcid1970
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2

Democrats and pedophiles...sounds about right...the two bookends of this countries problems....


7 posted on 08/05/2006 3:42:31 AM PDT by AngelesCrestHighway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: elcid1970

In my opinion, this is all part of their zero sum outlook. They like to deceive as many people as possible into ruining their lives. That reduces the competition and smooths their ascent to power and wealth.


8 posted on 08/05/2006 3:47:54 AM PDT by ClaireSolt (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Rembrandt_fan

The author of the article is not imagining things. He cites real evidence: Levine's book and its endorsement by Elders.

Levine has a university post, and if she does not have tenure, she will get it, party on the basis of her "publication." University personnel committees will credit such work, and promote its authors. They will generally scoff and nit-pick at anything conservative. It is a self-perpetuating ideological culture.

It is definitely true that liberalism likes to draw no lines. Support for pedophilia is a reductio ad absurdum for liberalism. Most ordinary liberals would deny that they support pedophilia, and most are not pedophiles themselves; but their ideology makes it difficult for them to explain exactly why they should be against it, when it accords so well with liberal thinking, and when it is being pushed by the extreme-liberal vanguard. Who would have thought that liberals would support abortion and homosexuality the way they do?


9 posted on 08/05/2006 3:53:49 AM PDT by docbnj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: All

"The truth is, liberals seek sexual utopia where no rules apply. Restraint has in fact become a dirty word to them. Self control – a throughly foreign concept."

Just 30 years ago most parents would have raised a huge ruckus if their kids were being taught homosexuality in the public schools. Today most are silent.

Is it some great surprise if we now see pedophiles pushing for the same?

It's a naive parent who thinks his child is safe in an institutional school system.

McCullough is astutely observing where the "core belief of liberalism" leads. This core belief is, in essence, lack of moral restraint.

It started with the liberal mantra "let's do it in the road" and is incrementally moving more and more towards societal acceptance of pedophilia.

We are all being "marketed" to accept this garbage and our children are the victims. If anyone here hasn't read the book The Marketing of Evil by David Kupelian, I highly recommend it. It's very eye-opening.


10 posted on 08/05/2006 3:57:03 AM PDT by USA Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: AngelesCrestHighway

"Democrats and pedophiles.. the two bookends of this country's problems"

Outstanding! What a perfect metaphor.

;^)


11 posted on 08/05/2006 4:00:25 AM PDT by elcid1970
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2

If this pervert is still alive one year from now,I will be surprised.


12 posted on 08/05/2006 4:52:53 AM PDT by Farmer Dean (Every time a toilet flushes,another liberal gets his brains.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rembrandt_fan
it doesn't follow that abortion advocates, say, are also proponents of pedophilia.

Unless, of course, that advocation of abortion includes support for getting abortions for underage girls without parental consent. This is often done to cover-up illegal adult male - teen female relationships.

13 posted on 08/05/2006 5:31:20 AM PDT by Onelifetogive (* Sarcasm tag ALWAYS required. For some Freepers, sarcasm can NEVER be obvious enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
I certainly think this guy, like any pedophile, is a sick individual and needs to be locked up. However, I don't care for this article, and the author's attitude and clear personal political agenda make it hard to believe at face value the claims he is making.

Since modern liberalism's true goal is the actual eradication of God, moral values, and the ideas of absolute right vs. wrong, it should surprise no one that not a single leftist politician in America has denounced Distasio. Nor did they denounce Levine.

As someone else said, virtually nobody, liberal or conservative, is okay with child molestation. I think we should focus less on making rediculous claims about liberals and liberalism and instead work to promote conservative ideas. The goal of liberalism is not to destroy God, destroy moral values, or destroy the concept or right or wrong. I think their main goal is to try to a create a society where (in their minds) everyone is equal - a noble idea, but as we all well know, their big government plans to accomplish this goal don't work and in many cases worsen the problem. As for not denouncing these people, I've never heard of them, and I doubt many others have either.

For liberals to denounce pedophiles, ultimately they would have to denounce, lesbianism, homosexuality, and their particular favorite – adultery.

