Pedophiles waiting in line....

[Argus]

This is beyond outrageous! :angry: Has anyone here gone to university? Learned how to research and what constitutes a reliable source? Same standards here. Provide legitimate sources only please. Otherwise your claims have no merit.

CHRISTIAN WEBSITES ARE NOT A SOURCE. TO PROVE A POINT, YOU MUST COME TO THE TABLE WITH FACTS.

IT DOESN'T WORK WELL WHEN YOU ARE LOOKING FOR SOURCES TO BACK UP UNREASONABLE CLAIMS OR MAKE LINKS WHERE THERE ARE NONE.

Whew!

I would tend to agree. However, we must bear in mind that material is normally on the internet because of advocacy by one group or another. Who is going to advocate against homosexuality? Generally speaking, no one but religious groups. Thus there is unlikely to be anything "anti-gay" or critical of homosexuals easily found on the internet unless it's posted by people who are themselves "anti-gay" which basically means religious folk.

As Geoffrey has already pointed out, universities tend not to be hotbeds of political incorrectness. A university professor who, no matter what his basis in science, said homosexuals are more likely to be child molesters than are heterosexuals, risks being hounded out of his classroom. The only exception would be, well, religious colleges.

So where would one find studies critical of homosexuality which you would accept as being valid?

[Argus]

Aw, I don't want to read everything. Reading about pedophiles on the Internet creeps me out. But from the title of the topic, I assume your point is that pedophiles are waiting in the I-want-to-marry-(insert noun) line to marry children? I find radically slippery-slope arguments intellectually dishonest, in that they're based on the premise of "if we make a rational decision now, we will never be able to make one again."

The problem is when the slippery slope argument consists of legal decisions. Legal jurisprudence is based upon previous examples, and the interpretation of laws tends to be changed incrimentally by a series of legal decisions over a period of years.

[Argus]

As a Catholic (born...I am not extemely religious though I believe in a higher power) here, I must admit that the problem in the Church needs to be solved before we say anything about anyone in the gay community...

What if the problem in the Catholic Church is gay priests? Because we've seen some evidence this is, in fact, the case. Mind you, the real problem in the Catholic Church is that idiotic chastity ruling by some long dead council which the Church stubbornly refuses to overturn.

[Argus]

NAMBLA are a bunch of twisted morons, they have nothing to do with the gay rights movement and statistics support the complete separation of the two groups. This post is the work of someone with an obvious inability to separate there irrationalities, it’s a rather sad little play on the obvious emotionalism that pedophilia brings to the fore.

Not so very long ago NAMBLA got to march in all the gay pride parades. I remember the year they finally were refused permission to march in New York by the organizers. It created quite a fuss. It would have seemed a no brainer to most, but many among the groups organizing the march were furious because they felt the gay pride march was all about inclusion of every aspect of homosexuality, be it men who like to whip each other's genitals, men who dress like fairie princesses, and men who lust after little boys. In any event, the NAMBLA people were booted out not because of overwhelming dissaproval for what they represented, but because, essentially, they were giving the march and homosexuals in general a bad name. So they were excluded largely as a PR move. I don't really have any information as to whether NAMBLA people are ostracised within the gay community. Some of what Betsy posted would suggest that is not the case.

[YankAbroad]

most of that appears to be men molesting boys, not men molesting girls

That's funny. Virginians Against Sexual Assault beg to differ:

http://www.vaasa.org/vastats.html

* One in three girls and one in six boys are sexually assaulted before the age of 18.

Source: Diana Russell, Handbook on Sexual Abuse of Children, 1988

* Most sexual abuse is committed by men (90%), and by persons known to the child (70% to 90%), with family members constituting one- third to one-half of the perpetrators against girls, and 10% to 20% of the perpetrators against boys. Source: Finkelhor, "Current Information on the Scope and Nature of Child Sexual Abuse," The Future of Children, Vol. 4, No. 2, 1994

* Estimates suggest that males account for 25% to 35% of child sexual abuse victims.

Source: Finkelhor, "Current Information on the Scope and Nature of Child Sexual Abuse," The Future of Children, Vol. 4, No. 2, 1994

Last time I checked, 25% to 35% was not "most." But don't let facts interrupt a good rant, carry on. . .

[YankAbroad]

Not so very long ago NAMBLA got to march in all the gay pride parades. I remember the year they finally were refused permission to march in New York by the organizers.

I suppose if 20 years ago isn't "not so very long ago."

Incidentally, the NYC police department, a number of investment banks, and Irish groups march in the NY Pride Parade too.

