betsy

Hmmm. No context, no reference to any actual incidences where gay groups have lobbied for the AoC to be lowered for all type sof sexual activity... yup...more b.s. Ummm....where's the substantiation that this is all b.s?

Woooo....we're getting into the great conspiracy theory here eh? So who's in on this conspiracy to tarnish ILGA. Definitely NAMBLA is in on it! Of course, the UN too....they gotta be in on it! Those bastards! And that Clinton! I just knew it! You could never trust that blasted guy! Who would've thought that he'd be a right-winger in the closet?

They say "14" is the magic number. 13 is a bonus! Is that why there's a resistance from EGALE to raise the age of consent to 16?

I think that pretty much sums up where you're coming from betsy. So I dug up on Philip Jenkins. Here's what I found. "In the mid 1990s, the Archdiocese of Chicago opened records to Jenkins on all 2,252 priests who had served Chicago in the past 40 years. Less than 2 percent of all priests who served in that time frame had been accused of sexual misconduct of any kind, and only one case involved pre-pubescent victims. With additional research, Jenkins concluded that pedophilia is no higher among Catholic priests than it is among members of any other profession. What is slightly more prevalent among priests, however, is the propensity for relationships involving post-pubescent boys. One term some psychologists use for adults who seek sex with young people ages 14-18-legal in many cases-is ephebophilia. "In most societies, this is a normal age for marriage, so why can we call it a psychiatric disturbance?" asks Jenkins. "The proper word for a man who has sex with a boy of 16 or 17 is homosexuality." So with the exception of an infinitesimal number of cases-no greater statistically than one would find among other religious clergy or among doctors or lawyers-priests are not pedophiles. In only slightly higher percentages, they are homosexuals who choose teen-age partners. This fact annoys some secular critics of the church, because by their own ideology it exonerates the handful of offending priests. A growing progressive movement, in fact, has worked hard for a decade toward mainstream acceptance of homosexual men who choose teen partners. " http://www.boulderweekly.com/archive/042502/waynesword.html

Thanks for reminding me, Black Dog. I meant to ask questions about this a while back. Going back to NAMBLA....as I understand, only their website exists...and members are nowhere to be found. Where are they now? Did they slink into sewers? Under rocks? ....or crawled back right under the protective skirts of some gay groups we know?

Here is another evidence that I just stumbled upon! A letter by NAMBLA to ILGA Secretariat. "Date: Fri, 28 Jan 1994 21:02:41 -0500 From: Roy Radow <[email protected]> Subject: NAMBLA Replies to ILGA Secretariat (Revised) Dear Tommy-tom, Please replace the NAMBLA-ILGA statement which currently appears in the QRD with this revised statement. Thanks. NAMBLA has been a member of the International Lesbian and Gay Association for 10 years. We've been continuously active in ILGA longer than any other US organization. NAMBLA delegates to ILGA helped write ILGA's constitution, its official positions on the sexual rights of youth, and its stands against sexual coercion and corporal punishment. We are proud of our contributions in making ILGA a stronger voice for the international gay and lesbian movement and for sexual justice. " http://www.qrd.org/qrd/orgs/NAMBLA/nambla....lga.secretariat Not only was NAMBLA a member of ILGA for 10 years. NAMBLA also helped write ILGA's constitution! ILGA's OFFICIAL positions on the sexual rights of youth! Hmmmm....

I do believe that a lot of silent majority are intimidated...or had given up on speaking out on the issue (not because of finally accepting what the Liberals are ramming down our throats), but more so out of reluctant resignation and hand-throwing up in the air "what's the point of reasoning with Liberals who have logic all tupsy-turvy!" Just read at the ru-butts and the line of reasoning here...and you get the message! All they could do to re-butt is shout BIGOTRY! Well, they can call me a bigot til they're blue in the faces. I know I'm not. And I definitely know why they're resorting to that labelling. It's the oldest trick in book for these people when they're stumped for sensible rebuttals.

You hit that one about the media right on the head! About a couple of years back, I read on the front page of National Post, an article by Christy Blatchford describing a new fancy gay bar in Toronto. So gay bar you say, big deal. But she's graphically describing what she called "SLURP RAILS or holes", where penis were poked through holes, inviting for anyone to do as you please...I guess I don't need to spell it out! The owner of the penis is unseen. It is bad enough to read such garbage on the front page of a national paper....but it was the tone and message of her report! She was gushing like this was something to be awed and applauded! She was marvelling at how creative the gays are for such fun times! Society had been systematically disensitized and manipulated by the media to accept this without any question. The gag law was the nice touch to prevent any attempts at any question! But of course, the media. Why do you think they're so busy and aggressive promoting this acceptance? Is it required for you to put your penis in the hole? Are you required to go t this bar? Were you required to read the article? Whats the problem? Who would have thought that what I was reading on the front page of what was parading to be a national paper, was nothing more than an endorsement of indecently x-rated, if not downright deviant acts? It does not belong on the front page, sir! It belonged in the likes of Hustler, and whatever Gay magazines there are. Or at best, somewhere on the nth page...with a warning of graphical sexual contents and that some of the contents may be offensive to others. It shows where the media is mis-leading society!

