At least they weren't gay

[penultimatestraw 473]

What do the Boy Scouts, Penn State and Catholic Church have in common? My link

Over two decades, the Boy Scouts of America failed to report hundreds of alleged child molesters to police and often hid the allegations from parents and the public.

 

A Los Angeles Times review of 1,600 confidential files dating from 1970 to 1991 has found that Scouting officials frequently urged admitted offenders to quietly resign — and helped many cover their tracks.

 

Volunteers and employees suspected of abuse were allowed to leave citing bogus reasons such as business demands, "chronic brain dysfunction" and duties at a Shakespeare festival.

 

The details are contained in the organization's confidential "perversion files," a blacklist of alleged molesters, that the Scouts have used internally since 1919. Scouts' lawyers around the country have been fighting in court to keep the files from public view.

 

As The Times reported in August, the blacklist often didn't work: Men expelled for alleged abuses slipped back into the program, only to be accused of molesting again. Now, a more extensive review has shown that Scouts sometimes abetted molesters by keeping allegations under wraps.

 

In the majority of cases, the Scouts learned of alleged abuse after it had been reported to authorities. But in more than 500 instances, the Scouts learned about it from boys, parents, staff members or anonymous tips.

 

In about 400 of those cases — 80% — there is no record of Scouting officials reporting the allegations to police. In more than 100 of the cases, officials actively sought to conceal the alleged abuse or allowed the suspects to hide it, The Times found.

 

…

 

With 50 years in Scouting, Arthur W. Humphries appeared to be a model leader, winning two presidential citations and the Scouts' top award for distinguished service — the Silver Beaver — for his work with disabled boys in Chesapeake, Va.

 

Unknown to most in town, he also was a serial child molester.

 

A few months after Humphries' arrest in 1984, local Scouting official Jack Terwilliger told the Virginian-Pilot newspaper that no one at the local Scout council had had suspicions about Humphries.

 

But that was not true. Records in Humphries' file show that six years earlier, Terwilliger had ordered officials to interview a Scout who gave a detailed account of Humphries' repeated acts of oral sex on him.

 

"He then told me to do the same and I did," the 12-year-old boy said in a sworn statement in 1978.

 

Officials not only failed to report Humphries' alleged crime to police, records show — they also gave him a strong job reference two years later, when he applied for a post at a national Scouting event.

 

"I believe the attached letters of recommendation and the newspaper write-up will give you a well rounded picture of Art," Terwilliger wrote. "If selected, I am sure that he would add much to the handicapped awareness trail at the 1981 Jamboree."

 

Humphries continued to work with Scouts and molested at least five more boys before police, acting on a tip, stopped him in 1984. He was convicted of abusing 20 Boy Scouts, some as young as 8, and was sentenced to 151 years in prison.

[drobeski 3,061]

So when a molester molests someone of the same sex he's not gay?

[MDC 7,882]

Maybe they should ban secretly gay people?

[Casual Observer 597]

What do the Boy Scouts, Penn State and Catholic Church have in common? My link

 

Are you sure? Props to the LA Times for being two decades late with this story.

 

 

 

"Homosexuals are targeting not just youth group homes, but all

groups that work with youth. When a California family sued the Scouts

in 1993 for exposing their son to a Scout leader who molested him, the

Scouts were ordered to turn over 25,000 pages of documents to the

plaintiff. This unprecedented glimpse into the world of Scout pedophiles

revealed that thousands of boys had been molested by Scout leaders and

other volunteers between 1971 and 1991 resulting in the expulsion of

over 1,800 Scout volunteers for pedophile activity.12 The documents show

that some Scout leaders molested over forty boys before getting caught

7 See Plaintiff’s Complaint, supra note 3, at 4.

8 Id. at 8.

9 K.L. Billingsley, Gay Agency Probed for Child Abuse, WASH. TIMES, Sept. 21,

1996, at A2.

10 Bettina Boxall, Beleaguered Gay Agency Fights Back, L.A. TIMES, June 23, 1996,

at B1.

11 As a former member of the California State Assembly the author requested all

documents relating to this case from the Department of Social Services and found no

evidence of any proceedings initiated by the Attorney General’s office.

12 Brief of Amici Curiae Public Advocate et al., Dale v. Boy Scouts of America, 734

A.2d 1196 (N.J. 1999) (No. 99-699); Steve Geissinger, Scouts Remove 1800 Scoutmasters for

Suspected Abuse Over Two Decades, ASSOC. PRESS, Oct. 14, 1993 (on file with author).

270 REGENT UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW [Vol. 14:267

and that many, once caught, simply moved to a different Scout troop and

continued abusing boys.

Gay activists have spun the Scout molestation epidemic as a

heterosexual problem. Examination of many of the higher profile cases,

however, reveals that Scout molesters are attracted exclusively to boys

and many lead mainstream gay lifestyles. John Hemstreet is a typical

example. Hemstreet is a convicted child molester, former Boy Scout

leader, and currently the President of the Toledo, Ohio chapter of

Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG). PFLAG is one of

the groups leading the nationwide attack on the Boy Scouts of America.13

Incredibly, the pro-pedophile group, North American Man Boy Love

Association (NAMBLA), which calls itself a homosexual group, wrote a

letter to the national Scout office urging "the Boy Scouts of America to

cease its discrimination against openly gay or lesbian persons in the

appointment of its scout masters and scouters and in its membership.

