And for those of you who still labor under the delusion that Psychologists had formed a consensus by studies and peer review that Homosexuality should be removed from the classifications of mental diseases and disorders — they didn’t.

The minority, albeit an influential minority within the APA were terrorized into making the change in 1973. For years after this departure from the scientific method, mainstream psychological professionals still were under the firm belief that homosexuality was a disease or abnormal condition of the mind:

Not all of the psychiatrists in the United States, however, are willing to promotion the homosexual propaganda. In fact, a study conducted in 1978 showed that 69% of American psychiatrists still regarded homosexuality as a pathological adaptation. A much more recent survey suggests that the majority of psychiatrists around the world continue to view same-sex behavior as signaling mental illness.

Psychiatric research indicates that people with same-sex sexual behavior are at greater risk for psychiatric disorders. (American Medical Association (AMA) Archive, General Psychiatry. 2001; 58:85-91). Also, gay, lesbian, bisexual, or not sure youth were 3.41 times more likely to report a suicide attempt than heterosexuals (American Medical Association (AMA) Archive, Pediatric Adolescent Medicine. 1999; 153:487-493).

I agree with Rob and Ming01 that this is not an issue of expression of sexual orientation or kissing. It’s an issue of the business owner’s prerogative to serve whom he wants to serve.

A business has a right to serve who they want, most will have a sign stating that. If they feel it is a distraction or just unwanted type of activity that they do not want in thier business I believe they have a right to ask you to leave.

On that same note, I believe if you feel you been wronged, that you also have the right ot speak out against the policy of that business, advertise and even pickett / stage protest of thier treatment.

Each has thier own right to free speech.

When you exercise your free speech on how your run your business or who you serve to – be aware that these actions may cause others to exercise thier free speech by informing the public thru direct protests or negative advertising of your business and directly affecting your business profits.

The APA has had a socio-political agenda since it was taken over in 1973.

You need to go back over your history.

Of course, because you don’t want to feel ill at ease as your pal is resting his balls on your chin, you just go ahead on and believe your favorite socio-political psychologist / pedo apologist.

We wouldn’t want to mess with your self esteem now would we?

Child molestation and pedophilia occur far more commonly among homosexuals than among heterosexuals on a per capita basis, according to a new study.

Abel also found that non-incarcerated “child molesters admitted from 23.4 to 281.7 acts per offender … whose targets were males.”

“The rate of homosexual versus heterosexual child sexual abuse is staggering,” said Reisman, who was the principal investigator for an $800,000 Justice Department grant studying child pornography and violence. “Abel’s data of 150.2 boys abused per male homosexual offender finds no equal (yet) in heterosexual violations of 19.8 girls.”

– Report: Pedophilia more common among ‘gays‘ April 29, 2002 http://www.w nd.com/news/article .asp? ARTICLE_ID=27 431

The average pederast molested an average of 150 boys, and each heterosexual pedophile molested an average of 20 girls, a ratio of 7.5 to one.

Homosexuals account for 1.6% of the population, but 18% of juvenile sexual assault victims are male…

The numbers vary between studies conducted and samples taken, but they all weigh heavily against your kind.

You can bet this is a set-up.

More likely than you think…

Gay couple detained near Mormon plaza after kiss

http://www.salon.com/wires/ap/us/2009/07/10/D99C0I082_us_mormon_church_trespassing/index.html

The church has been the target of protests over its support of a ban on gay marriage in California.

Sorry Jerkass,

Wrong again.

Dodge, twist and spin — your butt-buddies are guilty as charged.

Homosexual’s Primary Target – Children

Homosexuality – a Clear and Present Danger

Sorry Jimmy,

That doesn’t cut it either. Any free society sets its own moral standards. When you allow government, particularly the unelected judicial branch to unilaterally and fundamentally change established moral standards, you will have lost self-determination of that society.

They no longer control their own society and they will have ceded their autonomy to the judiciary.

People — via the legislatures, are to make the law.

Courts — are to interpret the law that has been made via the representative process reflective of the will of the people.

Certainly their are minority rights, but exceptions cannot be allowed to consume the whole. Because if you do, you again are in the situation described above.

GAY RIGHTS ARE NOT THE ISSUE. Gay Rights are simply a tool for total governmental control via the bench.

Why bother having popular elections if you can just have judges like Sotomayor running the country?

Wake up and smell the danger.

Jerkass, you’re all over the map on this aren’t you?

Homophobia is a psychobabble term coined by a homosexual psychologist as a psycho-political weapon, yet you say that it is irrelevant.

Meh.

Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain?

Then you say I am changing the subject when I point out the real and ultimate objective for those using homosexual special rights as a bludgeon against the other 98 percent of society.

THAT IS the objective, for those using homosexuals for their political gains.

What homosexuals want are forced acceptance, special rights and free access to little boys.

Then you come up with the laughable proposition to allege that the removal of homosexuality from the DSM in 1973 was a scientific matter, which is a proven lie.

Ultimately, what you are defending is a deviant and dangerous mental disease. Kids are endangered by it, greater society is endangered by it, and homosexuals themselves are endangered by it, to the point that their anal hijinks curtail their life expectancy between 8 to 20 to 24 years, depending upon which study you consult.

The bottom line is that it is bad for society, kids and homos. The State has no rational basis for allowing a clear and present danger to exist without sanction. The State’s duty is to protect society, not inflict a clear and present danger upon it. Nor can homosexual sodomy be a fundamental human right, any more than pederasty, pedophilia, polygamy or bestiality can be fundamental rights, despite what any runaway judiciary has to say.

