Pedophiles waiting in line....

[CCGirl]

http://www.arthistoryclub.com/art_history/NAMBLA]http://www.arthistoryclub.com/art_history/NAMBLA

The following excerpts from the link above are...along with what I think is the most recent lobbying of the Gay Rights group in lowering the age consent (Mar 2004).... what has been bothering me, thus I'm seeking for answers.

"ILGA had passed a resolution in 1985 which stated that "young people have the right to sexual and social self-determination and that age of consent laws often operate to oppress and not to protect." In spite of this apparent agreement with NAMBLA on the age of consent issue just nine years before, ILGA, by a vote of 214-30 expelled NAMBLA and two other groups (MARTIJN and Project Truth ) in early 1994 because they were judged to be "groups whose predominant aim is to support or promote pedophilia." Although ILGA removed NAMBLA, the U.N. reversed its decision to grant ILGA special consultative status. Repeated attempts by ILGA to reacquire special status with the U.N. have not been successful, but the group does exercise consultative status with the European Commission."

"Radicals like Pat Califia [15] argue that politics played an important role in the gay community's rejection of NAMBLA. Califia says that although the gay rights mainstream never committed itself to NAMBLA or its platform, neither did it actively ostracise NAMBLA until opponents of gay rights used the group to link gay rights with child abuse and "recruitment." As evidence, subscribers to this theory point to statements made by prominent gay activists which contain political assessments of NAMBLA's impact on gay rights. One such statement was made by gay rights lobbyist Steve Endean. Endean, who opposed NAMBLA, said: "What NAMBLA is doing is tearing apart the movement. If you attach it [the man/boy love issue] to gay rights, gay rights will never happen." Gay author and activist Edmund White made a similar statement in his book States of Desire: "That's the politics of self-indulgence. Our movement cannot survive the man-boy issue. It's not a question of who's right, it's a matter of political naivete."

None of this is relevant. Sources are credible when they are free of bias, are reporting studies, are held in high esteem through peer review, etc. Citing an opinion piece in an online "Chrisitan" news source, is NOT proof. And citing a fox news article is just .....well....funny

Please cite some scientific journals or studies based on research. Opinion pieces don't count!

EDIT: Do you support the idea that the age of consent for homosexuality should be different than for heterosexuals?

[geoffrey]

EDIT: Do you support the idea that the age of consent for homosexuality should be different than for heterosexuals?

The age is too low as is. Shouldn't be a difference, it just shouldn't be 14.

[tml12]

EDIT: Do you support the idea that the age of consent for homosexuality should be different than for heterosexuals?

The age is too low as is. Shouldn't be a difference, it just shouldn't be 14.

I still say it shouldn't be based on the age, rather we need to make sure 50 year olds aren't screwing their 14 year old neighbour.

[betsy]

Most of the authors you claim are "prominent," I've never heard of.

And I spend a great deal of time doing work in the "Gay Rights Movement" -- you know, the one for which you cannot name a single major group.

Efforts to equate the IGLA's position that homosexual ages of consent should not be different from heterosexual ones with "lowering the age of consent" in general are highly misleading.

Again, not surprising, though, since your position isn't to learn, explore or make a cogent argument -- it's to attempt to tar gay people as pedophiles who want to rape children. Pretty contemptible on your part, really.

Incidentally, I doubt that the "art history" site you're linking to is an "official NAMBLA" site. Perhaps you should try linking from the web site of a relevant group -- you know, perhaps, oh, I dunno, an actual significant gay organization?

Well, obviously you've already made up your mind that I am simply smearing...so no matter what substantiations I present to you, you'll just automatically trash it.

I find it hard to believe that all these sites, including the news report about Lithuania lowering the age of consent....are all out there to smear. Aren't they afraid of being sued for slander, defamation and false reporting?

[YankAbroad]

All members of this organization should be put in jail

Except that the organization doesn't exist, except when right-wingers need a bogeyman to tie to "the gays." Notice how it's more or less disappeared as people have come to understand that gays aren't interested in raping their kids?

Funny how that works.

