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.
So, "defending" NAMBLA isn't the same as "going to bat" for NAMBLA?
If you say so . . .
And I was quoting you -- but I note you didn't answer me.
How exactly is "defending" different from "going to bat for"?
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."
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.
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.