Lastly, local time, it is either verrrry late at night or verrrry early in the morning. I’m putting my heterosexual butt to bed.

there is no convicing (sic) them of any argument you may prove with facts, evidence or logic (deductive, practical or otherwise).

Wankertized is projecting again! You should see the way he tried to spin his stupid mistake of saying that “camp” was short for “campaign” into a half a years worth of denial, spin and the most outrageous nonsense on the planet!

He never has admitted that he was wrong, but then he is impervious to facts, evidence and logic!

But, he’s a great mimic, and sometimes when he copies the arguments of rational people and doesn’t try to embellish them too much with his own ignorant ranting, he almost sounds rational!

Todd,

I do believe that you have accidentally backed into something relevant.

And that relevance iiiiisssssss ….

Homosexuality, pederasty, pedophilia, necrophilia, and all those -philias have ALWAYS been considered DEVIANT.

Only by judicial fiat has Homosexuality been legalized, and only by sheer terrorist tactics has homosexuality been delisted from the DSM atlas of mental diseases and conditions.

Yeaaahhhhh, homosexuality is a sexual deviancy, like all the other deviancies you’ve listed.

Why, oh why, in GOD’s name, would anyone in their right mind, defend ANY ONE OF THEM as good and normal?

There is a term called ‘begging the question’ or stating as fact something which has not been proven.

There are approximately six threads devoted to the issue of homosexuality (and many more which touch tangentally on the issue of homosexuality) some of which focus on the close interrelationship between homosexuality and pederasty. NAMBLA is a bright and shining example of this.

Those studies have spanned from 1947 up to the present. The percentages vary from study group sample to study group sample but the tendencies consistently show that there is a close correlation between homosexuality and sexual assault on children.

This ranges from the under-18 crowd to assaults on infants and children in between.

Yet, a self-professed homosexual sashays in to SAB and attempts to refute the years of study and the data which come from those studies, with what…… ?

Alleging that just because a male sexually assaults an underage male doesn’t make it homosexual…. ????

This reminds me of the Italian man, caught in the act with his mistress by his wife, loudly protesting his innocence by shouting at her…

Waddayou a-gonna believe… ME or you-a lying eyes?

See also: Harry Hay

Just keep it up Eddie, and people will start to hate you.

All kidding aside, you’ve just described the statistical version of the Eastern Bunny and the Great Pumpkin.

Studies have shown that the infidelity rate among even supposedly monogamous homosexual pairs to approach 100 percent, dwarfing married, heterosexual infidelity rates of 22 percent for males and 18 percent for females.

Moreover the nature of the infidelity amongst homosexuals is massively different as well. Within such pairings, each homosexual may have as many of 8 extra-relationship strays in a given year, many of them in the context of anonymous homosexual sex, and very often in the context of group sex.

So that monogamous stuff your handing me is a statistical anomaly.

Secondly, homosexuals have a 50 to 70 percent chance of contracting the AIDS virus, and even before that, account for approximately 65 percent of all syphilis cases in the United States.

THINK about that — 2 percent of the population accounting for 65 percent of all Syph! That’s not all. The homosexual population is a major vector and driver of a huge number of communicable diseases.

Then you go on to talk about homosexuals not being pederasts or pedophiles. Well, among certain homosexuals, that may be true. But statistically, they far outstrip the Normal population in their tendency to attack little kiddies. Ratios from 7.5 to 1 (among those convicted of child abuse) to 40 to 1 (over the general population) have been citied.

You want to trust your 9 year old son to an overnight with Michael Jackson? (not now of course, which is the first time he’s ever been safe around other little boys)

And then you also say, otherwise mentally normal. That’s akin to saying an otherwise-sane guy who prefers goats to real human women.

Homosexuality comes with a raft of other mental conditions, from anti-social behaviors, bulimia, and suicide rates three and a half times over the normal populace.

Homosexuality, as a mental disease or condition, was removed from the DSM in 1973 under political duress, not as a result of scientific studies or consensus within the psychological professional community. Fully five years after that political decision was made, about 68 percent of polled psychologists continued to deem homosexuality a defect or mental aberration. Indeed, even today, a majority of polled psychologists still consider it such.

You’ve been getting your information from La Cage aux Folles and not reality, my dear, hated, Eddie.

Check out the links I have assembled for you. They are there for your EDIfication.

Kenny,

Now you’re just being impenetrably stupid. Your mom has told you no to cookies and now you are stamping your feet, whining and asking again and again.

We’ve addressed that question above, as being a tiny, statistical oddity.

If, per chance, there exists such a two-headed beast as Eddie proposes, the fact that they exist is still no justification for jamming the deviant and dangerous affliction of homosexuality onto the rest of society.

Nor is it just numbers.

Certainly, take for instance, if your same Never-Never-land of sane, monogamous, non-diseased, non-pedo homosexual pairs existed as the norm, they would still die out within one or two generations.

Homosexuals are not born. It is not genetic, other than if you conclude a mental disease being genetic, such as in a brain imbalance.

They thrive by one generation to the next by finding little kids to rape and they, in turn, rape the next generation of homosexuals.

Not exclusively, of course.

Others develop their homosexual tendencies as a developmental error, with weak, ineffectual fathers, overbearing mothers, as well as other factors, such as using George W Bush as a preferred avatar.

But the bottom line is, like parasites, homosexuals depend upon the presence of other people’s children for them to continue.