So homosexuality is clearly an effort to advance police who are Irish investment bankers too. The connection is undeniable!

What if the problem in the Catholic Church is gay priests? Because we've seen some evidence this is, in fact, the case

That's not what the victims groups say. In fact, a majority of the victims of abuse were little girls or women at the time, and victims groups have been quite upset that the Church and right wingers like yourself have ignored and downplayed their suffering in order to advance an anti-gay agenda.

See for yourself:

http://www.snapnetwork.org/female_victims/..._as_victims.htm

Already shaken by a yearlong sex abuse scandal involving priests and minors, the Roman Catholic Church has yet to face another critical challenge - how to help thousands of nuns who say they have been sexually victimized.

A national survey, completed in 1996 but intentionally never publicized, estimates that a "minimum" of 34,000 Catholic nuns, or about 40 percent of all nuns in the United States, have suffered some form of sexual trauma.

Some of that sexual abuse, exploitation or harassment has come at the hands of priests and other nuns in the church, the report said.

http://www.snapnetwork.org/female_victims/...ell_stories.htm

Over a half-dozen abuse survivors, mostly women, sat on the altar of North

Parish Church and told members of the Voice of the Faithful, a lay reformist group, about experiences that came close to ruining many of their lives.

One woman said she had not stepped into a church since her rape by a priest at age 11; another woman spoke of girlhood abuse by a priest who dined with the family; and another woman described how the Catholic Church paid $250,000 to keep her quiet.

"I didn't think that I was ready or brave enough to speak to a group like this but then we started hearing about people feeling this is a homosexual issue," said Christine Hickey, a Somerville resident. "I think we need women to speak out because the Vatican says it is a gay issue."

[Argus]

No, not the homosexual community. Pedophiles are.

All the gay people I know resent such people.

Well, to be fair, uhm, do you think they would tell you otherwise?

[Argus]

Not so very long ago NAMBLA got to march in all the gay pride parades. I remember the year they finally were refused permission to march in New York by the organizers.

I suppose if 20 years ago isn't "not so very long ago."

Not to me.

Incidentally, the NYC police department, a number of investment banks, and Irish groups march in the NY Pride Parade too.

So homosexuality is clearly an effort to advance police who are Irish investment bankers too. The connection is undeniable!

Sneakweaseling away from the subject and point are not valid debating tactics. NAMBLA isn't allowed to march in pride parades, not because the gay community as a whole dissaproves, but because it's bad PR.

[YankAbroad]

Sneakweaseling away from the subject and point are not valid debating tactics. NAMBLA isn't allowed to march in pride parades, not because the gay community as a whole dissaproves, but because it's bad PR.

I'm just pointing out that your argument seems to be that marching in a pride parade means that those people are part and parcel of the "Gay Agenda," at least according to you.

And you know about the motivations of "the gay community as a whole" through. . . what, exactly?

I'm glad you're backpedalling from your inane assertions that "most child rape victims are male on male" and that the Catholic scandal was all about boys. . . if I were you, I'd run screaming from those foolish statements too.

[Argus]

most of that appears to be men molesting boys, not men molesting girls

That's funny. Virginians Against Sexual Assault beg to differ:

http://www.vaasa.org/vastats.html

* One in three girls and one in six boys are sexually assaulted before the age of 18.

Source: Diana Russell, Handbook on Sexual Abuse of Children, 1988

* Most sexual abuse is committed by men (90%), and by persons known to the child (70% to 90%), with family members constituting one- third to one-half of the perpetrators against girls, and 10% to 20% of the perpetrators against boys. Source: Finkelhor, "Current Information on the Scope and Nature of Child Sexual Abuse," The Future of Children, Vol. 4, No. 2, 1994

* Estimates suggest that males account for 25% to 35% of child sexual abuse victims.

Source: Finkelhor, "Current Information on the Scope and Nature of Child Sexual Abuse," The Future of Children, Vol. 4, No. 2, 1994

Last time I checked, 25% to 35% was not "most." But don't let facts interrupt a good rant, carry on. . .

None of that is in any way relevent to what I said. Most child sexual abuse is within families, and so, of course, it's going to involve heterosexual males abusing female victims. However, outside of the family, most child sex abuse cases appear to be men abusing boys. I would say, in fact, the overwhelming number of the reported cases are men abusing boys.