This will permit scouts to be exposed to a variety of life styles and will

permit more of those individuals who genuinely wish to serve boys to do

so."14

Using twisted logic, pro-gay academics argue in various social

science journals that the molestation of boys is not a gay lifestyle issue

and that such men are not really homosexuals. It is simply amazing that

gay propagandists and sexology "experts" are successfully bamboozling

the public and the media into believing that a man’s exclusive focus on

young males should not be defined as homosexuality! But if an exclusive

attraction of a male to other males of any age is not homosexuality, what

is?"

[titans&bucs&bearsohmy! 2,745]

You know the sad thing about all this crap (aside from the horror of the victims, obviously?)

 

Millions and millions of boys and girls in this country need role models. In the case of the boys in particular, male role models. They have no male figure in their lives that is an example.

 

Now me, as I go around public, you see kids all the time. It used to be enjoyable to talk to them. Have em give you five, show you whatever toy they have with them. I frequently even buy them a treat or toy out of the little quarter machine places have (I always got the ok from the parents first).

 

Having no kids of my own, and having no intention of it, I had actually given thought to doing the big brother big sister program, or something like that.

 

But it seems lately, as a grown man, you get dirty, or at least suspicious looks for even saying hi to random kids around town. Parents don't want their kids to get around ANYONE. I would be afraid to have a little brother over to my house or something, just because that is an accusation that ruins your life, and can't be disproved. Even with other adults, I am VERY conscious of these things, and NEVER have a female student alone in the classroom with the door closed. With a couple of crazy ones, I have even gone and gotten another teacher to be present while they took their test, just in case they claimed I pulled my cack out or something.

 

Now obviously, I see where the parents are coming from. You have to be ever watchful.

 

But on the other hand... I find it very sad, and ultimately detrimental to the kids. I remember as a kid that many of the "A HA!" moments in my life, where something clicked for me, came because of something a friend's dad said, or a scout leader, or a church group chaperone, or whoever. Now they were saying the same sh!t MY dad said, but you know kids just don't listen to their own parents.

 

Kids are gonna miss out because of all of this crap.

 

_____________________

 

I think its time we FORCE the SCOTUS to let us execute pedophiles again. Amend the constitution if need be, obviously, the current penalties aren't deterring it.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

 

 

I think its time we FORCE the SCOTUS to let us execute pedophiles again. Amend the constitution if need be, obviously, the current penalties aren't deterring it.

 

Capital punishment is decided by the states. It isn't in the Constitution, Matlock.

[titans&bucs&bearsohmy! 2,745]

Are you sure? Props to the LA Times for being two decades late with this story.

 

 

 

"Homosexuals are targeting not just youth group homes, but all

groups that work with youth. When a California family sued the Scouts

in 1993 for exposing their son to a Scout leader who molested him, the

Scouts were ordered to turn over 25,000 pages of documents to the

plaintiff. This unprecedented glimpse into the world of Scout pedophiles

revealed that thousands of boys had been molested by Scout leaders and

other volunteers between 1971 and 1991 resulting in the expulsion of

over 1,800 Scout volunteers for pedophile activity.12 The documents show

that some Scout leaders molested over forty boys before getting caught

7 See Plaintiff’s Complaint, supra note 3, at 4.

8 Id. at 8.

9 K.L. Billingsley, Gay Agency Probed for Child Abuse, WASH. TIMES, Sept. 21,

1996, at A2.

10 Bettina Boxall, Beleaguered Gay Agency Fights Back, L.A. TIMES, June 23, 1996,

at B1.

11 As a former member of the California State Assembly the author requested all

documents relating to this case from the Department of Social Services and found no

evidence of any proceedings initiated by the Attorney General’s office.

12 Brief of Amici Curiae Public Advocate et al., Dale v. Boy Scouts of America, 734

A.2d 1196 (N.J. 1999) (No. 99-699); Steve Geissinger, Scouts Remove 1800 Scoutmasters for

Suspected Abuse Over Two Decades, ASSOC. PRESS, Oct. 14, 1993 (on file with author).

270 REGENT UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW [Vol. 14:267

and that many, once caught, simply moved to a different Scout troop and

continued abusing boys.

Gay activists have spun the Scout molestation epidemic as a

heterosexual problem. Examination of many of the higher profile cases,

however, reveals that Scout molesters are attracted exclusively to boys

and many lead mainstream gay lifestyles. John Hemstreet is a typical

example. Hemstreet is a convicted child molester, former Boy Scout

leader, and currently the President of the Toledo, Ohio chapter of

Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG). PFLAG is one of

the groups leading the nationwide attack on the Boy Scouts of America.13

Incredibly, the pro-pedophile group, North American Man Boy Love

Association (NAMBLA), which calls itself a homosexual group, wrote a

letter to the national Scout office urging "the Boy Scouts of America to

cease its discrimination against openly gay or lesbian persons in the

appointment of its scout masters and scouters and in its membership.

This will permit scouts to be exposed to a variety of life styles and will

permit more of those individuals who genuinely wish to serve boys to do

so."14

Using twisted logic, pro-gay academics argue in various social

science journals that the molestation of boys is not a gay lifestyle issue

and that such men are not really homosexuals. It is simply amazing that

gay propagandists and sexology "experts" are successfully bamboozling

the public and the media into believing that a man’s exclusive focus on

young males should not be defined as homosexuality! But if an exclusive

attraction of a male to other males of any age is not homosexuality, what

is?"