You, on the other hand, have yet to make a case why the rest of heterosexual society should displace everything they hold dear, established over 5,000 years of human history, to accommodate a diseased and deviant practice.

You are whining and casting insults, but you have nothing of substance to support your position.

Left unanswered is why you have taken up the position of defending pole-smokers, we’ll leave that for another day.

You asked where that 37 percent figure came from, and even ventured as guess as to its’ origin and I gave it to you.

Moreover, you persist in the fiction that somehow it is not homosexual for a male to assault another male who happens to be younger (and therefore weaker) than him.

As a matter of fact, the proof is overwhelming — homosexuals attack young boys at a far greater rate than heterosexual men attack young girls.

Imagine if you will, the same percentage of heterosexuals attacking underage girls. Even the old and low figure of 37 percent out of the general population would be incredibly huge amount of raping going on.

As it is, a far smaller proportion of heterosexuals tend to molest, rape, or sexually assault, girls below the legal age of consent.

Not so for homosexuals.

I can understand your wanting to put distance between homosexuals who commit homosexual sodomy with other adult homosexual males and those homosexuals who perpetrate it on young boys who are below the legal age of consent.

It’s embarrassing.

It’s bad enough as it is that homosexuals contract, carry and pass on the lion’s share of AIDS and many other STD’s. Once word gets out as to the extremely high incidence of homosexual rape of little boys, the facade of normalcy is difficult to maintain. Barney Fwank, instead of seeming to be a high-powered politician, is just an aging, deviant, queen.

Not good for the revolution, hey?

But do go on and try to avoid the truth. It’s mildly entertaining.

Jerkass, still shooting into the berm:

HOMOPHOBIA – Psychologist and gay activist George Weinberg coined the term homophobia in his 1972 book Society and the Healthy Homosexual,[6] published one year before the American Psychiatric Association voted to remove homosexuality from its list of mental disorders.

Weinberg’s term became an important tool for gay and lesbian activists, advocates, and their allies.

and of course, there’s the stock, No, you’re gay, tactic.

Sell Psycho-babble somewhere else. We’re not buying.

And Kenny,

Not sure of what dog you have in this fight, but I seem to recall some personal involvement in underage sex. Am I right?

You are in denial. Homosexuals have proven themselves to be predators.

Crime statistics also pose concerns. Figures released last summer by the Justice Department reveal that adults are not the primary victims of sexual assault, she said.

They showed that 67 percent of all reported sex abuse victims are children and 64 percent of forcible sodomy victims are boys under 12.

Two analysts with Washington-based, pro-family organizations agree that homosexuals pose a greater risk to boys.

…..

Since heterosexuals outnumber the homosexual population about 44 to 1, as a group the incidence of homosexuals molesting children is up to 40 times greater than heterosexuals, she said.

–Homosexuals more likely to molest kids, study reports

What I find logically inconsistent is the fantastic assertion that a male raping an underage male is not gay.

?????

Sha-aah.

That’s an asinine assertion.

Moreover you have utterly failed to address the ubiquitous links to studies and reports of the very high correlation between homosexuality per se, and homosexual attraction for the very young.

Even from the homosexuals themselves, starting with the Kinsey interviews of homosexuals, admitting that 37 percent of them had been cornholing little boys, to the admission of the famed homosexual Kevin Bishop: Scratch the average homosexual and you will find a pedophile. (for link, see above)

Your denials are just that and completely empty in the face of this wealth of data.

Yes, there may be some homosexuals who do not attack young boys, but as I have pointed out by citing the aforementioned studies, that the homosexual general population rate for attacking children are orders of magnitude over the rate that heterosexuals attack children — something on the order of 40 to 1.

Even the mainstream (if such a thing can be said) objectives set by homosexual leader, as far back as 1972 is the complete abolition of ages of sexual consent.

Wedded to this has been the non-stop legal assault on the Boy Scouts ever since they took steps to rid themselves of homosexuals within their ranks, ultimately forcing the issue to the Supreme Court itself.

The indicators are both consistent and clear: homos have their dicks hard for little boys.

As to Lesbians, they have been flying under the radar for quite some time, inasmuch that law enforcement has traditionally had a difficult time associating females with rape and gang activity, as well as domestic violence.

This is changing and now the reporting numbers showing female-on-female violence and female-on-female gang rape is increasing to an alarming degree.

See When Violent Femmes Attack

I didn’t bring up Lesbians because Lesbians weren’t the issue. They are, however, not blameless and have their own serious deviancies to answer for.

Finally, nice try at attempting to bring in some other reason why I am sounding the alarm on homosexuals. In your mind, simple disgust at homosexuals and wanting to preserve what is good in society cannot be reason enough to do so, but it is.

That the term “homophobia” was coined by a gay activist is irrelevant to this discussion. It has an accepted definition. And you have it.

Again, a link to one of your previous posts containing information substantiated only by non-objective data analysis does not prove your hypothesis. You can only do this objectively and scientifically.

Just for funsies, here’s a link to an article written by a doctor of psychiatry that points out that there is no scientific evidence available to conclude that homos = pedos:

http://individual.utoronto.ca/james_cantor/blog1.html

No doubt your response to this will attempt to discredit him because of your sociopolitical agenda. Still I think I’m gonna find him just a little more believable than I find you.

It has an accepted definition.