It's also funny how for such an allegedly big and powerful well funded group which is allegedly so central to the gay rights movement, they don't have an official web site, leadership, full time office, or anything else other than a couple dozen "members" (half under the employ of the FBI) and a "membership list" which often included the names of J Edgar Hoover's enemies in an effort to smear them.

The whole thing is a smokescreen. Nobody but psychos (and right-wing extremists, but I repeat myself) supports the alleged aims of the group or believes that it has any significant following whatsoever.

obviously you've already made up your mind that I am simply smearing

It's not that I've made up my mind, it's that you are Blanche, you are!

I find it hard to believe that all these sites, including the news report about Lithuania lowering the age of consent....are all out there to smear

Let's see. . .

You've linked to WorldNet Daily -- a right-wing anti-gay site. Seems reasonable they'd smear gays.

You've linked to FOX News -- a right-wing anti-gay site. Seems reasonable they'd smear gays.

You've linked to "LifeSite" -- a religious right-wing anti-gay site. Seems reasonable they'd smear gays.

Oh, and you've linked to an "art history club" web site as an authoritative source on this history of gay rights. What site will you link to next to support your view? Perhaps a web site for classic car enthusiasts?

[CCGirl]

Why do people think the government should impose age of consent laws at all?

[geoffrey]

EDIT: Do you support the idea that the age of consent for homosexuality should be different than for heterosexuals?

The age is too low as is. Shouldn't be a difference, it just shouldn't be 14.

I still say it shouldn't be based on the age, rather we need to make sure 50 year olds aren't screwing their 14 year old neighbour.

Divide by two and add seven? The new Canadian law?

[tml12]

Why do people think the government should impose age of consent laws at all?

To protect kids from abuse.

[betsy]

EDIT: Do you support the idea that the age of consent for homosexuality should be different than for heterosexuals?

Why, are heterosexuals lobbying to lower the age of consent? Never heard of that one.

[CCGirl]

EDIT: Do you support the idea that the age of consent for homosexuality should be different than for heterosexuals?

Why, are heterosexuals lobbying to lower the age of consent? Never heard of that one.

What? Do you think the age of consent should be the same for both hetero and homosexuals?

[YankAbroad]

Why, are heterosexuals lobbying to lower the age of consent? Never heard of that one.

Homosexuals aren't lobbying to lower the age of consent either -- a point you've ignored for the SIXTH time now. Repeating your lie over and over doesn't make it true, you know.

In every case you've cited, the age of consent law was moved for gay sexual intercourse to the SAME place where it ALREADY WAS for straight sexual intercourse -- in other words, people didn't have to be older in order to legally have homosexual relations with others.

The one case you cited about Sri Lanka lowering its opposite-sex age of consent had no gay involvement at all -- in fact, Sri Lanka is a very homophobic country where sexual relations with members of the same sex is punishable by prison time. Your argument that the "Gay Rights Movement" has anything to do with decisions in that country is dishonest in the extreme.

[betsy]

All members of this organization should be put in jail

Except that the organization doesn't exist, except when right-wingers need a bogeyman to tie to "the gays." Notice how it's more or less disappeared as people have come to understand that gays aren't interested in raping their kids?

Funny how that works.

It's also funny how for such an allegedly big and powerful well funded group which is allegedly so central to the gay rights movement, they don't have an official web site, leadership, full time office, or anything else other than a couple dozen "members" (half under the employ of the FBI) and a "membership list" which often included the names of J Edgar Hoover's enemies in an effort to smear them.

The whole thing is a smokescreen. Nobody but psychos (and right-wing extremists, but I repeat myself) supports the alleged aims of the group or believes that it has any significant following whatsoever.

obviously you've already made up your mind that I am simply smearing

It's not that I've made up my mind, it's that you are Blanche, you are!

I find it hard to believe that all these sites, including the news report about Lithuania lowering the age of consent....are all out there to smear

Let's see. . .

You've linked to WorldNet Daily -- a right-wing anti-gay site. Seems reasonable they'd smear gays.

You've linked to FOX News -- a right-wing anti-gay site. Seems reasonable they'd smear gays.

You've linked to "LifeSite" -- a religious right-wing anti-gay site. Seems reasonable they'd smear gays.

Oh, and you've linked to an "art history club" web site as an authoritative source on this history of gay rights. What site will you link to next to support your view? Perhaps a web site for classic car enthusiasts?

http://www.glaa.org/archive/1994/namblaoutofbounds.shtml

will this do?

Boy, you're hard to please.... I'm going through all this various sites.

[YankAbroad]

Well at least this time you've FINALLY linked to a gay-themed web site.

Not a major web site, not one run by a major group, but it's a slight improvement.

And the article you posted argues that NAMBLA has no place in the gay rights movement -- which directly undermines your argument that it's central to the gay rights movement.

Note this section:

Tests of character seldom accommodate themselves to our schedule. In the case of NAMBLA, not to decide is to decide. By canceling the membership of NAMBLA and other pedophile organizations, ILGA would not be denying anyone's right of self-expression but exercising its own. It is time to tell NAMBLA and its kin to express their views elsewhere, without the benefit of ILGA's assistance or its name.

D'oh! Doesn't seem like NAMBLA has received any endorsement or co-operation even from this tiny GLAA group you're linking to in this twelve-year-old article.

Try again.

[betsy]

All members of this organization should be put in jail

Except that the organization doesn't exist, except when right-wingers need a bogeyman to tie to "the gays." Notice how it's more or less disappeared as people have come to understand that gays aren't interested in raping their kids?

Funny how that works.

It's also funny how for such an allegedly big and powerful well funded group which is allegedly so central to the gay rights movement, they don't have an official web site, leadership, full time office, or anything else other than a couple dozen "members" (half under the employ of the FBI) and a "membership list" which often included the names of J Edgar Hoover's enemies in an effort to smear them.

The whole thing is a smokescreen. Nobody but psychos (and right-wing extremists, but I repeat myself) supports the alleged aims of the group or believes that it has any significant following whatsoever.

obviously you've already made up your mind that I am simply smearing

It's not that I've made up my mind, it's that you are Blanche, you are!

I find it hard to believe that all these sites, including the news report about Lithuania lowering the age of consent....are all out there to smear

Let's see. . .

You've linked to WorldNet Daily -- a right-wing anti-gay site. Seems reasonable they'd smear gays.

You've linked to FOX News -- a right-wing anti-gay site. Seems reasonable they'd smear gays.

You've linked to "LifeSite" -- a religious right-wing anti-gay site. Seems reasonable they'd smear gays.

Oh, and you've linked to an "art history club" web site as an authoritative source on this history of gay rights. What site will you link to next to support your view? Perhaps a web site for classic car enthusiasts?

http://www.glaa.org/archive/1994/namblaoutofbounds.shtml

will this do?

Boy, you're hard to please.... I'm going through all this various sites.

YIKES! Uh-oh....now I done it. I did not realize the source for the latest link until I clicked the home page.

http://www.glaa.org/index.shtml

Tell me this is not a right-wing group....please?

[tml12]

http://www.egale.ca/

All my gay friends say this is the best website for gay-rights groups in this country.

[YankAbroad]

Do you think the age of consent should be the same for both hetero and homosexuals?

She's not going to answer because once she does, her entire spurious argument falls even further to pieces.

If she acknowledges that same-sex and opposite-sex ages of consent should be the same, she's acknowledging that gay groups didn't lobby to lower the age of consent -- they lobbied to bring the same-sex age of consent into alignment with the opposite-sex age of consent.

If she argues they shouldn't be the same, she demonstrates the double-standard we know she has.

However, if she ignores the question and continues to repeat the lie that gays want to eliminate age of consent legislation, she has a fighting chance of scoring some points.

Well, until she posts articles from tiny gay organizations from 12 years ago which argue that NAMBLA isn't a gay group in order to "prove" that NAMBLA is a gay group.

[CCGirl]

EDIT: Do you support the idea that the age of consent for homosexuality should be different than for heterosexuals?

Why, are heterosexuals lobbying to lower the age of consent? Never heard of that one.

What? Do you think the age of consent should be the same for both hetero and homosexuals?

Why is it that the age of consent for heterosexuals and homosexual females is 14, but the age of consent for homosexual males is 18. How's that for a double wammy bias? Gender and sexual orientation!

[geoffrey]

The age of consent for sexual relations should be the same whether your gay or not.

The age for homosexual relations should be higher because these poor boys and girls get coerced by older people that try to make it seem cool to them. I've seen this happen.

EDIT: Acts of homosexuality don't equal sex.

[YankAbroad]

Tell me this is not a right-wing group....please?

I don't know anything about them. They don't appear to have been active for quite a number of years, judging from their web site. The article you're linking to is 12 years old and still discredits your core point that NAMBLA is an active and important part of the gay rights movement, since it argues decisively that it has no relevance whatsoever.

I certainly wouldn't rely on a small group of "all volunteer activists" to prove a point about gay rights, when there are large multi-million-dollar-budget groups like HRC in Washington or Égale in Canada with hundreds of thousands of members.

Of course, the reason you're avoiding them is because you're on a desperate search to prove a spurious and discredited hypothesis, rather than attempt to learn the facts of the situation.

[CCGirl]

EDIT: Acts of homosexuality don't equal sex.

What???

[YankAbroad]

The age of consent for sexual relations should be the same whether your gay or not.

The age for homosexual relations should be higher because these poor boys and girls get coerced by older people that try to make it seem cool to them.

Two points:

1) You realize that your first sentence and second sentence contradict each other, don't you?

2) I was raped once as a child -- by a female teacher. There's nothing inherently less predatory about heterosexuals who prey on opposite sex children. If there's an age at which kids cannot make sexual decisions, you should set that age as the limit for all sexual activity, not just certain types.

[YankAbroad]

EDIT: Acts of homosexuality don't equal sex.

What???

I second that "What???"

[geoffrey]

EDIT: Acts of homosexuality don't equal sex.

What???

Let me elaborate.

Sexual intercourse can't happen with gay people, one or the other lack essiential elements to make this successful. Anal intercourse isn't a natural process (mostly because it makes no sense from biology or anything else) and isn't sex in the same way. Lesbians can't possible even compare.

I really don't want to get into the intricacies of homosexual relations because personally I find even the concept disgusting. But we need to let people that aren't hurting anyone their freedom to do whatever. Just stop pretending its the same as straight people. It's not on any level.

[betsy]

Well at least this time you've FINALLY linked to a gay-themed web site.

Tests of character seldom accommodate themselves to our schedule. In the case of NAMBLA, not to decide is to decide. By canceling the membership of NAMBLA and other pedophile organizations, ILGA would not be denying anyone's right of self-expression but exercising its own. It is time to tell NAMBLA and its kin to express their views elsewhere, without the benefit of ILGA's assistance or its name.

D'oh! Doesn't seem like NAMBLA has received any endorsement or co-operation even from this tiny GLAA group you're linking to in this twelve-year-old article.

Try again.

D'oh?

Hang in there buddy, we're making painful progress here. Boy, I feel like a dentist extracting tooth from you.

So now, finally, we've both established that you were wrong in saying there was never any history between NAMBLA and ILGA. In fact, NAMBLA was a member of ILGA!

Oh well...I mean you now harm. Although I'm afraid it will fall on deaf ears....my point in all these is the fact that:

The changing of the traditional definition of marriage had opened the gates.

And I'm only questioning the fact....that with the Gay Rights Movement PAST involvement with NAMBLA...and for all the declared disassociation with the pedophile group, why is the Gay Rights Movement still pushing for lowering the age of consent?

I have voiced out my concern.

Well...I guess I'll have to distance myself from this discussion. Or at least I'll try.

[YankAbroad]

So basically, if a woman gives her husband a blow job, or a man fucks his wife up the ass, that's not sex either?

Or if your teenage daughter goes out and gives 10 different blow jobs to 10 different boys, it's not sex because there's no chance whatsoever for her to become pregnant in such an unnatural use of her mouth which is "made for eating and breathing?"

Pretty bizarre view, I have to say.

Just stop pretending its the same as straight people. It's not on any level.

There's not much of a difference between a guy's mouth or a gal's mouth on a man's dick -- other than the fact that most bisexual male friends of mine tell me that gay men give better head.