Within families, the underlying cause of most child sexual abuse is alcholism and drug abuse, while outside the family it's much more predatory in nature. We repeatedly hear cases of adult men taking positions where they can get close to boys, as in Scout leaders, but rarely, if ever (I actually can't remember a single case) hear of predatory men trying to volunteer for positions where they can get close to young girls.

[Argus]

I'm glad you're backpedalling from your inane assertions that "most child rape victims are male on male" and that the Catholic scandal was all about boys. . . if I were you, I'd run screaming from those foolish statements too.

I never made any such assertation, so it would be hard to back away from it. Fighting straw men is also an invalid debating tactic.

[YankAbroad]

I never made any such assertation, so it would be hard to back away from it

Well, I guess backing away from the assertion you made and claiming you never made it is one way to handle the situation. You clearly said, twice, that:

what we're talking about here is molestation outside the family, by predators, and most of that appears to be men molesting boys, not men molesting girls

Of course, let's go back and look at the facts again (remember those?)

* Estimates suggest that males account for 25% to 35% of child sexual abuse victims. Source: Finkelhor, "Current Information on the Scope and Nature of Child Sexual Abuse," The Future of Children, Vol. 4, No. 2, 1994

You're fantastic at making up quotes, like your laughable 1% of the population is gay assertion. . . but rather poor at dealing with the actual facts.

Of course, you're not interested in arguing the facts, you're interested in smearing gays as "pedophiles." I don't know whether to categorize your "contribution" as pathetic, or laughable. Perhaps both?

[Argus]

What if the problem in the Catholic Church is gay priests? Because we've seen some evidence this is, in fact, the case

That's not what the victims groups say. In fact, a majority of the victims of abuse were little girls or women at the time, and victims groups have been quite upset that the Church and right wingers like yourself have ignored and downplayed their suffering in order to advance an anti-gay agenda.

See for yourself:

http://www.snapnetwork.org/female_victims/..._as_victims.htm

The cite above in no way supports your statements. It writes about the number of nuns who have experienced sexual abuse of one form or another, as adults, within the church, or as children outside of it. If there was a percentage comparison to the number of boys molested by priests and brothers I missed it.

Already shaken by a yearlong sex abuse scandal involving priests and minors, the Roman Catholic Church has yet to face another critical challenge - how to help thousands of nuns who say they have been sexually victimized.

A national survey, completed in 1996 but intentionally never publicized, estimates that a "minimum" of 34,000 Catholic nuns, or about 40 percent of all nuns in the United States, have suffered some form of sexual trauma.

Some of that sexual abuse, exploitation or harassment has come at the hands of priests and other nuns in the church, the report said.

Yes, about 9%. This is surprising? Of course in an institution with such a heavy hangup about sex, with chastity rules for priests and nuns, there is going to be problems. But that really does not address the fact that the overwhelming number of child molesttation cases involving the Church were by homosexual priests molesting boys.

[YankAbroad]

It writes about the number of nuns who have experienced sexual abuse of one form or another, as adults, within the church, or as children outside of it. If there was a percentage comparison to the number of boys molested by priests and brothers I missed it.

Of course you did, because you didn't read the article in question. It has unfavorable statistics, making your already curious argument deflate even further.

One-third to one-half of the victims of clergy abuse are female, according to Susan Gallagher, who recently went public about the abuse she says she suffered beginning in the late 1960s and stretching to about 1980. She drew the estimate from attendance at national support groups for victims of clergy abuse.

"All pedophiles care about is access, they don't care about gender," she said, adding that both she and her brother were abused by the same priest.

1/3 to 1/2 of victims being women (and more likely closer to the latter given the composition of the plaintiffs in the class action law suits) completely invalidates your claim.

Incidentally, this quote was in the article I linked to -- the article you didn't bother to read.

[YankAbroad]

Yes, about 9%. This is surprising? Of course in an institution with such a heavy hangup about sex, with chastity rules for priests and nuns, there is going to be problems.

That's funny, and here I am saying there shouldn't be excuses made for any rapist.

While you seem to think that opposite sex rape is OK -- even reasonable -- as long as it's men raping women. Curious.

Good to see you're still making up statistics, though.

[Argus]

I never made any such assertation, so it would be hard to back away from it

Well, I guess backing away from the assertion you made and claiming you never made it is one way to handle the situation. You clearly said, twice, that:

what we're talking about here is molestation outside the family, by predators, and most of that appears to be men molesting boys, not men molesting girls

Of course, let's go back and look at the facts again (remember those?)