 

I think your argument is bunk too.

 

Is a guy that molests an 8 year old boy gay? I guess.

 

Does that mean gay men molest little boys high rates? No.

 

Just like the guy who focks his 8 year old niece is straight, and that does not mean straight people molest children at high rates. A larger number of female children are molested than male children you know.

 

Some people, ghey or straight, like to fock kids. I guess it is some kind of power thing, I honestly don't know, or really focking care. They should be killed in a painful way on national television.

 

But trying to use these situations for your political agenda to paint a group that hasn't done anything wrong as pedophiles is focking disgusting.

[JTB 52]

You know the sad thing about all this crap (aside from the horror of the victims, obviously?)

 

Millions and millions of boys and girls in this country need role models. In the case of the boys in particular, male role models. They have no male figure in their lives that is an example.

 

Now me, as I go around public, you see kids all the time. It used to be enjoyable to talk to them. Have em give you five, show you whatever toy they have with them. I frequently even buy them a treat or toy out of the little quarter machine places have (I always got the ok from the parents first).

 

Having no kids of my own, and having no intention of it, I had actually given thought to doing the big brother big sister program, or something like that.

 

But it seems lately, as a grown man, you get dirty, or at least suspicious looks for even saying hi to random kids around town. Parents don't want their kids to get around ANYONE. I would be afraid to have a little brother over to my house or something, just because that is an accusation that ruins your life, and can't be disproved. Even with other adults, I am VERY conscious of these things, and NEVER have a female student alone in the classroom with the door closed. With a couple of crazy ones, I have even gone and gotten another teacher to be present while they took their test, just in case they claimed I pulled my cack out or something.

 

Now obviously, I see where the parents are coming from. You have to be ever watchful.

 

But on the other hand... I find it very sad, and ultimately detrimental to the kids. I remember as a kid that many of the "A HA!" moments in my life, where something clicked for me, came because of something a friend's dad said, or a scout leader, or a church group chaperone, or whoever. Now they were saying the same sh!t MY dad said, but you know kids just don't listen to their own parents.

 

Kids are gonna miss out because of all of this crap.

 

_____________________

 

I think its time we FORCE the SCOTUS to let us execute pedophiles again. Amend the constitution if need be, obviously, the current penalties aren't deterring it.

 

 

I often feel the same way....like what is this guy doing talking to my child feeling.

[titans&bucs&bearsohmy! 2,745]

Capital punishment is decided by the states. It isn't in the Constitution, Matlock.

 

Do yourself a favor dooshpilot, don't try to correct your betters on things they know far more about. I will now proceed to pwn you.

 

_____

 

Up until the 1970's, the states punished many things with death, each in their own way. Most had murder as a capital crime, some automatically. Others had rape and pedophilia as capital crimes.

 

That all changed in the 70's. In Furman v. Georgia, the USSCOTUS first held a death penalty statute unconstitutional. This was largely because it was being applied capriciously, and more frequently to blacks. It had too much discretion involved.

 

For a brief time, there WAS no death penalty in the US. Eventually, SCOTUS allowed it again, after outlining the "guilt phase" and "penalty phase" procedure we still use today.

 

In response, Indiana passed a law mandating that ALL murder convictions carried the death penalty. The USSCOTUS struck that down too. The same happened to the North Carolina Statute and the Louisiana Statute (Woodson v. North Carolina, Roberts v. Louisiana).

 

In 1977, the Court ruled (Coker v. Georgia) that the death penalty in the case of an adult woman being raped, but not killed, was unconstiutional, as the "disproportionate" penalty violated the 8th amendment.

 

Numerous states, most recently Louisiana, have tried to execute child molesters. The SCOTUS has said that the death penalty is only able to be used in cases of 1st degree murder.

 

___

 

So once again, you got pwned. Really dude, don't go around challenging lawyers on things that a reasonably well educated pre-law undergrad student knows. You just end up looking stupid.

 

And no, you get no link. Do your own focking research moron.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

Do yourself a favor dooshpilot, don't try to correct your betters on things they know far more about. I will now proceed to pwn you.

 

_____

 

Up until the 1970's, the states punished many things with death, each in their own way. Most had murder as a capital crime, some automatically. Others had rape and pedophilia as capital crimes.

 

That all changed in the 70's. In Furman v. Georgia, the USSCOTUS first held a death penalty statute unconstitutional. This was largely because it was being applied capriciously, and more frequently to blacks. It had too much discretion involved.

 

For a brief time, there WAS no death penalty in the US. Eventually, SCOTUS allowed it again, after outlining the "guilt phase" and "penalty phase" procedure we still use today.

 

In response, Indiana passed a law mandating that ALL murder convictions carried the death penalty. The USSCOTUS struck that down too. The same happened to the North Carolina Statute and the Louisiana Statute (Woodson v. North Carolina, Roberts v. Louisiana).

 

In 1977, the Court ruled (Coker v. Georgia) that the death penalty in the case of an adult woman being raped, but not killed, was unconstiutional, as the "disproportionate" penalty violated the 8th amendment.

 

Numerous states, most recently Louisiana, have tried to execute child molesters. The SCOTUS has said that the death penalty is only able to be used in cases of 1st degree murder.

 

___

 

So once again, you got pwned. Really dude, don't go around challenging lawyers on things that a reasonably well educated pre-law undergrad student knows. You just end up looking stupid.