Only by homo activists and their propagandist supporters. It is actually a political smear masquerading as a scientific/medical term.s It contains the assumption that everyone who doesn’t accept the homo activist agenda is “afraid” of homosexuality, which is a blatant lie.
“Phobia” means a morbid fear of something. Not accurate at all.

So I see we’re changing the subject now.

The will of the people has no bearing on the outcome of scientific discovery (unless of course it’s a scientific test on the will of the people). However, the forwarding of sociopolitical agendas has been known to suppress scientific discovery. Global warming is a tremendous contemporary example of this phenomenon. The idea that nationalized health care is a Good Idea is another. So is the idea of prohibition.

Wake up and smell the danger.

i do smell it. and its people like you that think you should tell others how to live. like i tell the churched up tools in our world, id be happy to let their god run the country for every day they want my God to run the country.

summary; if you wanna judge/ ban one entire GROUP of people because of the actions of a portion of that group, you better start with the race of people that disproportionately
populate our jails and fat people that eat up our health care system and wreck the plant because they need so much food. id say let them live their lives….

You haven’t a clue about how laws have been made from the days of Hammurabi forward, and certainly haven’t a clue about how a Constitutional Republic works. Your mind is still clogged with the grade school psycho-babble which you’ve been force-fed all your young life. You might not think so, but it comes through clearly in your contentions.

Let’s ignore that 90% of your argument against me comes as an attack against my childhood which I have REPEATEDLY and thoroughly refuted.

You don’t know me Zig. And your attacks against my childhood are boring and inane.

I DIDN’T go to a public school. I wasn’t baraged with liberal propeganda. And I am far more libertarian than I was either in high school or when I first joined this board.

If your only debate tactic is to attack my upbringing, perhaps you should admit defeat and move along.

If 98 percent of society consists of one portion on your Venn diagram and 2 percent of the other and that 2 percent accounts for at least 37 percent of the Child Sexual Abuse, what is the pro rata rate of CSE of that 2 percent?

Misdirection. Lets make the equation 1-1. If Gays rape 37% of kids, and heteros rape 63%, heteros rape more. If gays rape 10 kids, and heteros rape 5 a piece, then we have even MORE hetero rapists.

You’re not this dense. So I can only assume you’re putting your fingers in your ears and screaming LALALALA. It’s a tactic worthy of Dino…not you.

Go back and do it again, with stats, figures and proper math this time.
Otherwise, you are no better than any other homosexual cheerleader on this thread.
Try again.

I dramatically increased the numbers in your favor and your argument still doesn’t hold water. I’m using YOUR figures. YOUR numbers. YOUR stats. And the results prove that there are less homo molesters per capita than straights. Even when I skew the data to try and give you cred…it doesn’t work.

Your position is wrong. And you don’t want to hear it.

Jackass Jimmy: Zig backs up his beliefs with published facts, providing direct statements and links to support his every claim, none of which can be overcome by your emotional, wholly subjective, unsupported beliefs (I do support your right to those beliefs). You are free to disagree with Zig, even hate him if you choose and you certainly seem to have no problem attacking his character, but please note that even if you think yourself to be wise and superior of intellect than Zig, so far you have been wholly unable to refute any of Zig’s overwhelming facts and thus you clearly lose every debate with him.

The business owner has a right to deny anyone business for any reason he chooses, the people (customers) have a right to oppose him by not buying his products or services; but to sue him for doing what he has every legal right to do is civil terrorism and as such, it is an enemy of free speech.

It is about time in America we remember that as long as we do not clearly incite violence by our words, every citizen of America has an equal right (access) to the public square to fight for his/her beliefs, even to spew vile hatred for people of color or because of their faith or their sexual orientation or whatever else they choose; and laws suits or criminal charges in the form of hate crimes laws solely for expressing one’s beliefs is anti-American!

It is inappropriate in a business catering to families for anyone to be engaged in pubic displays of affection, of a sexual nature; this place was designed for eating and normal conversations and thisd should have been taken outside.

JJ; First, I do not believe society should decide what is moral or immoral, I believe Truth exists outside the changing, mostly destructive morality of various societies and times. As an example, the murder of a human being has been wrong in every time, geographic setting and society and thus represents a recognition of an absolute moral Truth – Murder is Immoral. There are many set standards of morality which exist outside space and time that apply in every situation, whether we choose to admit they exist or not.

This clearly applies to homosexuality, no matter how one tries to massage the issue, homosexuality is a violation of Natural Design and Divine Commandment. It has been, with rare exception, universally condemned in every time, geographhic setting and society since the beginnning of time; thus the immoral status of homosexual conduct is an established, eternal Truth and no temporary change in public opinion can alter that simple fact.

Yes, we must be careful of published information, be it in the media, academia or scientific circles. Human caused global warming is an example of why we must be cautious about accepting anything simply because it is published and/or endorsed by experts (Ex is a has-been, spurt is a large drip). In the case of human cause global warming the pseudo-scientific data simply does not match what we observe. In the case of homosexuality and pedophilia, we are facing these facts: (1) They cannot reproduce to replenish their numbers and create more homosexuals, they must recruit. (2) The best ages to recruit are when the targets are young. (3) The media will not report and the scientific community will not produce good data, because it is politically incorrect to do so, thus we are made blind by their indifference. (4) The reports of heterosexuals molesting boys is incorrect, if they have sexual lust after one’s own gender, they are at best closet homosexuals. Add them and admitted homosexual molestors and we have a significant number of homosexual cases of pedophilia to support the meager scientific studies. Thus, the evidence is solidly on Zig’s side of the ledger.