Quite frankly, I don't see the connection. I think it's reprehensible to compare homosexuality to pedophilia, but that's the author's goal. His clearly bigoted agenda makes it hard to believe anything he says.
14 posted on 08/05/2006 5:59:57 AM PDT by MinnesotaLibertarian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MinnesotaLibertarian
As someone else said, virtually nobody, liberal or conservative, is okay with child molestation.

You quite apparently live in denial. If Joycelin Elders can publicly endorse a university text advocating child-adult sex, then "nobody" is a foolish generalization.

Fifty years ago, nobody was OK with divorce, teen pregnancy, homosexuality, or shacking up before marriage. Further, that "virtually nobody" does NOT include the academic extreme where pedophilia and bestiality are legitimate topics of "research."

With the academic left so aligned, public advocacy of pedophilia is a matter of time.

15 posted on 08/05/2006 7:03:41 AM PDT by Carry_Okie (There are people in power who are truly evil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie

"With the academic left so aligned, public advocacy of pedophilia is a matter of time."

Exactly.

Excellent post. Thanks.


16 posted on 08/05/2006 10:19:54 AM PDT by USA Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: docbnj
WorldNet Daily often features Pat Buchanan, who--like Elders--was an official for a presidential administration. His public writings and utterances often cross the line into outright antisemitism. Can one argue, then, that all conservatives share his 'amen corner for the Jewish Lobby' views or think, as Buchanan has publicly stated, that 'Hitler was a great man', or that conservative thought leads inexorably to such a position? No, one can't. The reasoning is invalid, red meat hyperbole without substance. By overstating the case, McCullough weakens legitimate criticisms of liberal positions on gay marriage, for example. Or abortion. Or euthanasia.

Look, I'm all about taking it to the liberal left, but McCullough's brand of 'Musclehead' illogic does no one any good.
17 posted on 08/05/2006 10:20:11 AM PDT by Rembrandt_fan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: MinnesotaLibertarian

"I think it's reprehesible to compare homosexuality to pedophillia."

Then why is NAMBLA so free with it's money when donating to homosexual causes? Even they can see they get a foot in the door when homosexuality is condoned and approved of by the general public. Inch, by inch...


18 posted on 08/05/2006 11:04:45 AM PDT by freeangel ( (free speech is only good until someone else doesn't like what you say))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2

This article is complete hogwash. The "school" is an online blog with a grand total of two entries, the last one on Wed Jul 13, 2005 5:30 am. This guy was molesting kids in his apartment complex. He has no political ties...liberal or conservative. It's jumping on crap like this that makes consrvatives look like idiots.


19 posted on 08/05/2006 3:06:53 PM PDT by mugs99 (Don't take life too seriously, you won't get out alive.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rembrandt_fan; MinnesotaLibertarian; mugs99
If you think this article is hogwash or that Liberals don't really support pedophilia, I would remind you that ACLU went to bat for NAMBLA in the case of two NAMBLA members who strangled ten-year-old Jeffrey Curley in Boston back in 1997.

I don't recall the specifics, nor do I recall any condemnation coming from the Liberal Left (of course, since this happened in Boston, home of the Unitarian Church and other assorted liberal movements, I really shouldn't be surprised).

Certainly there was no moral outrage from the Left anything like what we saw after the Matthew Sheppard murder, but again, since Sheppard was gay and Curley wasn't, maybe I shouldn't really be surprised.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curley_v._NAMBLA

20 posted on 08/06/2006 7:04:40 PM PDT by fgoodwin (Fundamentalist, right-wing nut and and proud father of a First Class Boy Scout!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: fgoodwin
I don't recall the specifics

Get back to me when you do. I'll remind you that pedophiles can be found in both liberal and conservative camps. I oppose liberals for their political ideology and I have no respect for anyone who attempts to label liberals as perverts.
.
21 posted on 08/06/2006 7:43:17 PM PDT by mugs99 (Don't take life too seriously, you won't get out alive.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: fgoodwin
If you think this article is hogwash or that Liberals don't really support pedophilia, I would remind you that ACLU went to bat for NAMBLA in the case of two NAMBLA members who strangled ten-year-old Jeffrey Curley in Boston back in 1997

They didn't go to bat for NAMBLA.
From your source:
"The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) stepped in to defend NAMBLA and won a dismissal based on the specific legal issue that NAMBLA is organized as an association, not a corporation".

