Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Bingo! That's why my location says "Deaf Mecca," because Washington DC is home to the first and only university designed for the deaf and hard of hearing. As a result, there's a huge community of Deaf people in DC.
I spent the first 40 years of my life in the DC area. ... MD, VA. ... Tysons Corner, Arlington ..
I was going to guess DC as second after Berkeley ... but I was over thinking.
I was a little weirded out by the prepubescent boys kissing, though. That would be the only thing I would change, though it does emphasize that people are in fact born gay.
Then why does the one boy, who appears to be about 10 or 11 yrs. old say something to the effect of "If I grow up to be Gay, I want to marry," as he kisses the other young boy?
Born that way or Grow up and become that way? (with a little help from ads such as this or Lady Ga Ga, etc.)
I'm confused. What does being liberal have to do with fascism or communism? None of my left-wing friends are fans of either system, and I can definitely say I am not either.
I enjoy chatting with you, so if I am too blunt, don't take it as an intentional insult and bear with me .... it's just my style to be direct.
OK .. You've already outlined your education experience so, I already have a feel for what is happening here. You don't have a foundation ... no historical context to draw upon here it seems ... so we need to start there. Communism is Left Wing, that's the historic fact. Fascism is Left Wing (some might argue that, but they'd lose) and Socialism is Left Wing.
Socialism is simply Communism-Lite. Communism and Fascism are really the same thing, with slightly different disguises. Conventional wisdom defines Communism as the State owning and controlling everything. Fascism is where Corporations and the Central Government allegedly work together ... or Corporations actually control the workings of Government. But these are illusory differences only .. effectively, what's the difference? There is no difference. There's more to this, but lets stop there for now ...
Here in the United States of America, we have a "constitutional republic" which is supposed to operate under a free market capitalist system ... where government and industry are separate ... Industry works as a for profit system, and government operates under the guidelines of power granted it by the people, administered by elected officials, adhering to the laws set forth in it's constitution. This is ... at least at this point in history, has become a total illusion also. Banks own and run the system ... with government and industry both controlled by the banks. This effectively has become a Fascist-Socialist hybrid, with the illusion of it's citizens controlling the course of the country through it's elected leaders.
The policies for which the left-liberal-progressive constituency supports is a Socialist-Communist model ... in other words, the moderate-liberal=socialist ... extreme left progressive=communist. Since there's effectively no difference between that and what we have ... you support what we have ... and what we have is destroying the country ... at least the "Constitutional Republic" that the founding fathers established. That's why we don't like your politics. Supposedly, we spent decades fighting the spread of communism all around the world .... now it's controlling the White House, the congress, the Universities, the entertainment industry.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nimchimpsky
I have to admit, this is the first time I've heard someone call Bush a leftist. That is totally news to me.
That's because most buy into the Republican-Right versus Democrat-Left illusion. The reality is, both work for the same master, and that master ain't you. Consequently, they both are working towards the same goals ... the illusion comes in by the differences in certain domestic policies these parties champion. It's just splitting the electorate into teams, so that each can blame the other when they don't get what they expected.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nimchimpsky
I don't think it's either-or. I think there are degrees of interference and support.
You don't understand how power works ... a power attained, always expands. You cannot have a little interference any more than you can be a little pregnant.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nimchimpsky
Is mentioning Johnny has a mommy and a daddy talking about sex? Where is there sex in that? All that is is mentioning Johnny's parents. Mentioning Mary has two mommies or two daddies isn't talking about sex. Where is the topic of sex in that statement? No one is bringing up what they do in bed or in private to little children. You can talk about people loving each other or being married or together without talking about sex. I don't understand why so many people think that even mentioning that gay people have partners just like straight people is talking about sex.
None of this applies to the education of grade school aged children. The message to the homosexual community can be summed up ... leave the frigging children alone. Keep your business out of the classroom. It doesn't belong there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nimchimpsky
Straight people refer to their husbands, wives, boyfriends, girlfriends, etc. in the flow of conversation, but when a gay person does it, all the sudden it's "talking about sex." But what is sexual about saying "I spent the weekend visiting my boyfriend's family"? What difference does it make if the speaker of that phrase is male or female? That doesn't make the same statement any more or less sexual in nature. I am not saying that it's okay to talk to very young children about sexual acts, but to mention that someone has two male or two female parents is hardly talking about sex.
Read my lips .... grade school children are OFF LIMITS. It's non-negotiable. There is absolutely no context in which these topics should even come up in the normal course of basic education. Keep out! Quit pushing. If you want coexistence and respect, leave the kids alone. Straight and gay is sexual orientation ... it's sex ... and it has no place in the classroom ... period. This is part of an agenda that you seem totally oblivious to. This is slow, creeping indoctrination ... starting at age 6 ... and progressing to 5th graders being given condoms.
This started in the high schools, and then in the middle schools ... now grade school. That's why the heterosexual community is fed up, and pushing back ... they see this agenda being advanced, slowly. It's not accidental ... it's a plan and they don't want it force fed to children.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nimchimpsky
As for the video visuals, I was just curious if it was a cheek-kiss or a french kiss or what have you. That does make a difference. I could tell just by listening to it that it had a lot of profanity, and the sound effects, to be honest, were quite annoying IMO. You're right, it was well-done in terms of they achieved their goal and a lot of editing must have gone into making that video, but the goal they had in mind was in poor taste. I just don't know why the message has to be said with so many F bombs. They offend no one by not swearing and yet they offend so many people by swearing. I have no idea why the maker of the video decided to use the F word so much. Complete lack of judgment if you ask me.
Well, there's a lot of poor judgment going around ... and it ain't just in the area of sex and sexual orientation.
I enjoy chatting with you, so if I am too blunt, don't take it as an intentional insult and bear with me .... it's just my style to be direct.
OK .. You've already outlined your education experience so, I already have a feel for what is happening here. You don't have a foundation ... no historical context to draw upon here it seems ... so we need to start there. Communism is Left Wing, that's the historic fact. Fascism is Left Wing (some might argue that, but they'd lose) and Socialism is Left Wing.
Socialism is simply Communism-Lite. Communism and Fascism are really the same thing, with slightly different disguises. Conventional wisdom defines Communism as the State owning and controlling everything. Fascism is where Corporations and the Central Government allegedly work together ... or Corporations actually control the workings of Government. But these are illusory differences only .. effectively, what's the difference? There is no difference. There's more to this, but lets stop there for now ...
Here in the United States of America, we have a "constitutional republic" which is supposed to operate under a free market capitalist system ... where government and industry are separate ... Industry works as a for profit system, and government operates under the guidelines of power granted it by the people, administered by elected officials, adhering to the laws set forth in it's constitution. This is ... at least at this point in history, has become a total illusion also. Banks own and run the system ... with government and industry both controlled by the banks. This effectively has become a Fascist-Socialist hybrid, with the illusion of it's citizens controlling the course of the country through it's elected leaders.
The policies for which the left-liberal-progressive constituency supports is a Socialist-Communist model ... in other words, the moderate-liberal=socialist ... extreme left progressive=communist. Since there's effectively no difference between that and what we have ... you support what we have ... and what we have is destroying the country ... at least the "Constitutional Republic" that the founding fathers established. That's why we don't like your politics. Supposedly, we spent decades fighting the spread of communism all around the world .... now it's controlling the White House, the congress, the Universities, the entertainment industry.
That's because most buy into the Republican-Right versus Democrat-Left illusion. The reality is, both work for the same master, and that master ain't you. Consequently, they both are working towards the same goals ... the illusion comes in by the differences in certain domestic policies these parties champion. It's just splitting the electorate into teams, so that each can blame the other when they don't get what they expected.
You don't understand how power works ... a power attained, always expands. You cannot have a little interference any more than you can be a little pregnant.
None of this applies to the education of grade school aged children. The message to the homosexual community can be summed up ... leave the frigging children alone. Keep your business out of the classroom. It doesn't belong there.
Read my lips .... grade school children are OFF LIMITS. It's non-negotiable. There is absolutely no context in which these topics should even come up in the normal course of basic education. Keep out! Quit pushing. If you want coexistence and respect, leave the kids alone. Straight and gay is sexual orientation ... it's sex ... and it has no place in the classroom ... period. This is part of an agenda that you seem totally oblivious to. This is slow, creeping indoctrination ... starting at age 6 ... and progressing to 5th graders being given condoms.
This started in the high schools, and then in the middle schools ... now grade school. That's why the heterosexual community is fed up, and pushing back ... they see this agenda being advanced, slowly. It's not accidental ... it's a plan and they don't want it force fed to children.
Well, there's a lot of poor judgment going around ... and it ain't just in the area of sex and sexual orientation.
I'm familiar with history, but I think at this point, left- and right-wing are pretty far removed from communism and fascism. Socialism is communism-lite in theory but not in practice. Communism in practice pretty much doesn't exist--it always defaults to dictatorship.
Power divided among many need not necessarily expand. It can be self-correcting meaning that if any single person in a government system tries to take too much power, the other government figures start making noise so that no one person gets power.
I have no problem not mentioning same-sex partnerships in the classroom--as long as straight people never mention their husbands, wives, boyfriends, and girlfriends, to young children the same way they expect of gays. Saying it's "indoctrination" is such a cop-out. Is it "indoctrination" when a straight women tells her 5-year-old and her 5-year-old's friend that "daddy is coming home in an hour"? Referring to significant others in casual conversation is a part of every day life. It's not indoctrination.
I am NOT talking about bringing up sex or sexual topics with children. I'm talking about just the casual "my husband is coming back in town next Thursday" type conversation. How does that have anything to do with sex?
Why don't you study history? It was "bible thumpers" (abolitionists) that got behind abolishing slavery. Actually, it was religious people who got behind most social evils and helped change them for the better.
Now because religious people do not support gay marriage all the good they have done through the centuries is dismissed. Does that make sense? Does that make those who support gay marriage seem like good people? Makes one wonder.
There were Christian abolitionists and Christians who supported slavery using the Bible.
There are Christians who support gay marriage and there are Christians who are vehemently against it.
There are Christians who do "good" and Christians who have caused great harm to others.
Oh, is that right? Only your sources and your information are legitimate, aye? Only the data that you agree with? How convenient for you. Well, put your seat belt on, things are about to get inconvenient!
I see below that you prefer to use religious anti-gay websites for your sources. We'll get to that shortly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyNTexas
Let me ask you this ... when I post, as I intend to do ... direct quotes from prominent homosexuals espousing the legitimacy of sex with children .. in fact, glorifying it ... are you going to also claim they are lying? Spreading propaganda and disinformation to make themselves look bad? I can't wait!
Oh You mean supposed quotes from supposed "prominent homosexuals" found only on religious-based anti-gay websites.
You are the gullible audience that they look for. One who doesn't bother to check out the sources of their claims.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyNTexas
But, before we get to that, lets examine YOUR "legitimate sources and information" for a bit first. I'm not going to just ignore it. Right off the bat, I see links to mainstream medical and psych journals, and though that might impress some of the drooling masses ... these same "peer reviewed" journals have been publishing propaganda for decades ...in fact, that's all they publish. They are without question, unmitigated frauds ... like publishing tripe about the safety of vaccines and how mercury, a known neurotoxin might actually benefit brain function ... and other such nonsensical claims. But that's subject for another thread.
So all the mainstream health organizations are just propaganda machines and unmitigated frauds in your opinion? Sounds like a conspiracy!
But articles from anti-gay religious propaganda groups are okay in your opinion? Of course they MUST be factual....because you agree with them?
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyNTexas
I'm not going to dissect every one of these links ... just too much to do in a single response, but lets look at a couple of them just at face value:
Of course you won't.
You want to look at them just at face value? Like the way you look at those quotes from anti-gay religious websites? How about going a little deeper....on both. You might actually get at the facts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyNTexas
The first thing we notice is that of - A. Nicholas Groth, who seems to be the author or co-author of most of this ... so lots of talk from a single source is still a single source. And since I'm familiar with the "statistical gymnastics" guys like this engage in, it's easy for me to spot the dancing, because I lived with a PhD for a couple of years who could utilize the methods of formal statistical analysis to literally prove to you that the sun only had a 73% chance of rising tomorrow ... with a couple of tweaks, 50-50. You gonna believe that too?
You don't know who A. Nicholas Groth is? And you presume to know something about sex offenders, child molestors and pedophiles? LOL!
Groth is one of the most well known experts in the field of studying sex offenders, including men who sexually abuse children, men who rape other men and men who rape women. The FBI uses his work on sex offenders in criminal profiling.
Oh and in case you think he is gay and somehow "biased"? No. He's straight. A lot of his work has been on men who rape women.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyNTexas
Anyway, he makes claims ... deceptively claiming that heterosexuals constitute a "greater" risk than homosexuals ... and you could make that claim based on shear volume since 2/3 of the child molestations are done by "self identified" heterosexual males .... but that means that the other 1/3 are committed by homosexual males .. and since they make up only 3% of the male population, that means mathematically, homosexuals are 10 times more dangerous, individually. Mr. Groth conveniently leave out that analysis.
Gosh you better tell the FBI not to use his work anymore! Obviously you know much better than a extremely well respected clinical psychologist who has worked for decades in his field, and all the FBI criminal profilers.
Where did you get the idea that "1/3 of of molestors are by committed homosexual males". You are misrepresenting his work - just like those religious websites you have quoted from.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyNTexas
Next, Here he claims how obvious it is that there is a difference between homosexuality and homosexual pedophilia, and how they are mutually exclusive .... but just a few sentences later, he suggests there is no such thing as homosexual pedophilia since it's all done by heterosexuals. Amazing ... so this CLOWN claims that homosexuals simply don't molest little boys at all ... all of these crimes are done by heterosexuals. Not one? Not a single instance at all? Mr. Groth is a freaking liar, and not a very good one ... if I were going to lie, I'd at least try to make it believable, and say ahhh there was a couple homos in there, but mostly heteros.
Of course that's true Mr. Groth .... apparently NO homosexuals are attracted to children, since you claimed ALL of the molesters were heteros (above).
Ah ... Dr. Groth again .. where have I heard that name? Oh yes, all the other reports ... but this next one is my personal favorite.
Here he claims that no lesbians molested any girls ... and the Male adults who molested little boys (again) are not likely to be a homosexual. Not likely? What the F does that mean? Not likely? Did he not ask? Did the data he used not stipulate this fact? Is this just a guess? Or is it just a continuation of the same lies he keep repeating? I think that's it! Dr. Groth is a bald-faced liar, and when he's not lying ... he's being sneaky and deceptive .. as I've highlighted in his word play.
You appear to be confused and obviously haven't read the actual studies. Yes of course there is a difference between homosexuality and homosexual (as in same-gender) pedophilia. You really don't know much about this do you? Perhaps you could try reading some of Groth's books on the subject.
And once again you are misrepresenting Groth. He does not claim that homosexuals do not molest children "at all". Just that most "regressed" pedophiles who molest boys have adult sexual attractions to women and not to men- aka they are heterosexual.
This is not just from asking them if they are homosexual or heterosexual. Try reading the actual studies and you might get a clue.
Again...go tell the FBI that you think Groth is a "clown and a bald-faced liar".
You obviously have not actually read the studies or you just don't appear to be capable of understanding them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyNTexas
And finally, we have this gem ... "one study noted"? What study was that? Isn't that kinda like what FOX news is famous for ... "some people say"? So the claim is that 98% of the molesters self-identify as heterosexual? And so there you have it, folks! Right from the horse's mouth? Yes, I believe everything child molesters say ... and so do the kids apparently when they say come with me little boy, I've got candy in my pocket!!!
Have you not heard of looking at the citation in the footnotes?
You are trying to trash these studies, yet you don't seem to know how to read a journal article with citations. Your credibility is extremely shaky at this point.
If you had bothered to look you would have found the link for the citation.
This was the study: Jenny C, Roesler TA, Poyer KL. Are children at risk for sexual abuse by homosexuals? Pediatrics. 1994;94:41-44. Free Full Text
It was published in the Journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics. The Academy has over 60,000 clinical members who are all qualified Pediatricians.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyNTexas
This is a great intro to my evidence ... with the first source being the CDC ... that's the Center for Disease Control ... not the Christian Dogma Commission, OK:
Here, the CDC reports that 57% of males who have had sex with other males claimed to not be either homosexual or bisexual. Imagine that!
Actually no. It doesn't state that at all. Where in the study did you find that? Or did you just pick up that figure and the link to the study from one of religious-based anti-gay websites?
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyNTexas
Really ...you know what I think?
You don't appear to think very much at all on this topic.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyNTexas
I think men who have sex with other men are extremely confused about homosexuality, and have a very difficult time telling the truth. There's a pattern here ... but based on my non-clinical opinion ... if a man has sex with other men ... he's a homosexual ... now if he molests a little boy and then claims he's a heterosexual .. surprise freaking surprise !!! But in spite of this ridiculous claim ... a claim the "experts" seem willing to take at face value, the end result is a homosexual molesting a little boy who is reported in the statistics as a heterosexual because they said so. Now I won't even offer speculation as to why these creeps will confess to molesting boys .. and even admit to having sex with other men .. but still insist they are heterosexual. Beats the crap out of me. Apparently, to these creeps it's preferable to be a pedophile than a homosexual.
Well you are certainly entitled to your opinion, but you've already proved a lack of critical thinking and poor research skills in this post alone. As well as an obvious contempt and disregard for anything that opposes your uneducated opinion - although you've shown you obviously haven't even read the studies you are are trying to trash.
If you want to know more about this subject, you could alwasys read some books by an expert with over 40 years experience in this field. One whose work is used by the FBI in crimimal profiling... You know...the person you called a clown and liar?
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyNTexas
But moving on ... contrary to the claims from the homosexual community that the national criminal data statistics don't link homosexuals to pedophilia, it's a bald faced lie, according to the FBI.
You mean the FBI that uses the work of Groth? Or is this another FBI?
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyNTexas
Now let's look at a few quotes, shall we?
Yes let's look at a few quotes. Oh... ...No links to the sources of the quotes?
Oh! Surprise surprise! I did a little googling of your "quotes". These "quote mines" are only found on religious-based anti-gay websites. What did you call them? "Christian Dogma Commission"? You know....websites that have been shown to misrepresent and lie about studies. Including Groth's! In fact Groth even wrote to some of these groups asking them not to cite his studies for their claims, because they misquoted and misrepresented his work in their propaganda articles. One of your "quotes" even had something that originated from NARTH - the "pray away the gay" religious-based fringe group who have never been able to publish anything in a reputable peer-reviewed journal, so they self-published their own "journal" - all 2 editions of it. They like to cite it as if it is something that is peer-reviewed by mainstream health professionals. It's not. They are a complete joke to mainstream health professionals. NARTH is quite small and most of it's members are not clinically qualified.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyNTexas
I'm going to stop here because this document is beginning to wigg out and act strangely .... there are plenty more quotes ... and we have NAMBLA ... and all of the connections and support they have received from the mainstream homosexual organizations.
*sigh* NAMBLA. Mentioning the virtually defunct NAMBLA as somehow representative of gay people is like mentioning Fred Phelps and the Westboro Baptist Church as a representative of all Christians. Fail.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyNTexas
The evidence of this real predisposition of homosexuals targeting young boys is OVERWHELMING .... and dozens of direct confessions to support that fact in the same theme as is posted above.
No. It's not. Your claims of "overwhelming" supposed "evidence" is found only on religious-based anti-gay propaganda websites. Are you sensing a trend here like I am?
To sum up, you think all mainstream health organizations and studies and articles in peer-reviewed journals are frauds, even though you obviously haven't read any studies or books on the subject. You think one of the most respected experts in this field is a clown and a liar. And you've shown you don't know how (or couldn't be bothered) to look up a citation in a scholarly article or study.
But you present a study from the CDC that doesn't even state what you claim it does. And "quote mines" (with no citations) from religious-based anti-gay websites. No wonder you didn't provide the links. But it's easy to so a google search on your quotes and see where they originate.
Uh...huh... I see where you are coming from.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyNTexas
It's undeniable ... and those that do go to such lengths to deny and fabricate bogus data and claims, are liars and defenders of child molesters, which makes them complicit in the attack on these children.
Yes, it's undeniable that the religious-based anti-gay groups who "go to such lengths to deny and fabricate bogus data and claims, are liars and defenders of child molesters, which makes them complicit in the attack on these children."
You hit the nail on the head.
It's not enough that we except it, we must also celebrate it.
We must treat them not as equals, but as extra special, for not to, is homophobic.
We have to acknowledge that homosexuality is actually better than hetrosexuality, for not to, is homophobic.
Remember, gay is the way, anything else is homophobic.
Actually if we could get the anti-gay religious fringe groups to stop spreading lies and myths to vilify gay people, that would be nice. You don't have to like or be comfortable about homosexuality, but at least get the facts straight.
Quote: Nimchimpsky
"I went to a high school where 30% of the students were gay/bi or trans, and 50% of the faculty were gay/bi or trans. We had a Gay Pride Week, Transgender Day of Remembrance, and our entire English curriculum was devoted to studying Civil Rights in America. Our school happily gave up teaching the classics for teaching African American Lit. Apart from 4 books by Shakespeare, every other book I read in high school was by or about being African-American, gay, or Jewish. We called our teachers by their first names, had an open-campus policy, and some of our teachers would even hold classes outside or at Starbucks. My HS would probably be selling the F*ck Hate shirts in the student lounge if school were in session."
30% Gay/Bi or Trans students at one high school? This sounds statistically impossible.
I don't and was actually somewhat of a supporter of SSM until I encountered this type of campaign/agenda, which prompted me to do some research and rethink my heretofore "sympathetic views. Wonder if this effects others the same way.
A) I don't believe you.
B) You sound like a Blaze "plant".
C) Your tactic of "I was supportive of this at first but now I've changed my mind after some - research" is used throughout conservative media in a lame attempt to sway public opinion on many issues (and doesn't work).
D) How did that "research" go btw?
E) The age-old question is why do you care? Where was the Christian bashing?
F) The poll really means nothing. I am straight btw and am not threatened by gays.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