Zig does, in my opinion too often use incindiary language and personal attacks; but he is not the issue, I was talking about your sins in this matter, not Zig’s.

Lastly, I did not decide what the business owner could or should do, I expressed my opinion only!

I was simply stating my personal view on the matter.

Then say that more clearly. I read your whole post, because I was shocked at the first thing you said and so I know that you defended individual rights. But it was murky. Do you think the issue revolves around the rights of individuals to own and therefore control their property or do you believe in some sort of arbitrary “reasonableness” standard ala what the Supreme Court does?

Thanks for clearing up that it is definitely the former.

Thanks Nieman.

Interesting, or should I say, it would be interesting… that tactic that the Left, or at least homosexuals and their fans use to say a vital link in their logic is irrelevant to the discussion.

No less irrelevant than the tree holding up the branch you are sitting on.

It is relevant, for instance, that the writer is homosexual because there is a built-in bias in everything that writer puts down. Homosexuals are often riven with self-loathing (reflected by their higher-then-normal numbers in suicides and suicide attempts) They desperately need to justify their behavior as not deviant and better yet, normal.

Hence their utter rage when people point out what they are doing is deviant, abnormal and well, wrong.

That’s driving their vicious reactions to Prop 8, YouTuber and Carrie Anne Prejean. There is something deeply, psychologically wrong with these people and you will very, very rarely get an admission from them that homosexuality is wrong.

Thus it is relevant.

By the same token it is relevant that the term homophobia was coined by a homosexual advocate for the purposes of psycho-political advantage.

It is also relevant that homosexuality brings with it a vast number of other infectious and even fatal diseases, many of which are communicable.

It is relevant that the cost of treating a single AIDS patient is, on average $600,000.00, because while the homosexual incurs that cost, for the most part, by his own deviant behavior, that cost is shifted onto the rest of us, whether we like it or not. THEFT, hey?

It is relevant that such as small sliver of the population accounts for such a massive amount of venereal diseases and child sexual abuse and by such extraordinary proportions.

It is relevant to point out that you have something in your background showing a tendency to put cognitive blinders as to what is going on in the world around you because to do otherwise would be to condemn your own behavior, or alternatively, if you have so little experience in life that you cannot leave the theoretical and understand that each statistic represents what may be a human tragedy (kids getting sexually assaulted by scoutmasters or priests, etc )

What is irrelevant is the psycho-babble Leftards and homos consistently trot out to bolster their empty arguments:

– You can’t tell me what to do!

Bullcrap.

We have always told you what you can and cannot do. It’s called Code, Statute, Ordinance, Regulations.

Grow up and get used to it.

It is what a just and ordered Constitutional Republic does to self-regulate society. We do it by voting for representatives, who write the laws we agree to live under. It works, so long as the candidates are telling us the truth during campaigns.

But what Leftards have done for years is to ram through their policies through the courts when they have failed time and time again to win popular support for their hare-brained bullshit.

Moreover, morals are really just that consensus within society determining what is right and what is wrong. The Courts are not intended to tell society what to do.

That is tyranny.

Who is in charge here? A majority of society, or a small, unelected Junta on a judicial bench? Changes in morals need to be done within society by consensus, not crammed down by courts, nor threats by school administrators or unilateral corporate policies that fly in the face of 5,000 years of accepted moral behavior. But homos aren’t asking people to accept them as normal. They are demanding, by threats, intimidation and punishment, to accept their deviant behavior.

I, for one, am not buying it. I’m telling you here and now that the emperor has no clothes and what homos do is filthy and disgusting. No phobia there. Just good, old-fashioned disgust.

– You’re a bigot. You’re a racist!

Old tactics. Psycho-babble. Brings no relevant facts to bear. Addresses legitimate counter-arguments –zilch!

– You’re a closeted, self-hating Homo too!

Well, most homos are self-hating, but that doesn’t make me one of them. You wish I were a homo. Again, addresses legitimate counter-arguments –zilch!

The queers continue to push for more rights than normal people have.

So, Zig, what about the non-AIDS carrying, monogamous, mentally sound gay couples who aren’t pedophiles, who want to marry?

Whatever homosexual couples do, it isn’t marriage. Words have meanings, and “marriage” is a heterosexual activity.

Why don’t those wonderful homosexual couples create their own social institution?

Instead, it looks as though, in part, we agree.
A small, deviant minority should not get to trump the moral beliefs of Greater Society.

Indeed. Marriage is not a right. And if we can deny marriage to incestuous people, polygamists, and 15 year olds, we can deny it to gays.

If society doesn’t call it marriage, that doesn’t stop gays from living together, having sex or anything else.

Yes, we know Nieman, when Geebus comes back to smite us and the good people like you get taken to the good place to eat ambrosia and live an eternity of pleasure.

You sound like the muslims who supposedly believe in the 75 virgins who will greet them in the afterlife. In either case someone’s going to be disappointed.

Zig… Dino confuses tolerance with acceptance. The American people have historically followed a live-and-let-live ethic, until they are pushed too far.

Leaders in the homosexual movement are quietly and desperately aware of that fact and have gone out of their way to condemn the ‘excesses’ of Perez Hilton and Borat.

For my part, I encourage Dino to continue his “in your face” mode of homosexual activism. It hastens the day when the American people will push back with overwhelming force.

In the meantime, maybe the deviants at NAMBLA can explain to him how that worked out for them.

Zig… Dino confuses tolerance with acceptance. The American people have historically followed a live-and-let-live ethic, until they are pushed too far.

