HIV-Positive Teacher Charged With Having Sex With Student (sexual assault and child endangerment)

Local6/AP ^ | 4/7/03 | ap

[Jael]

HIV-Positive Teacher Charged With Having Sex With Student Posted: 11:50 a.m. EDT April 7, 2003

PATERSON, N.J. --
An HIV-positive teacher from a Roman Catholic elementary school is accused of sexually assaulting a former student over a two-month period, prosecutors said.

Raymond J. Welsh, 33, of Fair Lawn, was charged with sexual assault by a diseased person, aggravated sexual assault, sexual assault and child endangerment. He was released Friday on $200,000 bail.

Joseph Del Russo, chief assistant prosecutor for Passaic County, said state law requires anyone infected with HIV to notify sexual partners.

[since the child was in about the 6th grade when all this started, I hardly see how this homosexual was "having sex." Why can't these people call this what it is? Rape.]

Welsh has taught religion, music, computers and gym at St. Therese School in Paterson since the late 1990s.

[Clint N. Suhks]

So, nothing peer-reviewed, just the ramblings of a bunch of political action committees.

That’s the common sense part Josh, you don’t need a PHD to read DATA objectively.

Speaking of politics, what member of the APA can give a negative opinion of homosexuals and not be a victim serious reprisal? The answer is NONE! The APA is it’s own political action committee.

[RightWingNut]

Did I misunderstand something ? this piece of human trash taught "religion"?

RELIGION ????!!!!!

I bet he always looked forward to singing " All Come All Ye Faithful"

[rebel85]

The APA no longer classifies homosexuality as a deformity, illness, or otherwise..only part of a normal behavior. How can they now speak out against it. They have now totally explained it away. It is no longer a problem.

[JoshGray]

However acting on those attractions is another matter. Coveting and conduct are two different things.

You said: If you no longer have same-sex attraction ... you no longer are homosexual. It’s pretty simple.

But if you do have the attraction, you are therefore still homosexual. It's pretty simple. (Just turning your own words around.)

The question is: what percentage of the population has those attractions? What percentage act on it? You do admit they're different things. If it's so "common", you should have some idea the difference between "I am a football player" and "I play football on weekends."

The APA is it’s own political action committee.

That's not the issue. The issue is your incorrect use of data.

[Clint N. Suhks]

The question is: what percentage of the population has those attractions?

No, it’s not. Do you honestly think we were talking about attraction without the behavior? That’s just silly, I didn’t think that needed to be spelled out to you. Clearly an ex-gay who has any lingering same-sex attraction but doesn’t act on it is no longer homosexual.

"I am a football player" and "I play football on weekends."

This is not a reasonable analogy, it should read

"I am a like football player" and "I play football on weekends."

You see the attraction and the action are independent things, obviously liking football does not make one a football player.

But it’s just like you to get bogged down in semantics and ridiculous unrelated points like bisexuals aren’t homosexuals, it’s irrelevant to try and make any distinction based on frequency. I’ve repeated it over and over, you pick a reasonable percentage of the population and compare it to the percentage of homosexual pedophiles and tell me there’s no link.

That's not the issue.

You needed the peer review, I simply explained why that’s not possible.

The issue is your incorrect use of data.

You mean like you’re not homosexual if you have same-sex attraction (and for the public schooled) and act on it? Don't be rediculous.

[Houmatt]

Oh. So there are no ex-gays. Interesting.

You know, there are times when I read threads like these,and find myself obigated to step in.

This is one of those times.

Look, pal, don't try to twist or distort what Clint said. You know what he said, you know what he meant. Trying to make an argument by being disingenuous does not make you look good.

Again: you brought him up. And you're defining the term. Rather badly, I must add. The numbers, by your definition, don't lie.

So, are you implying his defintion is not factual?

Sorry, Charlie, but 37% percent of the male population is not homosexual. Not even 10%, which is the widely held myth. Every single study I have ever seen that is not conducted by self-serving individuals but it at the conservative estimate of 5%.

And, yes, homosexuality is a behavior that can be modified.

