shopify analytics tool

from crux № 6 - Homosexuality does NOT equal pedophilia

There was nothing except comments from readers like you to link that to pedophilia or homosexuality.

To me, it's immoral and perverse that you've taken it on yourself to pass judgement when there is nothing to show that these people did the things you say that you oppose.

Would you accept them passing judgement on you?



Ah, I see.

Let me look this over. I'm meeting someone for coffee in a bit, and I may not get back to the computer until this afternoon.

One quick thing though, if you don't mind.

Going by the bit you quoted,

86% of pedophiles described themselves as homosexual or bisexual

Doesn't that tie into what I said above about using homosexuality as an excuse?



Homosexuality does not equal pedophilia, any more than deer hunting equals school shooting sprees. These are different behaviors, one does not indicate the other. Just because you don't approve of lesbians or pedophiles doesn't mean they are one and the same. Just as not every straight man is a rapist, or every Republican racist.

That doesn't mean that there aren't child molesters using homosexuality as an excuse.

I'll stand with you against sex with kids. But until and unless you can show that every homosexual (or even most homosexuals) target kids, I'll tell you that lumping all gays in with the child molesters is wrong.



Should I tell you the things I have seen passed off as the Republican agenda or the Christian agenda?

Do you have any idea the things that are regularly attributed to these groups? The hateful accusations that always seem to end with the downfall of freedom and the enslavement of humanity?

I will tell you what I've told the accusers in other forums.

Show me where everyone or even a simple majority has signed off on this agenda, and I'll look at your accusations again.

p.s. It was done better in The Protocols of Zion. And I didn't believe that one for an instant.



"No one is claiming every person with a homosexual problem target kids. Many target adults for sexual harassment, inappropriate behavior, disease spreading, domestic violence, porn, prostitution and murder."

One paragraph and you accuse all homosexuals of Horrors Too Terrible To Mention™. According to you if they don't target kids, they do something else wrong to other people because that is what homosexuals do. If someone can't see it, that someone must dig just a little harder because something ghastly will surely turn up. And if that doesn't work, why, you'll invent something.

There is still not much point in talking to you about it, is there?



You really do like to overcomplicate things.

Are there pedophiles who are not homosexual?

Yes.

Are there homosexuals who are not pedophiles?

Yes.

Therefore, homosexuality does not equal pedophilia.

Now, shall we discuss your obsessions?



It's not all "queers."

Any more than the exploits of Ted Bundy and John Wayne Gacy make all men serial killers.

The individual is guilty, not the group.



A very wise man said "You can't childproof the world. The best you can do is world proof your children."



No, it doesn't.

First, lesbians aren't male and aren't banging boys.

Second, most homosexual men aren't banging boys either.



No, not really.

For example, if I were to point out (again) that homosexuality does not mean pedophilia, several folks here would chime in that I was all for sex with children.

In another place, if I were to disagree (again) with the notion that Christians should be locked away on general principle, several folks there would chime in that I was all for religious oppression.

The biggest and hardest lesson that I've had to learn is that no one group has THE answer, and no group that says it has THE answer can be fully trusted.



You know, people keep acting as if there were some sort of golden age where adults didn't sexually molest children.

Guess what? It happened twenty years ago, it happened forty years ago, it happened sixty years ago, and it happened eighty years ago.

It is not something new, not some sign of the times, not some terrible symptom of a philosophy you do not agree with.

Now, you can spend time lamenting for a time that never was, denouncing all life paths you don't follow, or you can do something today.

If you want to denounce libertarianism for "enabling" behavior you don't like, how is that different from the progressives denouncing conservatives for behavior they don't like?



That's not the question and you know it.

Look, it's very simple. I stand for the rights of the individual. He's not guilty because of skin color, sexual preference, religious choice, or net worth.

A person is guilty because of what he has done.

Not because a given label has this "tendency" or because the "common wisdom" says that "his kind" does that sort of thing. That's what progressives do. They do proclaim guilt based on skin color, sexual preference, religious choice, and net worth.


And yet we still have innocent people accused of crimes because you don't approve of their life style.

It's not because they have committed a crime, it's because you think there is an outside chance that they may.

You seem to think I am defending homosexuality. I'm not.

I'm taking a stand against slander. Well, technically in this case it's libel. Let's settle for defamation.

Prove that every homosexual is a pedophile. Prove that every pedophile is a homosexual.

If you can't do that, then the rule of law has no meaning.



It's not moral equivalence.

It's a matter of injustice to claim people are guilty before they've committed a crime just because of a label.

Innocent until proven guilty.

If you can't show that every gay is a pedophile, then you have no authority to treat them as if they were guilty.

Anymore than the RadFems have to the authority to treat every man as a rapist.



The percentages don't matter.

All that matters here is that someone can be gay without being a pedophile and someone can be a pedophile without being a gay.

That means that homosexuality does not equal pedophilia. People can be one or the other but not both.

ETA: That last sentence is missing a word. It should be

"People can be one or the other but not necessarily both."

Sometimes my fingers don't work. Sorry.



Again, if there are homosexuals who are not pedophiles and pedophiles who are not homosexuals, that's beside the point.

Do all Baptists eat chicken? Are there non-Baptists who eat chicken? Is chicken uniquely Baptist?

That's the same silly game that you're playing.

You don't like homosexuals. I understand that. But if you "associate" them with a crime BECAUSE they are homosexual, you do no honor to yourself or your cause.

I started keeping my crux files because I noticed I kept getting into the same discussions in comment threads on other people’s web sites. After a while it just made sense for me to organize my thoughts by topic. These are snippets. It’s not in any particular order, it’s just discussions I have again and again.

blog comments powered by Disqus
2017       2016       2015       2014       2010       2009       2008       2007       2006       2005