Which is why the gay movement used to have such support. “Leave me alone, it’s none of your business” is a good rallying cry for most people. “You have to accept me no matter what!”…not so much.

Black people have a statistically higher chance of incarceration for violent crime. Do we discriminate against every black person because of that?

this is what i have been saying the WHOLE TIME here….. by his logic, we should. black males make up too much of the prison population (and if you look at who just gets arrested…… what about dead beat dads…sheesh!!! ) and only a low portion of the population.

I also noted; fat people. fat people not only steal food (via their need to eat more and maintain their fatness) from hungry children world wide, but damage the environment because we need to grow more to feed them.

everyone is innocent until proven otherwise and people should be allowed to do whatever they want. keep your gods chocolate out of my Gods peanut butter.

Which is why the gay movement used to have such support. “Leave me alone, it’s none of your business” is a good rallying cry for most people. “You have to accept me no matter what!”…not so much.

PP, Kenny,

good points. I think you’ve hit the nail on the head.

Jimmy,

dude, just simma down nah, you’re going off the rails a tad.

Hoo mama, I feel like I’m entering the homo = pedo argument a little late.

First off, I’m a 25 year old gay guy. I’m not a pedophile. I was in a 2 year relationship that was 100% monogamous. It ended because of “normal people” problems such as communication issues, etc.

I guess I must be a unicorn

Second — I couldn’t find this magical “37% of child molestation is committed by homos” statistic anywhere. After a bit of research, I now realize how you came up with this number. Please follow the logic train:

Roughly 90% of child molestations are committed by men. 40% of those molested are male. The figure Zig is citing assumes that because 40% of those molested are male, and because 90% of molesters are male, then the 37% of men who molested male children are automatically “homosexual.”

This obviously ignores the intended definition of “homosexual” or “gay,” which really means “people who are attracted to ADULT members of the opposite sex,” just as heterosexual carries the implied “adult” as well.

Pedophiles are pedophiles. They are attracted to children. I am not an expert on sex or sexual pathology (and neither are you), but it seems silly to assume that the straight/gay paradigm applies here. That would be akin to saying that if a guy has sex with a male sheep, he is gay. The dude is screwing sheep. There’s obviously something more to the issue than simply being attracted to the fact that the sheep is a male. Likewise, a man who engages in a purely definitonal act of homosexuality with a child isn’t necessarily “homosexual” in the way the word is intended.

If you’re counting any man who has ever had any kind of male-male sexual interaction as “gay,” then 60% of dudes are fags.

The point: pedophilia and homosexuality are two different things. The statistic you are citing is more than a little misleading, but I think you know that (Obvious troll is obvious, for graet justice).

Third — I’m not really sure how the promiscuity/STD statistics play into the argument that gay people shouldn’t be treated fairly. If anything, those problems are more likely CAUSED by intolerance. If gay people view homosexuality as inherently wrong/evil/immoral/etc., they will be more likely to keep their sexuality hidden and therefore more likely to engage in promiscuous sex with anonymous partners.

I’m not going to play apologist for other homos, however. I recognize that there is a huge problem with the issues you cited, but I would like to submit that these problems are circumstantial and not inherent. Just as black people are more prone to crime and violence because societal factors have prevented them from emerging out of poverty until recently, homosexuals are promiscuous because people view their relationships as evil and illegitimate, creating a societal pressure for brief, anonymous encounters instead of long-term, healthy relationships.

Take this taco bar incindent, for example. It’s unfair to ask gay people to have relationships that resemble straight relationships when they get ejected/harassed/humiliated for doing so. If a heterosexual couple were to peck each other on the lips, no one would bat an eyelash. A homosexual couple does it and it’s “a statement.” You can’t have your cake and eat it too.

As for my thoughts on the original post — (as I said in my comment on the other gay-related story:) an establishment can eject anyone they choose for any reason. The ejected patron is in their rights to make the policies of said establishment known. If done persuasively,the patron can hit the business where it hurts the most: in the wallet, WITHOUT litigation/regulation/etc.

Sorry for the long windedness.

-Fritz

While Zig and I don’t agree on the whole homo=pedo thing, this bizarre “Gay sex doesn’t make one gay” argument is beyond me.

If one is having sex exclusively with men…they are gay. Period. If the guy they’re doinking is 12 or 105 they’re still having gay sex.

No one pretends that guys who have sex with 6 year old girls aren’t having heterosexual sex. So what’s this nonsense, “unicorn”?

Oh gosh, you mean you learned this on that paragon of truth, MSNBC?

I guess we can just toss out all those scientific studies dating back from 1947 to the present and just listen to Keith Olbermann instead, huh?

No wonder you are stuck on stupid, you incredible fucktard.

And…

While Zig and I don’t agree on the whole homo=pedo thing, this bizarre “Gay sex doesn’t make one gay” argument is beyond me.

If one is having sex exclusively with men…they are gay. Period. If the guy they’re doinking is 12 or 105 they’re still having gay sex.

Well… yeah

Bizarre is right.

Some typical commenter wrote:

No one pretends that guys who have sex with 6 year old girls aren’t having heterosexual sex.

Are you being serious?!!?!?!

Yes, I absolteuly am 100% opposed to your insane allegation that male adults who molest male children are, by definition, sexually attracted to male adults (ie, homosexual).

Adults who molest children are attracted to children. Just children. Period. It’s called pedophilia. It’s not called homosexuality, because they’re not sexually attracted to other males. They’re sexually attracted to children. It’s gross.