[Houmatt]

There are many homosexuals and heterosexuals (and bisexuals) that do not have sex with children.

And yet, everything Clint referenced in post #9 is correct.

Not only that, the most vocal in the movement to normalize pedophilia are homosexuals (Like the North American Man-Boy Love Association, or NAMBLA. And you have homosexual activists Larry Kramer and Pat Califa singing its praises, too.). How do you explain that?

[Houmatt]

If you want to call anyone who's ever had sexual relations with a member of the same sex a "homosexual",

He didn't.

Not good trying to put words in his mouth.

[Trace21230]

"Not only that, the most vocal in the movement to normalize pedophilia are homosexuals (Like the North American Man-Boy Love Association, or NAMBLA. And you have homosexual activists Larry Kramer and Pat Califa singing its praises, too.). How do you explain that?"

I don't need to explain it because I'm not a fan of NAMBLA or or pedophilia.

Perhaps you can explain the fixation with homosexuality that so many people on this board have.

Why is it that everyone wants smaller government until it comes to regulating sex? I don't get it.

My advice to the fanatics, mind your own business, what consenting adults do in their bedroom has nothing to do with you. Butt out.

Trace

[Houmatt]

My advice to the fanatics, mind your own business, what consenting adults do in their bedroom has nothing to do with you. Butt out.

It's not quite that simple.

I think you would a have lot of people agreeing with you if they would indeed keep it behind closed doors. But you know as well as I do they don't.

"Gay Pride" parades. "Gay" rights. People demanding acceptance and a minority status based on their sexual behavior, something that can be changed and modified.

Does that sound like people wanting to keep their sexual behavior inside their own bedroom?

[Houmatt]

So Clint says "attraction" is what makes someone "gay." He's mostly correct about that part, sexual orientation is more about attraction and identity than it is about behavior.

Then perhaps you could explain why homosexual activists have equated sexual "orientation" with behavior, in that you can be called a bigot and a homophobe (sic) if you say something like, "I love the sinner but hate the sin."

Well, so-called "ex-gays" claim to be "no longer homosexual," yet many of them (and there's not that many to begin with) admit that they still have same-sex attractions.

Proof?

That is a fact that the "ex-gay" industry tends to gloss over when they say things like: "complete change is completely possible."

All things are possible through Jesus Christ.

You see... there's a logical inconsistency of your own. Your first statement is (probably) correct if you identify "homosexuality" as a sexual orientation (attraction/identity), but then you contradict yourself by claiming that "homosexuality is a behavior."

See above.

[Houmatt]

Not only that, the most vocal in the movement to normalize pedophilia are homosexuals (Like the North American Man-Boy Love Association, or NAMBLA. And you have homosexual activists Larry Kramer and Pat Califa singing its praises, too.). How do you explain that?

That's a figment of your imagination.

"In those cases where children do have sex with their homosexual elders... I submit that often, very often, the child desires the activity, and perhaps even solicits it, either because of a natural curiosity... or because he or she is homosexual and innately knows it. ... And unlike girls or women forced into rape or traumatized, most gay men have warm memories of their earliest and early sexual encounters; when we share these stories with each other, they are invariably positive ones."

~ Larry Kramer, writer and founder of the AIDS Coalition to Unleash Power (ACT-UP), in Reports from the Holocaust, New York: St. Martin's Press, 1991.

"Boy-lovers and the lesbians who have young lovers are the only people offering a hand to help young women and men cross the difficult terrain between straight society and the gay community. They are not child molesters. The child abusers are priests, teachers, therapists, cops and parents who force their stale morality onto the young people in their custody. Instead of condemning pedophiles for their involvement with lesbian and gay youth, we should be supporting them."

~ Pat Califia, lesbian author and activist, in The Advocate, October, 1980.

So much for it being my imagination.

D'oh!

Your bugaboo NAMBLA no longer exists as a viable organization...

But it is viable enough for this to be occurring.

(even when they did so exist they lobbied for "sexual autonomy" of all children, boys AND girls)

And yet the membership is male and it is still called the North American Man-Boy Love Association.

Do you think it is a good idea to defend an organization you know absolutely nothing about?

Their website can be easily found through a Yahoo search. Why don't you actually go there and read what they have before you say another single word, so that way you will never have to be humiliated and embarrassed again.

[Clint N. Suhks]

He's mostly correct about that part, sexual orientation is more about attraction and identity than it is about behavior.

Attraction without behavior is not the disorder, acting on it is. Desiring to steel the candy bar and steeling the candy bar is a fair analogy.

(His OPINION of homosexuality as a "pathology" is completely unsustainable.)

Only if you completely ignore the DSMII and the unscientific politics surrounding its removal.

So Clint is saying: "same-sex attraction" = "gay" = "homosexual;" and also: "NO same-sex attraction" = NOT "gay" = NOT "homosexual."

No…Clint is clearly saying the pathology is acting on the attraction, read a bit farther next time.

Well, so-called "ex-gays" claim to be "no longer homosexual," yet many of them [but NOT all] (and there's not that many to begin with) admit that they still have same-sex attractions.

But not acting on it, like not stealing the candy, is where the reparation occurs.

That is a fact that the "ex-gay" industry tends to gloss over when they say things like: "complete change is completely possible."

"complete change IS completely possible."

It all depends on the motivation of the patient, even the born again Christian has thoughts of sin that don’t go away but that doesn’t mean he hasn’t “completely” changed. Are you starting to get it yet?

So, IF (according to Clint) same-sex attraction makes one "gay," AND many so-called "ex-gays" still feel same-sex attractions, THEN Clint must be inferring that those "ex-gays" are LYING! Right?

No! See above. It’s all about acting on it.

And since Clint seems to strongly believe in the "ex-gay" mythos, his comments have damaged his own cause by dramatically reducing the (already tiny) number of so-called "ex-gays."

Oh, how so? You didn’t read this post did you?

Like much of the anti-gay brigade, Clint is trying to have it both ways: "'Gay' is attraction" or "'Gay' is behavior." They jump back and forth between those definitions as it suits them, and do not apply them uniformly.

I'm not anti-happy, I'm anti behvior. Anyway it’s actually both, I didn’t realize you thought one went without the other. Logically the behavior encompasses the attraction and yet the attraction alone is nothing more than a fleeting thought. Funny you devoted such a lengthy explanation to such an illogical conclusion.

Your first statement is (probably) correct if you identify "homosexuality" as a sexual orientation (attraction/identity)

If homosexuality is an “orientation” then so is bestiality, pedophilia and incest. Actually there’s no such thing as “sexual orientation” in a clinical sense, anything other than a man/woman relationship is a paraphilic disorder.

but then you contradict yourself by claiming that "homosexuality is a behavior."

Here we go again with the sophistry, redefining his argument to suit your own justifications is really pathetic.

The self-identified homosexual percentage of population is certainly in the single digits... but the number of folks that have engaged in homosexual behavior is far, far greater... most certainly more than 10%.

That’s simply a ridiculous projection at best and an attempt to muddy the waters at worst. If these people have same-sex attraction and chronically act on it, whether or not they “identify” as homosexual, then they are indeed homosexual.

[Clint N. Suhks]

By now, everyone should know that Kurt Freund NEVER said ANYTHING that even vaguely resembles the proffered interpretations.

By now everyone should know that an APA psychiatrist can’t say anything negative about the practice of perversion.

By now everyone should know that common sense and logical reading of DATA clearly says the homosexual population, as a whole is more likely to commit pedophilia. Just ask the altar boys.

[Jael]

Yes, that is what made me irate enough to poat the article!!! How dare they misrepresent what happened to that child?????

[Jael]

Well, I thought the obvious fact of a sodomite raping a child would give people a clue that I would hate that. I got suspended from here for 3 days once for fighting with a bunch of liberals who post here who were defending sodomy. Man, I hate that stuff.

But part of it is how the media protrays it. I suspect that MOSt of us here already hate and abhor homosexuality and child rape.

My intention was to expose the liberal media and their hand in promoting it.

:-)

[Jael]

The rest of the article at the link does. I didn't know if it was ok to post the whole thing. The victim was a young boy