 

And no, you get no link. Do your own focking research moron.

 

Just because the SC has made a ruling on a State Law regarding capital punishment doesn't mean capital punishment is spelled out in the Constitution.

 

It is decided state by state.

[titans&bucs&bearsohmy! 2,745]

It is decided state by state.

 

No, it is not. The SCOTUS had held, more than once, that the Federal Constitution's Eighth Amendment Prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment applies to the states, and overrules state law.

 

Its this little thing called the Supremacy Clause, whereby proper federal laws and the federal constitution trumps the state law.

 

As such, EVERY SINGLE ONE of the States that has the death penalty has to follow the two phase trial procedure the SCOTUS laid down. Also, EVERY SINGLE STATE has to follow the prohibition that the death penalty can only be applied to first degree murder cases.

 

____

 

You know, for someone who babbles politics 24 hours a day, you really know absolutely nothing about how our system works. You should come sit in on my political science class sometime. You might learn something.

 

Don't believe me? I'll make you a challenge... If you can find ONE case, just ONE, of ANY state executing someone for ANY crime other than murder (or treason, which is in the constiution) in the last 30 years, I will leave the bored for a year. One entire calendar year.

 

I won't bother trying to make it a wager, where you risk something too, as I know you aren't a man and wouldn't honor it anyway.

 

Now run along. You might rub some alcohol into the mushroom shaped welt on your forehead from where I just d!ckslapped you.

[Casual Observer 597]

I think your argument is bunk too.

 

Is a guy that molests an 8 year old boy gay? I guess.

 

Does that mean gay men molest little boys high rates? No.

 

Just like the guy who focks his 8 year old niece is straight, and that does not mean straight people molest children at high rates. A larger number of female children are molested than male children you know.

 

Some people, ghey or straight, like to fock kids. I guess it is some kind of power thing, I honestly don't know, or really focking care. They should be killed in a painful way on national television.

 

But trying to use these situations for your political agenda to paint a group that hasn't done anything wrong as pedophiles is focking disgusting.

 

I don't think it's bunk. There are studies out there that conclude that gay men child molest at higher rates than heteros. However, I've already discussed this in another thread at length and don't have the time to waste on it today.

[titans&bucs&bearsohmy! 2,745]

I don't think it's bunk. There are studies out there that conclude that gay men child molest at higher rates than heteros. However, I've already discussed this in another thread at length and don't have the time to waste on it today.

 

Then how do you explain this?

 

According to U.S. Justice department figures, one of every three girls is molested by the time they are 18 years old (33%), and 14% of boys are molested by age 18. Therefore, more than twice as many girls as boys suffer molestation.

[Casual Observer 597]

Then how do you explain this?

 

There a lot more heterosexuals than homosexuals.

[titans&bucs&bearsohmy! 2,745]

No, it is not. The SCOTUS had held, more than once, that the Federal Constitution's Eighth Amendment Prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment applies to the states, and overrules state law.

 

Its this little thing called the Supremacy Clause, whereby proper federal laws and the federal constitution trumps the state law.

 

As such, EVERY SINGLE ONE of the States that has the death penalty has to follow the two phase trial procedure the SCOTUS laid down. Also, EVERY SINGLE STATE has to follow the prohibition that the death penalty can only be applied to first degree murder cases.

 

____

 

You know, for someone who babbles politics 24 hours a day, you really know absolutely nothing about how our system works. You should come sit in on my political science class sometime. You might learn something.

 

Don't believe me? I'll make you a challenge... If you can find ONE case, just ONE, of ANY state executing someone for ANY crime other than murder (or treason, which is in the constiution) in the last 30 years, I will leave the bored for a year. One entire calendar year.

 

I won't bother trying to make it a wager, where you risk something too, as I know you aren't a man and wouldn't honor it anyway.

 

Now run along. You might rub some alcohol into the mushroom shaped welt on your forehead from where I just d!ckslapped you.

 

That's what I focking thought. Pwned.

[penultimatestraw 473]

I don't think it's bunk. There are studies out there that conclude that gay men child molest at higher rates than heteros. However, I've already discussed this in another thread at length and don't have the time to waste on it today.

Right, and I already proved your logic was faulty in that thread.

[Casual Observer 597]

Right, and I already proved your logic was faulty in that thread.

 

No, you came with a Wikilink that attempted to state that a quarter of the population is actually gay - they just don't know it.

[IGotWorms 4,063]

No, it is not. The SCOTUS had held, more than once, that the Federal Constitution's Eighth Amendment Prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment applies to the states, and overrules state law.

 

Its this little thing called the Supremacy Clause, whereby proper federal laws and the federal constitution trumps the state law.

 

As such, EVERY SINGLE ONE of the States that has the death penalty has to follow the two phase trial procedure the SCOTUS laid down. Also, EVERY SINGLE STATE has to follow the prohibition that the death penalty can only be applied to first degree murder cases.

 

____

 

You know, for someone who babbles politics 24 hours a day, you really know absolutely nothing about how our system works. You should come sit in on my political science class sometime. You might learn something.

 

Don't believe me? I'll make you a challenge... If you can find ONE case, just ONE, of ANY state executing someone for ANY crime other than murder (or treason, which is in the constiution) in the last 30 years, I will leave the bored for a year. One entire calendar year.