This case would have set a precedent holding corporations responsible for crimes committed by individuals. A good example is Dennis Rader, the BTK serial killer. Rader was president of the Congregation Council for the Christ Lutheran Church, a corporation. Should the Christ Lutheran Church be held liable for the murders committed by Dennis Rader?
.
22 posted on 08/06/2006 10:49:01 PM PDT by mugs99 (Don't take life too seriously, you won't get out alive.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: mugs99

So, "defending" NAMBLA isn't the same as "going to bat" for NAMBLA?

If you say so . . .


23 posted on 08/07/2006 6:43:35 AM PDT by fgoodwin (Fundamentalist, right-wing nut and and proud father of a First Class Boy Scout!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: fgoodwin
So, "defending" NAMBLA isn't the same as "going to bat" for NAMBLA?
If you say so . . .


LOL!
I quoted your source!
You can keep your head in the sand and play the culture war game but the fact is that if you can hold NAMBLA liable as a corporation you can do the same against churches.

I will remind you that the ACLU has defended Christians in many cases. I have yet to see you guys give them credit for that.

September 20, 2005: ACLU of New Jersey joins lawsuit supporting second-grader's right to sing "Awesome God" at a talent show.

August 4, 2005: ACLU helps free a New Mexico street preacher from jail.

December 22, 2004: ACLU of New Jersey successfully defends right of religious expression by jurors.

November 20, 2004: ACLU of Nevada supports free speech rights of evangelists to preach on the sidewalks of the strip in Las Vegas.

November 9, 2004: ACLU of Nevada defends a Mormon student who was suspended after wearing a T-shirt with a religious message to school.

August 11, 2004: ACLU of Nebraska defends church facing eviction by the city of Lincoln.

July 10, 2004: ACLU defends the rights of a Baptist minister to preach his message on public streets.

June 3, 2004: Under pressure from the ACLU of Virginia, officials agree not to prohibit baptisms on public property in Falmouth Waterside Park in Stafford County.

May 11, 2004: After ACLU of Michigan intervened on behalf of a Christian Valedictorian, a public high school agrees to stop censoring religious yearbook entries.

March 25, 2004: ACLU of Washington defends an Evangelical minister's right to preach on sidewalks.

February 21, 2003: ACLU of Massachusetts defends students punished for distributing candy canes with religious messages.

October 28, 2002: ACLU of Pennsylvania files discrimination lawsuit over denial of zoning permit for African American Baptist church.

July 11, 2002: ACLU supports right of Iowa students to distribute Christian literature at school.

April 17, 2002: In a victory for the Rev. Jerry Falwell and the ACLU of Virginia, a federal judge strikes down a provision of the Virginia Constitution that bans religious organizations from incorporating.

Want more?
.
24 posted on 08/07/2006 7:20:59 AM PDT by mugs99 (Don't take life too seriously, you won't get out alive.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: mugs99

And I was quoting you -- but I note you didn't answer me.

How exactly is "defending" different from "going to bat for"?


25 posted on 08/07/2006 7:43:33 AM PDT by fgoodwin (Fundamentalist, right-wing nut and and proud father of a First Class Boy Scout!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: fgoodwin

I think what he meant was that the ACLU wasn't defending NAMBLA's political stance, just the legal idea of an association (which in this case happened to be NAMBLA) not being liable for the actions of individual members.

Your wiki source even states that the ACLU does not endorse NAMBLA's pedophile objectives, and the specific attorney says, "I've never been able to fathom their position."


26 posted on 08/07/2006 8:56:09 AM PDT by Balke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Balke

Fair enough -- nor do I think anyone in FR was trying to paint all libs as perverts.

But the "anything goes" mindset of the liberal left certainly seems to jive well with NAMBLA's stated goal of eliminating all "age of consent" laws.


27 posted on 08/07/2006 11:00:30 AM PDT by fgoodwin (Fundamentalist, right-wing nut and and proud father of a First Class Boy Scout!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson