Seeing as how the original thread has deginerated into a hate-Ryan-fest, I’d like to give a chance to people who are actually interested in having a rational argument with me to come to this thread. I would have liked to put this in GD to discourage Pit-type behavior, but apparently that’s not allowed :rolleyes:.
I’ll start.
“homosexual conduct” is a technically accurate term for male-male contact, but many people interpret it as being any conduct done by homosexuals, so I will try to avoid it in this thread.
There is good evidence that most male-male child molesters are not homosexual. I really, truly, honestly do not remember every saying that most are, but if I did I retract that statement.
Now, is there anything else that anyone wants me to agree to?
And I’m still having trouble figuring out what she’s talking about, which is kind of why I wasn’t in the other thread. Evidently she’s ranting about something, but what?
BTW, I don’t hate you, Ryan
Remember, a bit of semantics and word-hijacking is involved here, esp. with regards to anything that has to do with children.
If one buggers little boys in the ass, most people want to disassociate themselves with you, at least ideologically. I think that’s where the controversy lies. That’s why Annie points out that media attention focuses on the Catholic Church because they dislike organized religion. The Boy Scouts get a Non-Team Player award, because they seem disinclined to play around with words too much.
Tedster says “media attention focuses on the Catholic Church because they dislike organized religion.” Where on earth do you get that idea? Many of the reporters I know – even some of the most hard-bitten and cynical – are religious. And whatever the feelings of the rest, I cannot remember any instance of reporters mocking religion or showing contempt.
Reporters like to uncover scandal and abuse of power. The Catholic Church is bigger and more powerful than, say, the local Church of the Nazarene so the Catholic Church gets more attention. But suggesting the CC is a target because reporters dislike organized religion is just wrong.
As for Coulter, I understood her line of thinking in making comparisons between the Catholic Church and the Boy Scouts. I find her logic faulty, though, and I agree with others who point out that she completely missed the issue of church authorities protecting abusers and hiding their crimes. That seems to me to be the heart of the scandal.
Well, just so long as the media is sure. :rolleyes: I must have missed that meeting.
She then goes on to form the following “argument”: the crimes in question are homosexual in nature… that is, the acts are perfromed on males by males. The only people who perform homosexual acts are homosexual men. Thus, homosexuals should be banned from, well, whatever. Everything, it seems.
Sorry, wrong answer. In cases of pre-pubescent and sometimes post-pubescent molestation, the sexual alignment of the perp is not reflected in the sex of those who are molested. When we are discussing such a context as youth molestation, we can no longer make the claim that homosexual acts are performed by homosexual men. Certainly they may be, but as far as I know there is no evidence supporting the assertion, and that in fact evidence to the contrary has been shown.
In this context, the evil liberals seem to be absolutely correct. Sexual behavior from older persons to younger persons is not related to the sex of the child. And Ann, here, seems to just have a bug up her but because she cannot grasp the idea that a homosexual act does not a homosexual make. If it did the world would be swimming with homosexuals.
Perhaps she needs to reassess her statistical skills. :rolleyes:
My GOD woman, could you be any more dense? Gays cannot be cured because there is nothing to cure. They suggest that perhaps such incidents could be avoided more often if priests had a means of releasing their sexual urges, or if they were otherwise involved in a romantic, caring relationship… and this suggestion is not (AFAIK) made toward just gay priests but all priests. Mother fucker, this lady is dumb.
People like this make me proud to support abortion.
Sorry, I’ve never seen a photograph of il ducessa. Or whatever the proper Italian is.
DDG
My take on it is that she annoyed at the way that liberals are trying to shift attention away from the idea that male-male acts might be done by homosexuals. When I first saw the article, I thought this was rather silly, but looking at how I got jumped on, it does seem like liberals can get rather irrational when it comes to homosexuality. I still don’t think that this is mainly a problem with homosexuals, but I do think that people in general are uncomfortable discussing the extent to which homosexuality was involved for fear of being called a bigot.
I’m not generalizing people who disagree with me as “liberals”. I’m generalizing people who can’t disagree with me rationally as “liberals”, and rabid ones at that. People in that other thread were calling me a bigot, a liar and an idiot.
Of course not all pedophiles are homosexuals, and not all homosexuals are pedophiles. But when there are a bunch of men molesting boys, I think that it’s valid to think that at least some of them are homosexual.