* Estimates suggest that males account for 25% to 35% of child sexual abuse victims. Source: Finkelhor, "Current Information on the Scope and Nature of Child Sexual Abuse," The Future of Children, Vol. 4, No. 2, 1994

I'm not entirely certain if you're being deliberately intellectually dishonest with your arguments or simply aren't terribly bright. You are taking my suggestion that the overwhelming number of child sexual abuse cases outside family appear to be of men on boys, and attempting to refute it by using statistics which largely consist of family molestation.

I will attempt to make it even more clear than I have already.

The overwhelming percentage of child sexual abuse happens within families, due to simple availability and proximity. And of course, most of that is males molesting girls. There really is no disputing either statement. Also, most of that abuse is the result of alcoholism and drug abuse. Again, there is no disputing the facts of that, as they are well-documented.

However. Outside of families, the overwhelming number of child sexual abuse appears to be men molesting boys, and the overwhelming number of predatory cases appears to be men molesting boys.

[Argus]

Yes, about 9%. This is surprising? Of course in an institution with such a heavy hangup about sex, with chastity rules for priests and nuns, there is going to be problems.

That's funny, and here I am saying there shouldn't be excuses made for any rapist.

While you seem to think that opposite sex rape is OK -- even reasonable -- as long as it's men raping women. Curious.

Good to see you're still making up statistics, though.

The "9%" figure came from your own cite. Did you not even read it?

Nearly one in five nuns said she had been sexually abused as a child. While most of the abuse came at the hands of a male family member, about 9 percent of the cases were attributed to abuse by priests, nuns or other religious people.

Nor is there any suggestion on my part that rape is acceptable. You appear incapable of any sort of rational discussion on this issue but continue to divert things into smears an innuendo. This does not speak well of either your intelligence or honesty.

[YankAbroad]

However. Outside of families, the overwhelming number of child sexual abuse appears to be men molesting boys

A dubious assertion (which, incidentally, doesn't pass the math if it's done on the statistics I've provided earlier). I suggest you either provide a link, or apologise.

dishonest

Dishonesty is tossing out phoney statistics in order to "prove" your effort to tar gays as pedophiles.

The reason you produce fake statistics is because the real ones don't agree with your assertions.

Just do the math with the VAASA statistics. What you're arguing is mathematically impossible.

And your statements about the Catholic situation have already been blown out of the water, too. Oh well.

[YankAbroad]

You appear incapable of any sort of rational discussion on this issue but continue to divert things into smears an innuendo.

You're the one arguing that most gays are pedophiles or pedophile supporters, and then you whinge about "diversion into smears and innuendo?"

Oh, cry me a river Ms. Thang!

[Argus]

One-third to one-half of the victims of clergy abuse are female, according to Susan Gallagher, who recently went public about the abuse she says she suffered beginning in the late 1960s and stretching to about 1980. She drew the estimate from attendance at national support groups for victims of clergy abuse.

"All pedophiles care about is access, they don't care about gender," she said, adding that both she and her brother were abused by the same priest.

1/3 to 1/2 of victims being women (and more likely closer to the latter given the composition of the plaintiffs in the class action law suits) completely invalidates your claim.

This is farcical. I am not going to take an "estimate" by a single woman, based on the people she sees at support meetings as evidence when the overwhelming number of reports have focused on priests abusing males. Unless, of course, you can find some logical reason why abuse of girls would be completely ignored by the media.

I refer you to the following.

Almost all the priests who abuse children are homosexuals. Dr. Thomas Plante, a psychologist at Santa Clara University, found that “80 to 90% of all priests who in fact abuse minors have sexually engaged with adolescent boys, not prepubescent children. Thus, the teenager is more at risk than the young altar boy or girls of any age.”[viii]

The situation in Boston, the epicenter of the scandal, is even worse. According to the Boston Globe, “Of the clergy sex abuse cases referred to prosecutors in Eastern Massachusetts, more than 90 percent involve male victims. And the most prominent Boston lawyers for alleged victims of clergy sexual abuse have said that about 95 percent of their clients are male.”[ix]

In a database analysis of reports on more than 1,200 alleged victims of priests identified by USA Today, 85 percent were males.[x] In another study by USA Today, it was determined that of the 234 priests who have been accused of sexual abuse of a minor while serving in the nation’s 10 largest dioceses and archdioceses, 91 percent of their victims were males.[xi]

Catholic League

[YankAbroad]

This is farcical. I am not going to take an "estimate" by a single woman, based on the people she sees at support meetings as evidence

Of course you won't -- because the statistics you pull out of your arse are so much more reliable! Hehehe!

Unless, of course, you can find some logical reason why abuse of girls would be completely ignored by the media.