 

I won't bother trying to make it a wager, where you risk something too, as I know you aren't a man and wouldn't honor it anyway.

 

Now run along. You might rub some alcohol into the mushroom shaped welt on your forehead from where I just d!ckslapped you.

 

Pwnt

[penultimatestraw 473]

No, you came with a Wikilink that attempted to state that a quarter of the population is actually gay - they just don't know it.

If you can't admit the estimation of gay % is problematic, making the stats you posted highly suspect, I can't help you. But I bet you most of the BSA pedophiles would not identify themselves as gay. The Venn diagrams overlap, as they do for heterosexuals molestors, but not enough to openly discriminate based on sexual preference IMO.

[SUXBNME 1,594]

Who cares about the kid touchers. The important question is will they lose their tax exempt status?

[Casual Observer 597]

If you can't admit the estimation of gay % is problematic, making the stats you posted highly suspect, I can't help you. But I bet you most of the BSA pedophiles would not identify themselves as gay. The Venn diagrams overlap, as they do for heterosexuals molestors, but not enough to openly discriminate based on sexual preference IMO.

 

It's not problematic. It's somewhere between 2 and 4% of the total population. Even if they were a higher percentage of the population, homo pedophilia occurs at an alarmingly higher rate than hetero. Stop trying to move the goalposts every time you're confronted with a study you don't like.

[penultimatestraw 473]

It's not problematic. It's somewhere between 2 and 4% of the total population. Even if they were a higher percentage of the population, homo pedophilia occurs at an alarmingly higher rate than hetero. Stop trying to move the goalposts every time you're confronted with a study you don't like.

Any critical appraisal of the literature requires looking for problems with study design, confounders, etc. Yet you choose to ignore these possibilities when a potentially flawed finding confirms your bias. The number of gays in the population is more variable than you simplify, both because of the sensitive nature of human sexuality and rampant homophobia.

[MDC 7,882]

It's not problematic. It's somewhere between 2 and 4% of the total population. Even if they were a higher percentage of the population, homo pedophilia occurs at an alarmingly higher rate than hetero. Stop trying to move the goalposts every time you're confronted with a study you don't like.

 

This again?

 

The overwhelming majority of same sex child molestors do not have same sex relationships with adults, so gays are no more likely to be molestors than anyone else, unless you consider all same sex molestors to be "gay" regardless of all their other behaviors. That position is supported by some anti-gay blogs but it's thoroughly rejected by the American Psychological Association. If you choose to defer to a bunch of fringe wingers over the opinion of experts that speaks to your own deliberate ignorance more than anything else.

 

Also, this whole debate is moot when it comes to the BSA. The Scouts don't cite any threats to kids as a reason for their ban on gays - it just offends their Christian beliefs. And their ban is on "openly" gay men. I'd argue that openly gay men are far less likely to diddle kids since they're already in adult sexual relationships and they'd be under far more suspicion. This is supported by studies I posted here last time, and the fact that the BSA like the Catholic clergy is apparently full of kid touchers.

 

Finally, the church / BSA apparently didn't expell every priest or member who behaved inappropriately with same sex kids even though they ban gays. So I'm concluding the BSA does not share your belief that all same sex offenders are necessarily gay.

 

[penultimatestraw 473]

This again?

 

The overwhelming majority of same sex child molestors do not have same sex relationships with adults, so gays are no more likely to be molestors than anyone else, unless you consider all same sex molestors to be "gay" regardless of all their other behaviors. That position is supported by some anti-gay blogs but it's thoroughly rejected by the American Psychological Association. If you choose to defer to a bunch of fringe wingers over the opinion of experts that speaks to your own deliberate ignorance more than anything else.

 

Also, this whole debate is moot when it comes to the BSA. The Scouts don't cite any threats to kids as a reason for their ban on gays - it just offends their Christian beliefs. And their ban is on "openly" gay men. I'd argue that openly gay men are far less likely to diddle kids since they're already in adult sexual relationships and they'd be under far more suspicion. This is supported by studies I posted here last time, and the fact that the BSA like the Catholic clergy is apparently full of kid touchers.

 

Finally, the church / BSA apparently didn't expell every priest or member who behaved inappropriately with same sex kids even though they ban gays. So I'm concluding the BSA does not share your belief that all same sex offenders are necessarily gay.

 

(s)he does, yet excludes same sex experimentation among young adults when determining the gheys available for pedophilia.

[shotsup 835]

Maybe they should ban secretly gay people?

 

Where oh where would you go ??

[The Pope 10]

Maybe they should ban secretly gay people?

 

[Casual Observer 597]

This again?

 

The overwhelming majority of same sex child molestors do not have same sex relationships with adults, so gays are no more likely to be molestors than anyone else, unless you consider all same sex molestors to be "gay" regardless of all their other behaviors. That position is supported by some anti-gay blogs but it's thoroughly rejected by the American Psychological Association. If you choose to defer to a bunch of fringe wingers over the opinion of experts that speaks to your own deliberate ignorance more than anything else.

 

Also, this whole debate is moot when it comes to the BSA. The Scouts don't cite any threats to kids as a reason for their ban on gays - it just offends their Christian beliefs. And their ban is on "openly" gay men. I'd argue that openly gay men are far less likely to diddle kids since they're already in adult sexual relationships and they'd be under far more suspicion. This is supported by studies I posted here last time, and the fact that the BSA like the Catholic clergy is apparently full of kid touchers.