Well, besides the whole “two wrongs” thing, my only issue there is that while I may disagree with you, I’m not a liberal. I hold some liberal views and many very conservative views. I just don’t want you to fall into the trap of dismissing your opposition by categorizing them as “the liberals.” No big.
Sure, I’ll buy that.
However, I’ve seen no evidence to suggest that the percentage of molesters who are homosexual is any greater than the percentage of homosexuals in the population as a while.
And that’s the nub, innit? Do you have any evidence that molesters are disproportionally homosexual?
I don’t think anyone is going to dispute that. Yet, much in the same manner, some molesters might like anime because it often depicts child-like characters in a sexual context.
Precisely what is your point? What policies, if any, do you think are appropriate for homosexuals (or, for that matter, anime fans) who work with children? If these differ from the policies made for heterosexual (or non-anime watching) workers, what is your reasoning for each of the differences?
[With all due respect, I think the failure to specify your dissenting position clearly from the outset was one of the many reasons the other thread devolved in the way it did. If you have to respond with, “I didn’t say that,” it’s usually a good idea to clarify what you meant. In addition, the line-by-line dissection of posts, seeming unwillingness to address why you disagreed with the APA, and apparent ignoring of the cites and links provided didn’t help you much either. While it is possible your opponents may have let their frustration get the best of them on some instances, I’d suggest you at least consider the possibility you may have been partially to blame for not communicating as clearly as possible.
Incidentally… while I apologize if my mocking of your style was not taken in the humor that was intended, I think an honest assessment of past threads would show that your format of post critique, combined with the other problems enumerated, leaves much to be desired if the intention is to reach some level of mutual understanding.
On the other hand, if the intention is to exasperate your fellow posters, it seems to succeed splendidly. Take this bit of criticism as you see fit.]
Well, I called you a pathetic lying fuckwit, but I am quite willing to rationally defend each of those characterizations. In fact, I have already done so in the “other” thread. Those judgments have nothing whatsoever to do with my political views, many of which you would probably consider liberal. They have everything to do with the the pathetic, lying, and fuckwitted content of your posts.
I wonder, are you avoiding the term “homosexual conduct” as a descriptor for male-male molestation because you do not wish to be inflammatory?
Of course. What is not valid, when speaking of pedophilic molestations, is to conclude that homosexuals present a greater risk than heterosexuals. That doesn’t stop Ms Coulter from doing so, of course. Nor does it stop her from spouting all kinds of nonsense about what “liberals” think.
Ryan, what I believe liberals are trying to say is not that all child molestation is done by heterosexuals but that pedophelia is a separate sexual orientation from both heterosexuality and homosexuality. That is, heterosexuality and homosexuality are attraction to adults of opposite and same gender, respectively; however, pedophelia is foremost attraction to children (a gender preference may or may not be present, but the age of the person is the primary criteria). Pedophiles who molest children of the same gender do not appear to have attraction for adults of the same gender (or at least this is the argument) and therefore equating them with gay folks by calling them homosexual and pedophiles rather than just the latter is incorrect. Of course, it would not be fair for this only to apply for homosexuals, and so it would be just as far to not call pedophiles who molest children of the opposite sex ‘heterosexual’ as well.
This is an important distinction because there are individuals out there who do actively connect homosexuality and pedophelia, and this association was even stronger in the past.
I believe the idea is that sexual orientation is more than just gender-oriented. For individuals whom gender is less important than some other factor (here, age), it would be more correct to define their sexual orientation in terms of that preference rather than defaulting to gender. I would say that there are other sorts of preferences that would qualify here as well (fetishes, for example).
As Spiritus Mundi pointed out, a large factor in the scorn being heaped upon Ms Coulter is her insistence on characterizing egregiously nonsensical statements as being “what ‘liberals’ think.” Besides the fact that she makes no effort to defend the assertion that “liberals” DO all think such things, she fails to make a case that even self-identified liberals all think the same way on any position whatever. In light of this, I would not be comfortable in starting any statement with “what I believe liberals are trying to say.” YMMV.
I don’t know that very many posters to either of these threads would care to assign the label of “orientation” to pedophilia. “Fetish” does indeed strike me as the best umbrella term to apply to pedophilia, necrophilia, bestiality, S&M, B&D, etc. In fact, if everyone were to recognize this convention as the accurate one, Ms Coulter would have the legs knocked right out from under her entire screed, and therefore have nothing to submit for publication. Which I can only see as a good thing.