You hit that one about the media right on the head! About a couple of years back, I read on the front page of National Post, an article by Christy Blatchford describing a new fancy gay bar in Toronto. So gay bar you say, big deal. But she's graphically describing what she called "SLURP RAILS or holes", where penis were poked through holes, inviting for anyone to do as you please...I guess I don't need to spell it out! The owner of the penis is unseen. It is bad enough to read such garbage on the front page of a national paper....but it was the tone and message of her report! She was gushing like this was something to be awed and applauded! She was marvelling at how creative the gays are for such fun times! Society had been systematically disensitized and manipulated by the media to accept this without any question. The gag law was the nice touch to prevent any attempts at any question! But of course, the media. Why do you think they're so busy and aggressive promoting this acceptance?

Given your glaring ignorance of gay groups and the gay community, I don't think you're in a position to tell them what to do. Maybe I'm not in any position to tell them what to do. But I don't want my children or anyone else's at any age...to be sodomized or otherwise abused by some sexually obsessed perverts! That's what pedophiles are, incidentally!

You haven't offered much proof hat there's any movement afOot to lower thE age of consent. Most mainstream gay organizations' stance on the issue is that, regardless of what the age is, the AoC for "gay" sex should be the same as hetero sex (SOMETHING YOU'VE FAILED TO ACKNOWLEDGE THROUGHOUT THIS THREAD). Obviously you have not read this. Here! "Even "pro-gay" feminists have called on gay groups to distance themselves from efforts to lower the age of consent. Writing in the UK Guardian newspaper in 2001, Julie Blindel points out, "If gay men are going to, on the one hand, campaign for sexual access to younger and younger boys, but bleat about public perceptions of them as a league of child abusers, is it any wonder that the whole thing is such a mess?" Blindel concludes, "If gay men are serious about distancing themselves from child sexual abuse, then it's up to them to make some real efforts to join forces against this gross violation." (see Blindel's piece here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/...3,4145251,00.... ) The IATC's Carlin concurs, "If gays are going to campaign (by way of zero change), for sexual access to young boys, they may lose the right in the eyes of many people to complain about the perceptions associated with their choice". I thought you were just kidding. But it seems that you're not well-informed for there are ample evidence about this!

Reminds of the Anti-semite who protests that "some of my best friends are Jewish" Look, there is no more reason for you to go prattling on about NAMBLA then there is for me to point out the Ku Klux Klan considers itself a Christian organization and demand that the local Mennonite church do more to disassociate themselves from the Klan. It's simply ludicrous to associate those two groups, but that's exactly what you are doing here. The problem with discussions like this is the not so subtle implication that gays are somehow more responsible for dealing with the problem than the rest of us. Why should that be? Why should EGALE be amy more responsible for deouncing NAMBLA than the Catholic Church is? I call it like I see it betsy, and this kind of false association is the product of bigotry, plain and simple. Get the beam out of your eye and take a good long look in the mirror. Yes you're right. The concern should be no more with the gay community than with the community in general. In fact your being gay is irrelevant to me and to most of society. The point is your sub-culture is associated, whether you like it or not, with NAMBLA. The homosexual community is part of the problem - it's the entire society's problem...and it's the entire society's responsibility to solve it...with or without the support of the homosexual community.

Reminds of the Anti-semite who protests that "some of my best friends are Jewish" I don't know what you're on about. In fact, none of my best friends are homosexuals. The fact remains that NOT ALL GAYS are pedophiles...and it has nothing to do with my friendship.

Are you serious? Transgender surgeries are covered yet many cancer treatments are not? How ridiculous. It shows when a minority gets such status that nothing can oppose anything they do (or fear being labelled a bigot), how damaging it can be to our country. Transgender surgery is completely cosemetic, no one could actually make any argument to me that shows its medically neccessary. However, also remember that Quebec teenager that got breast implants paid for by the government because she didn't feel like her breasts her big enough. I really hope we get some leaders with a backbone across the board in this country soon. We are selling ourselves to little special interests left right and centre. Oh yes, about cancer...I forgot all about that!

Thank you Geoffrey. I know that it is almost impossible....but still remaining hopeful. I guess this is not the right time to ask them to give back the original marriage definition? Just kidding....

Care to provide a link to that info? Or any source to substantiate that? It's just too hard to believe...

Don't you think the most logical solution for GRM to prove strongly that Man-Boy love is not part of the gay culture is to... ...lobby for the age of consent to be raised HIGHER? The Gay Community should...and MUST pressure their lobbying groups that this time around, they should stand alongside Heterosexuals and 80% of the population who want to see the age of consent to be raised to 16! EGALE must stand on its own...and not be influenced by ILGA whose name is tarnished, no matter what! Be the first Gay Group to stand alongside heterosexuals!