It's a major problem for the victims groups.

Of course, unlike you, I support all the victims, rather than calling the ones whose existence is politically inconvenient to hate speech liars -- as is your style.

[tml12]

One-third to one-half of the victims of clergy abuse are female, according to Susan Gallagher, who recently went public about the abuse she says she suffered beginning in the late 1960s and stretching to about 1980. She drew the estimate from attendance at national support groups for victims of clergy abuse.

"All pedophiles care about is access, they don't care about gender," she said, adding that both she and her brother were abused by the same priest.

1/3 to 1/2 of victims being women (and more likely closer to the latter given the composition of the plaintiffs in the class action law suits) completely invalidates your claim.

This is farcical. I am not going to take an "estimate" by a single woman, based on the people she sees at support meetings as evidence when the overwhelming number of reports have focused on priests abusing males. Unless, of course, you can find some logical reason why abuse of girls would be completely ignored by the media.

According to dictionary.com:

1) A "pedophile" is "an adult who is sexually attracted to a child or children."

2) A "homosexual" is "Of, relating to, or having a sexual orientation to persons of the same sex."

3) A "heterosexual" is "Sexually oriented to persons of the opposite sex."

Only one of those terms, "pedophile," do I find offensive. We know about the issues with Catholic priests in this country, but there are also many issues where Catholic priests molested "altar girls." The Catholic Church only recently began having altar girls and there are a very few...if you are a priest who, naturally, cannot have sex or be married, and you are "aroused," you will probably go after what is around you. There are not many women in executive positions in the Catholic Church. This may be why we have so much data on it.

I am going to have to agree with YankAbroad that I don't think there is any correlation between homosexuality and the desire to commit acts of pedophelia.

[Argus]

You appear incapable of any sort of rational discussion on this issue but continue to divert things into smears an innuendo.

You're the one arguing that most gays are pedophiles or pedophile supporters, and then you whinge about "diversion into smears and innuendo?"

Oh, cry me a river Ms. Thang!

Again - I made no such argument. I did, however, suggest that your contention that the homosexual community despises such people was unsupported by evidence.

[Argus]

One-third to one-half of the victims of clergy abuse are female, according to Susan Gallagher, who recently went public about the abuse she says she suffered beginning in the late 1960s and stretching to about 1980. She drew the estimate from attendance at national support groups for victims of clergy abuse.

"All pedophiles care about is access, they don't care about gender," she said, adding that both she and her brother were abused by the same priest.

1/3 to 1/2 of victims being women (and more likely closer to the latter given the composition of the plaintiffs in the class action law suits) completely invalidates your claim.

This is farcical. I am not going to take an "estimate" by a single woman, based on the people she sees at support meetings as evidence when the overwhelming number of reports have focused on priests abusing males. Unless, of course, you can find some logical reason why abuse of girls would be completely ignored by the media.

Only one of those terms, "pedophile," do I find offensive. We know about the issues with Catholic priests in this country, but there are also many issues where Catholic priests molested "altar girls."

Very few, actually.

The Catholic Church only recently began having altar girls and there are a very few...if you are a priest who, naturally, cannot have sex or be married, and you are "aroused," you will probably go after what is around you. There are not many women in executive positions in the Catholic Church. This may be why we have so much data on it.

Unfortunately, you responded to that post before I revised it. I would suggest you examine the cite I added afterwards. As for priests having no females accessible, I would guess that most priests who are interested in sex can get it from parishioners, or from nuns, or from anyone else. The contention they are restricted to their alter boys is simply foolish. Priests have very easy access to many children and adolescents of both sexes as well as adults, of course.

[Argus]

This is farcical. I am not going to take an "estimate" by a single woman, based on the people she sees at support meetings as evidence

Of course you won't -- because the statistics you pull out of your arse are so much more reliable! Hehehe!

Name one unsupporting statistic I have posted. You are smiply, for lack of any valid argument, lying.

Unless, of course, you can find some logical reason why abuse of girls would be completely ignored by the media.

It's a major problem for the victims groups.

Of course, unlike you, I support all the victims, rather than calling the ones whose existence is politically inconvenient to hate speech liars -- as is your style.

I see no evidence you support victims. Nothing in what you've written shows support for victims. Everything you have posted suggests an atempt to stop all discussion of this issue, perhaps to defend those who engage in molesting from condemnation?

How do you personally feel about young boys? Not, perhaps children, but fourteen year old boys. Would you willingly engage in sex with a fourteen year old boy?