 

Finally, the church / BSA apparently didn't expell every priest or member who behaved inappropriately with same sex kids even though they ban gays. So I'm concluding the BSA does not share your belief that all same sex offenders are necessarily gay.

 

 

We've plowed this ground before. This is the re-definition tactic that offends common sense. It does not matter whether the offender is openly gay or views themselves as gay. Building off of that faulty re-definition, you then conclude that the molestation rates are not higher. This is the same faulty premise adopted by the APA. And for the record, what you posted in our prior discussion was a link to the UC Davis "rainbow" site that you said wasn't biased, which contained links to critiques of the "anti-gay" studies.

 

I am with you on the notion the majority of gay people are not child molesters. We differ, however, when we confront the fact that there are those in the gay community that are unashamed of their pedophilia or are hiding it (nambla, for example and the guy mentioned in my post above in this thread, for another)and it is difficult to differentiate and weed those out. And make no mistake, the BSA, having been sued for allowing a pedo to remain on staff even after they knew of his prior molestation of scouts is acutely aware of the problem (as are their insurers) despite the public reasons they may give for the present position. For the record, the BSA, Catholic Church and other large organization that has encountered this problem should have terminated offenders as soon as they were discovered and that the fact that these organizations didn't is a disgrace.

[penultimatestraw 473]

We've plowed this ground before. This is the re-definition tactic that offends common sense. It does not matter whether the offender is openly gay or views themselves as gay. Building off of that faulty re-definition, you then conclude that the molestation rates are not higher. This is the same faulty premise adopted by the APA. And for the record, what you posted in our prior discussion was a link to the UC Davis "rainbow" site that you said wasn't biased, which contained links to critiques of the "anti-gay" studies.

 

I am with you on the notion the majority of gay people are not child molesters. We differ, however, when we confront the fact that there are those in the gay community that are unashamed of their pedophilia or are hiding it (nambla, for example and the guy mentioned in my post above in this thread, for another)and it is difficult to differentiate and weed those out. And make no mistake, the BSA, having been sued for allowing a pedo to remain on staff even after they knew of his prior molestation of scouts is acutely aware of the problem (as are their insurers) despite the public reasons they may give for the present position. For the record, the BSA, Catholic Church and other large organization that has encountered this problem should have terminated offenders as soon as they were discovered and that the fact that these organizations didn't is a disgrace.

Pedophiles are a small % of gay and heterosexual populations, and there isn't a great tactic to weed them out from either group. Should we prohibit people of middle eastern descent from flying too?

[Casual Observer 597]

Pedophiles are a small % of gay and heterosexual populations, and there isn't a great tactic to weed them out from either group. Should we prohibit people of middle eastern descent from flying too?

 

No, we should check the shiot out of them and make them remove their shoes too. Since we don't want to be unfair to one group in this society, we all have to endure groping, walking in our socks a little bit in the airport, etc.

[MDC 7,882]

We've plowed this ground before. This is the re-definition tactic that offends common sense. It does not matter whether the offender is openly gay or views themselves as gay. Building off of that faulty re-definition, you then conclude that the molestation rates are not higher. This is the same faulty premise adopted by the APA. And for the record, what you posted in our prior discussion was a link to the UC Davis "rainbow" site that you said wasn't biased, which contained links to critiques of the "anti-gay" studies.

 

 

I'm giving up on this discussion now, for two reasons:

 

1. We've already totally covered all of this ground, and;

 

2. You obviously come from the school of thought that holds that inconvenient facts and expert research can be magically wished away just by accusing it of bias.

 

You dismiss the American Psychological Association and a study by UC Davis that specifically refuted one of your "studies" (before you quickly deleted your link) as biased because you don't like their conclusions. Instead, you post a bunch of links to anti-ghey sites that misinterpret research they didn't even conduct.

 

Why should I keep discussing this when you are immune to facts, research or expert opinions? Your mind is made up and nothing will ever change it.

[Casual Observer 597]

I'm giving up on this discussion now, for three reasons:

 

1. We've already totally covered all of this ground, and;

 

2. You obviously come from the school of thought that holds that inconvenient facts and expert research can be magically wished away just by accusing it of bias.

 

You dismiss the American Psychological Association and a study by UC Davis that specifically refuted one of your "studies" (before you quickly deleted your link) as biased because you don't like their conclusions. Instead, you post a bunch of links to anti-ghey sites that misinterpret research they didn't even conduct.

 

Why should I keep discussing this when you are immune to facts, research or expert opinions? Your mind is made up and nothing will ever change it.

 

I posted a link to one article. The article contained cites to studies. I did not delete the link, nor have I ever deleted a link in any post I've ever made, so don't accuse me of things I haven't done. Your UC Davis link cites probably all of the studies done that don't present gays in a favorable light and devotes a one or two line critique to the methodology of each study. Not surprisingly, the UC Davis site finds something wrong with all of the contra studies. Apparently, the rainbows didn't like the conclsuions of that expert research.

[MDC 7,882]

I posted a link to one article. The article contained cites to studies. I did not delete the link, nor have I ever deleted a link in any post I've ever made, so don't accuse me of things I haven't done. Your UC Davis link cites probably all of the studies done that don't present gays in a favorable light and devotes a one or two line critique to the methodology of each study. Not surprisingly, the UC Davis site finds something wrong with all of the contra studies. Apparently, the rainbows didn't like the conclsuions of that expert research.