Let’s see…. Ooh, a quiz!

1) If an adult male only has sex with female corpses, does that make him a heterosexual or a necrophile?

2) If an adult male only has sex with male and female horses, does that make him a bi-sexual or a zoophile?

3) If an adult male only has sex with male infants, does that make him a homosexual or a pedophile?

I can hardly wait!!!

To Kenny: of course the act itself is homosexual. It’s unfortunate that you guys are oversimplifying/misrepresenting my point when I’m making an honest effort to have a dialog in the face of some pretty insulting generalizations on Zig’s part. If you’d like to refute what I have to say with reason or if I was unclear, that’s fine, but please no more of this straw man nonsense.

I’m saying there is a difference between “homosexuals” as normal people define it and “homosexuals,” as Zig is defining it. Zig is lumping child molesters who molested little boys in with “normal” homosexuals (IE: ones who have sex with other adult males) and I’m saying that’s disingenuous for reasons that deal with the sexual pathology of pedophilia. Again, would you claim that a guy who screws male sheep is gay? The sheep are male. He’s screwing them. That’s technically a homosexual act. However, there is obviously some other motivation compelling him to blast the fleeced rectum of said ovine victim OTHER than the sheep’s male gender.

The statistic he keeps falling back on (this 37% number) could easily be due to a number of non-gender specific factors (such as a need for power over impressionable minds, the lack of access to other children, etc).

My point is that a pedophile is probably not having sex with a little boy simply because he is a male and that’s an important distinction. This number is derived by calling any pedophile who engaged in a homosexual act simply “a homosexual,” when the most accurate term is “a pedophile,” just as you wouldn’t call a man who screws male sheep “a homosexual” either, you’d call him “a zoophile” (or whatever the term is).

There is a HUGE distinction between saying “37% of boys were molested by men” and saying “37% of boys were molested by homosexuals.”

The point is — gay guys aren’t dabbling in a little bit of column A, a little bit of column B. “Today I think I’ll have the muscle bear, but tomorrow I’m gonna go with the 6 year old.” It doesn’t work that way for heterosexuals, either. Zig is, as I already said, trying to depict homosexuals as out to “attack” (notice the purposeful use of the word) your children when the truth is gay people, by definition, are not interested. If you’re getting confused by the term “homosexual,” we can lose it. “Gay” is a little sillier sounding, but whatever.

To Zig:

Sure, homosexuality is aberrant, but who gives you the right to tell me what I can do with another consenting adult?

You mean lumping in like how NAMBLA is always marching with you in Gay Pride parades?

Or lumping in, like how Gay travel brochures have sections on where to find little boys?

“We looked at the leading gay travel guide,” Reisman said of her research. “Forty-seven percent of the 139 nations they talked about identified places to find boys. The average heterosexual travel guide is not concerned with finding children.“

Dude.

Give it up.

You’re pervs.

To Hannitized:

Oh, I recognized the blatant trollage of both of them. I’ve even called it out several times. It’s clear they are just arguing for shits and giggles, which is fine. But as you said, it’s more fun to present completely reasonable arguments and get “Just admit it, you’re a perv” in response.

-Fritz

The point is–gay guys aren’t dabbling in a little bit of column A, a little bit of column B. “Today I think I’ll have the muscle bear, but tomorrow I’m gonna go with the 6 year old.” It doesn’t work that way for heterosexuals, either. Zig is, as I already said, trying to depict homosexuals as out to “attack” (notice the purposeful use of the word) your children when the truth is gay people, by definition, are not interested. If you’re getting confused by the term “homosexual,” we can lose it. “Gay” is a little sillier sounding, but whatever.

Yet if a guy needs the sheep to be male to have sex with it, how is that not both homosexual AND zoosexual? That;s a pretty big question.

My point is that a pedophile is probably not having sex with a little boy simply because he is a male and that’s an important distinction. This number is derived by calling any pedophile who engaged in a homosexual act simply “a homosexual,” when the most accurate term is “a pedophile,” just as you wouldn’t call a man who screws male sheep “a homosexual” either, you’d call him “a zoophile” (or whatever the term is).

Yet 95% of all pedophiles choose a sex that they engage with. Straights don’t see need to play games and pretend a guy who rapes six year old girls is straight. Gays are the ones who need to pretend guys who rape little boys are straight.

Frightening Gay Statistics

Although most homosexual activists publicly deny that they want access to boys, many homosexual groups around the world are working aggressively to lower the age of sexual consent. Their cause is being aided by the professional psychiatric and psychological associations, which have moved n recent years toward normalizing pedophilia, much as they did with homosexuality in the early 1970s.

Kevin Bishop, an admitted pederast (pedophile), is promoting the work of the North American /Man-Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) in South Africa. Bishop, who was molested at the age of six, is also an admitted homosexual who is blunt about the relationship between homosexuality and pedophilia. “Scratch the average homosexual and you will find a pedophile,” said Bishop in an interview with the Electronic Mail & Guardian (June 30, 1997).1 (1. Angella Johnson, “The man who loves to love boys,” Electronic Mail & Guardian, June 30, 1997, http://www.mg.co.za/mg.)

This pedophile/homosexual activist began studying pedophilia while a student at Rhodes University. He also discovered Karl Marx there, as well as other literature that helped form his worldview. His views are being echoed around the world by homosexual activists who are seeking what they call “sexual freedom” for children.

