The truth about 'gay' pedophilia: Olivia St. John looks at research in light of Foley fiasco

WorldNetDaily.com ^ | Saturday, October 7, 2006 | Olivia St. John

[bboop]

I thought I heard that age 16 was a separation point, in terms of law. Re pedophilia ....

[George W. Bush]

Barney Franks a homo but thats O.K. because he's a democrat.

That's not good enough, buster.

I demand that you commend, celebrate, extoll and build monuments to his buggery. I demand that you sing the praises of his misuse of the digestive tract for sexual titillation all the days of your life.

Or else you're an evil bigot, probably slightly more evil than Hitler and Stalin combined.

[Jacquerie]

Yeah, the Catholic priest pedophilia problem is never phrased as homosexual pedophilia either. It is just continual liberal spin and obfuscation. And they wonder why their ratings are in the tank.

[RightOnTheLeftCoast]

"The Jews provided a unique human history by living the experience of sexual obedience to the fundamental mechanics of procreation."

I wouldn't go there if I were you... Islam, with its polygamy, is even more "obedient" in that way, and has the birth rates to prove it.

[George W. Bush]

However, they are not homosexuals.... they are just humans who are expressing their God given sexuality in a deviant manner. So instead of using the term 'homosexual', the more appropriate term would to call him/her 'one who engages in homosexual acts'.

You approach the idea of traditional sodomy: the use of sex organs for purposes other than vaginal sex within marriage.

In this sense, the majority of Americans are sodomites to one degree or another. And, before you object, look at your Bible: nothing there says that the sin of Sodom was homosexual sin. And Lott did offer his daughters to the crowd of perverts, obviously with the expectation that they might accept misusing virgins instead of the fair angels. It was an anything-goes philosophy of sexual behavior that was the sin of Sodom. So other than roving rape-gangs unrestrained by a civil authority, ask yourself how modern America differs from ancient Sodom in its fundamental attitudes toward authentic sexuality and the perverted imitations of sex traditionally known as sodomy.

[Question_Assumptions]

I don't think that it's homosexuality, per se, that drives them to young boys. I think it's the fact that many gay men were introduced to that culture when they were in those age groups and if I remember correctly, those who have been molested themselves tend to molest others. I think we are seeing a vicious circle here.

[Chuzzlewit]

I think it's simply a matter of gay men desiring the freshest meat available.

You do see older (rich) straight men with young pretty women, don't you. Similar, except for one is yech! ... and one is yum.

[freeper_peeper]

You said: "So instead of using the term 'homosexual', the more appropriate term would to call him/her 'one who engages in homosexual acts'."

Good point.

Perhaps "practicing homosexual" would be concise enough since they practice perversion.

Question_Assumptions said: "I think it's the fact that many gay men were introduced to that culture when they were in those age groups and if I remember correctly, those who have been molested themselves tend to molest others. I think we are seeing a vicious circle here."

You're right. And that's the primary reason they're trying to get into the Boy Scouts and have already gotten into our schools.

Chuzzlewit said: "I think it's simply a matter of gay men desiring the freshest meat available."

Sadly, very tragically, you're right too. It keeps the feeding trough filled.

Lormand, thanks for your courage in saying what you did and I wish the very best for you. Godspeed.

[George W. Bush]

Perhaps "practicing homosexual" would be concise enough since they practice perversion.

The original poster had it right. There is no such thing as a homosexual or a heterosexual. There is only behavior.

You find that if you actually debate this issue with 'gay men', taking this tactic really throws them and makes them mad. You're, in effect, telling them that they are imaginary creatures. Then you can bring the subject back to their behavior and misuse of their sexual organs.

The mythological creatures known as the homosexual and the heterosexual, later termed 'gay' and 'straight', are the creations of modern clinical psychology, primarily Kinsey.

If you adopt the enemy's words and concepts, you have handed him a subtle weapon with which to deflect you.

[freeper_peeper]

Oh, I wholeheartedly agree! That wasn't my point.

The problem is that we need to adopt more concise phraseology to counter the skewed phraseology so often used to great advantage by the Left, i.e., "choice", "women's liberation", "feminism", "progressives", "homophobia", and the like.

Here's a really good Freepers thread highlighting a representative list: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1115231/posts

Unfortunately, in our time of fast-paced media clips, creating our own to-the-point phraseology can only help us in countering these leftist tongue twisting socialists lacking a soul.

[George W. Bush]

Excellent points.

[SaltyJoe]

Splitting of hairs.

Yes, it's important to know that there's a difference of sin or that which offends God.

The man who maliciously molests then guns down school girls in a small God-fearing town is a far worse villain than a combat weary soldier who guns down suspicious hardened criminals acting like surrendering soldiers.

Yes, there are degrees of sin.

Two consenting and unmarried adults talking dirty to each other is far less offensive to God than a grown man talking dirty to a prepubescent boy.

Are their prepubescent pages in Congress?

Larry King might want to do more journalistic homework before he starts accusing members and former members of government of a crime that won't stick. Larry, himself will be the story instead of the offending ex-politician.

BTW, what is Larry's definition of pedophile? Anyone who dates, expresses interest, or talks dirty to a younger person?

How many wealthy men and women are enjoying the company of a younger companion? Who is Demi Moore married to? Who does Cher date...and the entire Hollywood crowd for that fact?

[SaltyJoe]

Forgot to add to post 33...

