I don't know the specific answer to this; however, would suggest the sexual act itself defines a homosexual -an active homosexual is actively engaging in homosexual activities.
In my opinion, homosexuality is defined by the 'same-sex' activity and I find it odd that homosexual activists suggest that those that sexually abuse or rape children of the same sex are not 'true' homosexuals? The term bisexual or child abuser is used in many cases to deflect the obvious homosexual reality.
In my opinion -even if one is just a recreational homosexual they suffer from the homosexual disorder...
I agree with you. I was just wondering whether the agencies were deliberately placing children with known homosexuals. I speculate, from the information in the post after yours, that they *know*, but don't have a formal record.
Yeah, the "pedophile priests" were mostly homosexual, not pedophile.
"In my opinion -even if one is just a recreational homosexual they suffer from the homosexual disorder..."
And you would be right! Also, if any homosexual sexually abuses a child, they are called a molestor, not a pediphile. Even if it's a child of the same sex, and NEVER called a homosexual if the same is true! They ARE ALL 3!
Then you have those weak-minded little fools that are into self-gratification with anyone who is completely powerless against them. The gender is completely irrelevant. Lacking a vulnerable child, these perverts would probably do a dog or a pig as quickly.