Bishop is on a crusade in South Africa to have “age of sexual consent laws” abolished, and he is looking for help from NAMBLA to accomplish his goal. He says children must be empowered “by teaching them about loving relationships at an early age, and giving them the opportunity to make an informed decision about having [sex].” He also approves of incest, noting, “Two women psychologists in America say the healthiest introduction to sex for a child should be with their [sic] parents, because it is less threatening and the emotional intimacy more comfortable.” 2 (2.Ibid)

Bishop agrees with NAMBLA that the next social movement in Western politics will be an attack m “sexual ageism,” which prohibits sexual contact based on age differences. The movement already is well under way in Europe and Canada.

——————————————————————————–

Homosexuals did not need scientific evidence, neither do pedophiles.

The public approval of homosexuality and the idea of homosexuals “marrying” would have been unheard of thirty years ago. But the homosexual campaign’s success did not depend on rightness or on scientific evidence – but in its image, and on the increasing permissiveness of society. Dr John Money of John Hopkins University has urged pedophiles not to be discouraged by the lack of evidence backing up their cause. He says:

“When the gay rights activists became politically active, there wasn’t a sufficient body of scientific information for them to base their gay activism on. So, you don’t have to have a basic body of scientific information in order to decide to work actively for a particular ideology. As long as you’re prepared to be put in Jail. Isn’t that how social change has always taken place?“

This quote comes from the “scholarly” Dutch journal, Paidika -A Journal of pedophilia. ( ) If homosexuality has been posed as healthy, good and normal, in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, so can pedophilia. Pro-pedophilic articles are making their way into academia.

SOURCE: Africa Christian Action
Book: The PinkAgenda: Sexual Revolution in South Africa and the Ruin of the Family
By Christine MC Cafferty with Peter Hammond

P.S.

You’ve already used that “dodge, twist, spin” line. Yeesh, your playbook is awfully small.

“When you know you are wrong, use the following phrase and completely ignore their points.”

Whoever’s paying you to promote his book needs to find a better employee.

It’s far more satisfying to me that you have no interest in addressing my points.

Yawn.

Wash, rinse, repeat.

You have, once again, misrepresented my point in an obvious straw-man tactic. Saying “Fritz is saying XYZ, he’s so dumb!” only works if I’m actually saying XYZ.

I’m not saying that the act of a man molesting a little boy is not a homosexual one, since it clearly is.

I’m saying that you can’t simply swap out the word “pedophiles” for “gay men” in these discussions since the intended definitions of those words are completely different. I’ve explained myself time and time again only to be met with your deliberate dodging of my points.

So, again: all of your statistics hinge on the notion that the pedophile mind and the mind of a gay man (who is attracted to other adult men) work exactly the same. You’re operating under the complete fabrication that gay men are attracted to features that are absent from men. By that logic, I’d be just as likely to be attracted to a woman as I would a child.

Clearly you know this to be simple misdirection, but to admit it makes all of your statistics completely worthless. You have still yet to provide me with any proof that gay men who routinely have sex with other adult men are diddling little boys at any demographically inconsistent rate.

You can say “gays molest 40 times their demographic percentage worth of little boys” all that you like, but that doesn’t make it true, simply because “gays” and “pedophiles” are not the same word. Again, using your own statistic, 97% of molesters are straight-identified, married men. Therefore, if there’s anyone to be afraid of, it’s straight-identified, married men, not out gay men.

As for your “ubiquitous links and statistics” (none of which prove what I am asking for, mind you) — linking to an article you wrote that contains no legitimate sources does not count as “providing evidence.” Also, citing obviously biased sources of the extreme minority opinion is about as compelling as me trying to prove the worth of holistic medicine by interviewing one quack doctor and saying “SEE?? He says oregano can cure cancer!!” I apologize if I am quick to dismiss your sources, but simply tacking “THE BIG PINK SWASTIKA: HOW GAYS WILL RAPE YOUR FACE AND IMPREGNATE YOUR SOUL, p. 13″ onto the end of your statistics doesn’t make your argument any more sound.

It’s also not very convincing to concoct these circular-logic dismissals of majority opinion. Whenever someone disagrees with you, well, it’s because The Pink Hand of the Big Gay Mafia told them to. Sorry, bud. You can concoct whatever fiction you like, that’s not going to change the majority professional opinion on the matter.

As far as NAMBLA is concerned (as I’ve already pointed out), you are singling out the legitimate pervs and trying to say that all gay men are like that. Your arguments against NAMBLA are sound, but they are only against NAMBLA. The fact that NAMBLA aligns with the gay movement does not make gays implicit by mere association.

“In 1994 the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) adopted a “Position Statement Regarding NAMBLA” saying GLAAD ‘deplores the North American Man Boy Love Association’s (NAMBLA) goals, which include advocacy for sex between adult men and boys and the removal of legal protections for children. These goals constitute a form of child abuse and are repugnant to GLAAD.’”

It’s hard to say that one part of the gay agenda is the removal of consent laws when it’s right there, on the books, saying quite the opposite.

Simply quoting stuff and saying things that sound like they might be legitimate does not make it true, as you’ve just proven. You have just stooped to a deliberate lie in addition to your misuse of facts.

You obviously find gay people repellent, and that’s your deal. But lying and misrepresenting the facts to paint an skewed (and completely nonsensical) picture of gay men borders on a motivation that can only be either religious or financial. Take your pick.

I should note that I fully support the right of homosexuals to protest this business because of their decision.

I just also recognize the«ight of the business to make this decision.