"Amendments to Canadian Law to Prevent Pederasty Likely to be Defeated by MPs Wednesday Pro-Family groups will note individual MP votes on 2 items raising age of consent for sex OTTAWA, September 27, 2005 Even "pro-gay" feminists have called on gay groups to distance themselves from efforts to lower the age of consent. Writing in the UK Guardian newspaper in 2001, Julie Blindel points out, "If gay men are going to, on the one hand, campaign for sexual access to younger and younger boys, but bleat about public perceptions of them as a league of child abusers, is it any wonder that the whole thing is such a mess?" Blindel concludes, "If gay men are serious about distancing themselves from child sexual abuse, then it's up to them to make some real efforts to join forces against this gross violation." (see Blindel's piece here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/...3,4145251,00.... ) The IATC's Carlin concurs, "If gays are going to campaign (by way of zero change), for sexual access to young boys, they may lose the right in the eyes of many people to complain about the perceptions associated with their choice". A poll conducted in 2002 found that 80% of Canadians believe that the federal government should raise the age of consent from 14 years to at least 16 years" jhw http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2005/sep/05092705.html Can we please stop with the personal attacks and name-calling? Let's try to keep this discussion as civil as possible?

Th epoint is these movements are made up of many diverse groups with dissimilar and even conflicting aims. There's no more one gay or feminist "movement": as there is one Christian church. But the one that had had the clout to have sat as a consultative voice in the UN ultimately spoke for every diverse groups...whether they have dissimilar and conflicting aims! Globally! Why do you think we now have SSM? It just suddenly came down from the sky and hit EGALE in the forehead and suddenly the lightbulb of an idea just lit up?

But for equality sake, gay couples should have the same benefits and protection as heterosexuals. I guess just like common-law spouses. But you did raise a very important issue here: What about benefits for polygamists and bisexual marriages? How many spouses in one "family" will actually collect survivors' beneift? This can be exploited, fraud-wise! Who ends up paying??? Taxpayers! I am livid enough to find out that we are now required to pay for our own eye-test (which is a natural occurence as the population ages)....and yet, EGALE is lobbying for or had already succeeded in requiring provinces to pay for transgender surgeries! Liberals really screwed things up!

Considering the numbers of Liberal MPs who were opposed to SSM getting re-elected....is it safe to assume then that the Liberal Party should be thankful for these MPs' firm opposition to SSM, for without them getting re-elected, how many seats would the Liberal actually have? That yes, in a way SSM did narrow the gap of Conservative win....but in a way that is supportive of keeping the traditional meaning of marriage.

Yes it does. On religious terms, we all have our own crosses to bear. The test is on how we bear our burden. I don't think God changes His way in accordance to how modern society gets, hence I cannot understand the other Christian denomination who succumbed to the pressures of humans in changing the ways of the church. I do hope the Vatican continues to hold firm. No one in favor of granting marital rights to committed gay couples has ever argued that religions should abandon their beliefs or compromise their basic tenets. What we want is equal treatment under the law. Religions should keep its focus on eternal matters. Government should keep its focus on temporal matters. Pressures and challenges have been launched against religious beliefs and teachings. Take for example that teen who challenged a Catholic school about bringing his gay partner in the prom. What guarantees that our religious beliefs and expressions would not be compromised? Priests preaching from the pulpits could easily be harrassed and intimidated by invoking the gag law.

Words of condemnation for NAMBLA is not enough. The Gay Groups can do more than that. It is up to the Gay Community to take action.

Nevertheless, NAMBLA is still haunting and hurting not only the Movement....but the gay community as a whole. Anti-GRM groups and NAMBLA may have brought this to the table......but unfortunately, we cannot deny that it was ILGA who provided the ammunition. The Gay Community must do more in correcting the terrible mistake made by ILGA in allowing NAMBLA to become a member of the group. This excerpt was taken from EGALE's site. It is an example of suspicion at work. Press Release November 15, 2004 Surrey School Board Fails to Provide Safe Space B.C. Human Rights Tribunal hearing starts today Vancouver—Today the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal will begin its three-week hearing into a complaint against the Surrey School Board by local moms Carol Pegura and Kim Forster. The hearing, which takes place at 605 Robson Street, 11th floor, in Vancouver, results from events that occurred at a school board meeting in June 2003. At that meeting, repeated comments were made linking same-sex couples to pedophilia, AIDS, and other sexually transmitted diseases. The board failed to take any action to maintain a safe and respectful atmosphere at the meeting. “School boards have a responsibility to ensure their meetings and their schools are welcoming and safe places for everybody, including same-sex couples and their children,” said John Guiney, Co-chair of Egale’s Education Committee. “It is reprehensible for a publicly-funded school board to condone, by their silence, comments that poison the atmosphere.” http://www.egale.ca/index.asp?lang=E&menu=2004&item=1110

Yes it does. On religious terms, we all have our own crosses to bear. The test is on how we bear our burden. I don't think God changes His way in accordance to how modern society gets, hence I cannot understand the other Christian denomination who succumbed to the pressures of humans in changing the ways of the church. I do hope the Vatican continues to hold firm.