When politics become diabolic in nature (which seems to fit the very name of polarizing "politics"), then opposing parties don't have the objective of "in order to perform a more perfect union", as stated in our Constitution's Preamble. The nature of polarized politics makes all human effort a grab for more power for the sake of being in power. There's no universal humanist appeal in such a pre-Nazi Germany political environment (Bolsheviks vs. National Socialists).

Thus, the real crime is held by both parties who refuse to define inappropriate behavior. The reality is that the entire nation, and the rest of the world, suffer for lack of moral leadership.

Republicans had the opportunity to define "getting a blow job from a White House intern" as inappropriate sexual relations. Americans would have had a former president bent over a barrel to sign a law that brings order to the Commander-in-Chief's behavior. And the president would never be above the law especially when he leads the entire Executive Branch who must adhere to very strict codes of morality. Instead, Republicans forced a losing battle to replace a President that couldn't have lost his job because the letter of the law protected him.

Are there any bills defining etra-marital blow jobs as inappropriate sexual relations for the Commander-in-Chief? Are there any bills that put the President in his place as one who must follow the same strict USMJ that all of his military must follow?

Demonic politics have protected sin, and inappropriate behavior will return again and again because Satan has turned the hearts of men against their brother. So, when Democrats complain of an "illegal war", they have "inappropriate behavior" to thank for it.

Recall that it only took one generation for mankind to go from disobedience in the Garden of Eden to fratricide.

[SaltyJoe]

Matthew 5:

43
"You have heard that it was said, 'You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.'
44
But I say to you, love your enemies, and pray for those who persecute you,
45
that you may be children of your heavenly Father, for he makes his sun rise on the bad and the good, and causes rain to fall on the just and the unjust.
46
For if you love those who love you, what recompense will you have? Do not the tax collectors do the same?
47
And if you greet your brothers only, what is unusual about that? Do not the pagans do the same?
48
So be perfect, just as your heavenly Father is perfect.

---

I "go there" to show that Jesus is Perfection. If gentiles and Jews are popping out babies left and right, then good for humanity. Why? Because that's what we are suppose to do in obedience to God--populate the planet. Every soul is a cup into which God pours His Grace. The planet is better off with people. Eventual, all will be return to God after all are harvested (both good and bad), and good are kept and the bad are burned away.

---

Matthew 22: (hypothetical widow marrying 7 brothers)

29
Jesus said to them in reply, "You are misled because you do not know the scriptures or the power of God.
30
At the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage but are like the angels in heaven.
31
And concerning the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was said to you by God,
32
'I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob'? He is not the God of the dead but of the living."
33
When the crowds heard this, they were astonished at his teaching.

---

Marriage is no longer a farm-animal like method to mass produce humanity. One man must pour ALL of his love into only one woman. If there's any question as to her needs, she will demand EVERYTHING that can be given from her one and only man. I know this to be true because I know many married men. Their wives demand everything from them (and often demand more...that's why she must look for the rest in the Divinity of God, not man, to find the fulfillment of self in Holy Matrimony). Thus, Marriage always includes the invisible 3rd Party, God.

Marriage seeking more than one human partner (polygamy) is extremely self destructive and takes God to rectify. Look at how disastrous the multiple relationships of Abraham have turned out! Only Jesus can unsettle this mess!

[freeper_peeper]

Ricoshea is astutely pointing out that the liberal media is intentionally avoiding mentioning the "H" word and using the term pedophilia to sidetrack the fact Foley is a homosexual going after male teens.

Liberals want people to believe the lie that all homosexuals are nice people incapable of doing anyone harm.

If this were pedophilia it would involve a child 13 or younger. This was not pedophilia. It was a homosexual advance towards a teenage minor.

[VOA]

bump

[weegee]

Even Michael Medved (a former liberal) has said that he sees a relationship between an adult male and a teen girl to be the worst of all 4 possible pairings between adults and teens (because the girl can get pregnant) even though homosexuals seduce new recruits (many will confess that they came to it by an older partner) and we've seen a number of adult women get pregnant by minor males (one tried getting the 13 year old father to pay child support and she wound up being charged for molestation).

Much of the left's "outrage" is false and just banging pots and pans to try to sour GOP support.

I don't recall them being upset with Scott Ritter.

[longtermmemmory]

You still have sexual delinquency of a minor and also statutory rape crimes.

[Enchante]

Pelosi can opportunistically kick Foley for purposes of her partisan smear campaign against all Republicans, but apparently she had no qualms about appearing publicly with one of the leading NAMBLA ideologists (funny, I cannot find a hint of Pelosi criticism for this guy no matter how much I work my Google button):

---

http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=10450

Said Harry: "Because if the parents and friends of gays are truly friends of gays, they would know from their gay kids that the relationship with an older man is precisely what thirteen-, fourteen-, and fifteen-year-old kids need more than anything else in the world."

In short, San Francisco's beloved Harry Hay was a vigorous and well-known advocate of older men having sex with young boys. He was a fearless and quite famous advocate for Congressman Mark Foley's behavior.

Which makes one curious about the presence of marcher number 34 in the 2001 Pride Parade. Marching a mere three spots away from the famous Harry Hay, no doubt waving and smiling to the crowd, was, as the Chronicle logged her in the Official Guide and Program Parade Lineup: "U.S. Rep. Nancy Pelosi."