 

Yes, you did delete a link in the last thread. You posted a link to a "study" that was specifically referenced as an example of faulty research on the UC Davis site. You quickly removed the link and I didn't comment on it, even though I noticed.

 

I'll cast my lot with the APA, until you tell me about your expert qualifications? I'm assuming you're some kind of PhD psychiatrist who has been involved in years of peer-reviewed research on this subject? Can't wait to see your CV.

[parrot 789]

I've said it before, never trust anyone who would go to a Shakespeare festival.

[Casual Observer 597]

Yes, you did delete a link in the last thread. You posted a link to a "study" that was specifically referenced as an example of faulty research on the UC Davis site. You quickly removed the link and I didn't comment on it, even though I noticed.

 

I'll cast my lot with the APA, until you tell me about your expert qualifications? I'm assuming you're some kind of PhD psychiatrist who has been involved in years of peer-reviewed research on this subject? Can't wait to see your CV.

 

I'm going to be kind here and say that you're mistaken. Again, I've never deleted any link. I posted a link to an article that cites the studies in footnotes to it. Here it is again:

 

http://www.mega.nu/ampp/baldwin_pedophilia_homosexuality.pdf

 

You have never posted an APA study on the subject. Yet you are pointing to this supposed APA position on something and peer-reviewed research supporting it, yet you cannot post it. Then you point to my lack of qualifications in the field of Psychiatrity as some kind of disqualifier. OK, then, until I see your expert qualifications I am going to discount your opinion. That's fair, right? I mean we can't simply read the conclusions of an expert's work and adopt or reject that position can we? By the way, were the studies cited in the above article peer-reviewed?

[naomi 360]

I think your argument is bunk too.

 

Is a guy that molests an 8 year old boy gay? I guess.

 

Does that mean gay men molest little boys high rates? No.

 

Just like the guy who focks his 8 year old niece is straight, and that does not mean straight people molest children at high rates. A larger number of female children are molested than male children you know.

 

Some people, ghey or straight, like to fock kids. I guess it is some kind of power thing, I honestly don't know, or really focking care. They should be killed in a painful way on national television.

 

 

A friend of mine who works in a youth group home for male sexual offenders told me that the majority of them were molested themselves. I think that might be a correlation that's controversial to give credence to for whatever reason, but according to him, it's just pretty damn clear. It's cyclical more than anything else.

 

Doesn't mean that if you were molested, chances are you're going to molest or struggle with the idea of it. Might be where the stigma comes in. But if you molest, chances are you were molested.

[penultimatestraw 473]

A friend of mine who works in a youth group home for male sexual offenders told me that the majority of them were molested themselves. I think that might be a correlation that's controversial to give credence to for whatever reason, but according to him, it's just pretty damn clear. It's cyclical more than anything else.

 

Doesn't mean that if you were molested, chances are you're going to molest or struggle with the idea of it. Might be where the stigma comes in. But if you molest, chances are you were molested.

As if this group didn't have enough sh!t in their lives, maybe we should discriminate against them too? I know you didn't say that, but the Casual Observers of the world would support this tactic.

[IGotWorms 4,063]

No, we should check the shiot out of them and make them remove their shoes too. Since we don't want to be unfair to one group in this society, we all have to endure groping, walking in our socks a little bit in the airport, etc.

 

What about home grown terrorists? McVeigh, Kaczinsky, the Colorado theatre shooter? Should we not bother checking those types, since they aren't middle eastern?

[penultimatestraw 473]

I'm going to be kind here and say that you're mistaken. Again, I've never deleted any link. I posted a link to an article that cites the studies in footnotes to it. Here it is again:

 

http://www.mega.nu/ampp/baldwin_pedophilia_homosexuality.pdf

 

You have never posted an APA study on the subject. Yet you are pointing to this supposed APA position on something and peer-reviewed research supporting it, yet you cannot post it. Then you point to my lack of qualifications in the field of Psychiatrity as some kind of disqualifier. OK, then, until I see your expert qualifications I am going to discount your opinion. That's fair, right? I mean we can't simply read the conclusions of an expert's work and adopt or reject that position can we? By the way, were the studies cited in the above article peer-reviewed?

Sorry I don't have access to journals on pedophilia and sexuality, but I'll look up some abstracts later. This is from a legal site: My link

MYTH # 1

Gay men molest children at far higher rates than heterosexuals.

 

THE ARGUMENT

Depicting gay men as a threat to children may be the single most potent weapon for stoking public fears about homosexuality — and for winning elections and referenda, as Anita Bryant found out during her successful 1977 campaign to overturn a Dade County, Fla., ordinance barring discrimination against gay people. Discredited psychologist Paul Cameron, the most ubiquitous purveyor of anti-gay junk science, has been a major promoter of this myth. Despite having been debunked repeatedly and very publicly, Cameron's work is still widely relied upon by anti-gay organizations, although many no longer quote him by name. Others have cited a group called the American College of Pediatricians to claim, as Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council did in November 2010, that "the research is overwhelming that homosexuality poses a [molestation] danger to children."

 

THE FACTS

According to the American Psychological Association, "homosexual men are not more likely to sexually abuse children than heterosexual men are." Gregory Herek, a professor at the University of California, Davis, who is one of the nation's leading researchers on prejudice against sexual minorities, reviewed a series of studies and found no evidence that gay men molest children at higher rates than heterosexual men.

