For example, Jack Ruby was given a trial, and was “innocent until proven guilty.”
But the whole nation saw him kill Lee Oswald on network TV, there wasn’t any question that he did the crime…
And that’s completely apart from the being tried in the court of public opinion. I’m not saying that it’s fair, that’s just the way it is.
As far as the “orientation” of child molesters, one could rightly argue that if a male prefers little boys, he’s not heterosexual, but a pervert of the worst kind. Good try, though.
Simple- The very fact one is attracted to little boys in a precludes one from being heterosexual. Case in point, the Boy Scout leader who is now facing 29 counts of molestation, (Reardon)
I doubt the mainstream media will mention his affiliation with Scouting, though. Gee, I wonder why?
Oh-- I forgot to mention/ask-- Can anyone explain to me why
it’s so vital to allow Gay Scoutmasters? Does this pass
the common sense test? Forgive me for not being “tolerant” (Another word who’s meaning has been hijacked, never mind)
I can only infer that it’s quite allright for males to
accompany Girl Scouts on overnighters as well… Correct?
First: The Boy Scouts are not in any way related to the Girl Scouts; they are entirely separate entities.
Second: There are male Girl Scout Masters, and they do accompany Girl Scots on overnight campouts.
But, by golly, I think you’re on to something here. If we keep all heterosexual men away from young girls, and all homosexual men away from young boys, we can eliminate all child molestation. Of course this would mean no male elementary school teachers, hell no male teachers at all. And of course, we can’t have Priests molesting young boys, so we’ll have to have an all female clergy.
But why limit it to men? Women occasionally molest children also, so to be safe, let’s keep lesbians away from girls, and heterosexuals away from boys. And for God’s sake, this idea of letting paretns be alone with their opposite sex children has got to stop. Marriage is the cause of this accident waiting to happen. Obviously we must do away with Marriage, and parents raising children together.
The ultimate solution, of course, would be to seperate all people into two groups. All of the hetero men, gay women, and boys in one, and the hetero women, gay men, and girls in the other, and not allow any contact whatsoever between them. We have the technology to do this now, sexual contact between people can be eliminated altogether.
If you want to open a can of worms like this, I’d be glad to meet you in GD in a thread devoted to this topic. Maybe we can win some converts to our way of thinking!
The great strength of this joint is that all these witty, smart, funny, perceptive people are bound together on a principle of fighting ignorance.
Meaning: provide evidence, separate opinion from fact, listen to the other side, etc.
I’m annoid with stoid.
ie, “oh everybody said so…” Oh really? [insert rolling eyes smiley]
Which means the gerbil story MUST be true, of course. Despite Snopes. Stoid, I’m wagging my finger at you. Be careful, or I’ll give you the cross look!
And to Searching for Truth- very cool handle old bean, but could I point out to you that when you bear that kind of stirring name, and say things such as:
can you see that you are tempting people to make sarcastic remarks about you, involving not searching VERY hard?
Not that I would myself…
[/point of order]
You can all get back to tearing up some poor media victim now.
Of course the Girl Scouts are a “different entity” than the Boy Scouts.
I didn’t suppose I’d have to spell it out, but some enjoy splitting hairs over grotesque details any rational person wouldn’t quibble over. My point still stands-- Nobody has any problem, then, with sending men who lust after Pre-Teen and Teen girls out overnight to sleep in the same tent? I trust and hope that’s not the case. I guess I’m just an “intolerant” and “bigoted” bastard. PC at its finest.
They aren’t heterosexuals-- Again, Good Try. They are Pedophiles/Pedarests And they don’t belong anywhere near our children, “NAMBLA” notwithstanding. It’s the same sort of nonsensical logic by which we are told “Rape isn’t about Sex, it’s about Power” Oh? And I suppose Robbery isn’t about stealing my Television, either. Who are these people, that come up with this?
They’re footstools?? Pederast, I think, is what you’re looking for (I know, I know, very likely a typo–just joshin’).
The thing that really makes me agree with several posters here is that despite the fact we’ve gotten the charge reported, there has been (at least as far as I’ve heard) no report of what actually prompted the charges. Even after this long, I haven’t heard anyone say what she did (and no, my prurient interests are just fine, thanks for caring). Even when we had the case several months ago about the mother nursing her five year old, we were at least told why she was charged. I haven’t heard anything about Ms. Poundstone’s actions.
So what does “lewd conduct” tell us? Did she kiss her daughter goodnight, and someone who is offended by her rumored sexuality (or possibly her alcohol problem) take it upon themselves to decide she did it for gratificational purposes? Was she sodomising her with vegetables? Did they shower together to save on hot water, talk about birth control, make a porn flick, what? Wouldn’t the public (or those of the higher IQ measurements) be more likely to agree the charges were justified if they could say, “Aha! That sure is ‘lewd’, all right!”? But we can’t. Almost makes me wonder if the people bringing the charges are afraid the rest of us won’t agree with them, so we’re just supposed to jump to the assumption that they’re called for without any evidence. “Trust us” activates my radar. Something’s amiss.
Tedster: The only reason your perverse theories aren’t getting the spanking they deserve is that they’re in MPSIMS, where nobody is paying attention. If you really want to defend the notion that gay men sent out on scouting trips wouldn’t be able to resist cornholing every fresh-faced straight boy in the campground, go over to Great Debates and start a new thread there. Unless you’re chicken.
Tedster: Since you seem not to understand the proper forum for posting your views, I’ve done you a favor and posted them in the proper forum for you. Come join us if you feel you can reasonably defend your position. The thread is in Great Debates, and is titled Tedster explains child molestation, sexual orientation, and scoutmasters.
Pederast, I think, is what you’re looking for (I know, I know, very likely a typo–just joshin’).