 

Anti-gay activists who make that claim allege that all men who molest male children should be seen as homosexual. But research by A. Nicholas Groth, a pioneer in the field of sexual abuse of children, shows that is not so. Groth found that there are two types of child molesters: fixated and regressive. The fixated child molester — the stereotypical pedophile — cannot be considered homosexual or heterosexual because "he often finds adults of either sex repulsive" and often molests children of both sexes. Regressive child molesters are generally attracted to other adults, but may "regress" to focusing on children when confronted with stressful situations. Groth found that the majority of regressed offenders were heterosexual in their adult relationships.

 

The Child Molestation Research and Prevention Institute notes that 90% of child molesters target children in their network of family and friends. Most child molesters, therefore, are not gay people lingering outside schools waiting to snatch children from the playground, as much religious-right rhetoric suggests.

 

Some anti-gay ideologues cite the American College of Pediatricians' opposition to same-sex parenting as if the organization were a legitimate professional body. In fact, the so-called college is a tiny breakaway faction of the similarly named, 60,000-member American Academy of Pediatrics that requires, as a condition of membership, that joiners "hold true to the group's core beliefs ... [including] that the traditional family unit, headed by an opposite-sex couple, poses far fewer risk factors in the adoption and raising of children." The group's 2010 publication Facts About Youth was described by the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Psychological Association as non-factual. Francis Collins, director of the National Institutes of Health, was one of several legitimate researchers who said Facts misrepresented their findings. "It is disturbing to me to see special interest groups distort my scientific observations to make a point against homosexuality," he wrote. "The information they present is misleading and incorrect."

 

MYTH # 2

Same-sex parents harm children.

 

THE ARGUMENT

Most hard-line anti-gay organizations are heavily invested, from both a religious and a political standpoint, in promoting the traditional nuclear family as the sole framework for the healthy upbringing of children. They maintain a reflexive belief that same-sex parenting must be harmful to children — although the exact nature of that supposed harm varies widely.

 

THE FACTS

No legitimate research has demonstrated that same-sex couples are any more or any less harmful to children than heterosexual couples.

 

The American Academy of Pediatrics in a 2002 policy statement declared: "A growing body of scientific literature demonstrates that children who grow up with one or two gay and/or lesbian parents fare as well in emotional, cognitive, social, and sexual functioning as do children whose parents are heterosexual." That policy statement was reaffirmed in 2009.

 

The American Psychological Association found that "same-sex couples are remarkably similar to heterosexual couples, and that parenting effectiveness and the adjustment, development and psychological well-being of children is unrelated to parental sexual orientation."

 

Similarly, the Child Welfare League of America's official position with regard to same-sex parents is that "lesbian, gay, and bisexual parents are as well-suited to raise children as their heterosexual counterparts."

 

MYTH # 3

People become homosexual because they were sexually abused as children or there was a deficiency in sex-role modeling by their parents.

 

THE ARGUMENT

Many anti-gay rights proponents claim that homosexuality is a mental disorder caused by some psychological trauma or aberration in childhood. This argument is used to counter the common observation that no one, gay or straight, consciously chooses his or her sexual orientation. Joseph Nicolosi, a founder of the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality, said in 2009 that "if you traumatize a child in a particular way, you will create a homosexual condition." He also has repeatedly said, "Fathers, if you don't hug your sons, some other man will." A side effect of this argument is the demonization of parents of gay men and lesbians, who are led to wonder if they failed to protect a child against sexual abuse or failed as role models in some important way. In October 2010, Kansas State University family studies professor Walter Schumm released a related study arguing that gay couples are more likely than heterosexuals to raise gay or lesbian children.

 

THE FACTS

No scientifically sound study has linked sexual orientation or identity with parental role-modeling or childhood sexual abuse.

 

The American Psychiatric Association noted in a 2000 fact sheet on gay, lesbian and bisexual issues that "no specific psychosocial or family dynamic cause for homosexuality has been identified, including histories of childhood sexual abuse." The fact sheet goes on to say that sexual abuse does not appear to be any more prevalent among children who grow up and identify as gay, lesbian or bisexual than in children who grow up and identify as heterosexual.

 

Similarly, the National Organization on Male Sexual Victimization notes on its website that "experts in the human sexuality field do not believe that premature sexual experiences play a significant role in late adolescent or adult sexual orientation" and added that it's unlikely that someone can make another person gay or heterosexual.

 

With regard to Schumm's study, critics have already said that he appears to have merely aggregated anecdotal data, a biased sample that invalidates his findings.

[drobeski 3,061]

What about home grown terrorists? McVeigh, Kaczinsky, the Colorado theatre shooter? Should we not bother checking those types, since they aren't middle eastern?

You left out Bill Ayers

[naomi 360]

As if this group didn't have enough sh!t in their lives, maybe we should discriminate against them too? I know you didn't say that, but the Casual Observers of the world would support this tactic.

 

I'll defer to CO on whether s/he thinks that. I understand where you're coming from though.

 

Although it doesn't suggest that you will molest if you were molested, it suggests you're more likely to than someone who wasn't. And that's really crappy, adds insult to injury. I'm not going to pretend the correlation doesn't exist (or at least my friend hasn't witnessed it on a compelling level). To a reasonable mind the potential that that dynamic is very real should underscore the gravity of the abuse, not anything else.