Posted on 04/07/2003 9:26:14 AM PDT by 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 $200,000 bail.
Joseph Del Russo, chief assistant prosecutor for Passaic County, said state law requires anyone infected with HIV to notify sexual partners.
[since the child was in about the 6th grade when all this started, I hardly see how this homosexual was "having sex." Why can't these people call this what it is? Rape.]
Welsh has taught religion, music, computers and gym at St. Therese School in Paterson since the late 1990s.
You missed my point. The actual NABLA site may be gone but the people that populated the site are not gone. They are simply elsewhere and still actively preying on children. I think that it would be a real feather in the cap of the homosexuals if they actively denounced pedophiles as the scum that they are rather than spinning bull$hit about how the pedophiles that rape little boys are "probably" heterosexual. That dog won't hunt.
I think that Welsh should spend a great deal of time in prison and that his victim should (voluntarily) receive counseling.
Think that Welsh should swing from a rope and his victim's family should be able to pull the lever. If it was my child he would already be dead.
No Bill, just the truth…NOT what the definition of is is.
I don't see any age-distinctions or references to age-preferences here.
Yeppers…Freund made no age distinctions in any of his studies that involves pedophilia, they could have been a 3 yld or a 13 yld. Do you think they were offended against by the same kind of pervert? If you do, you’re certainly not the brightest bulb on the tree.
Well, that certainly narrows it down to sometime between birth and voting.
Well, that certainly confirms it, you’re definately not the brightest bulb on the tree are you? We’re talking about a 3 year window where the body’s maturation occurs…you remember…it’s when you probably had your first intergenerational experience. Perhaps you need to review your 7th grade biology.
I'm going to assume you mean the distinction between "pedophilia" and "ephebophilia". Correct me if I'm wrong.
You’re wrong. Ephebophilia is simply post pubescent attraction and a case can be made that homosexuals are more likely to commit this kind of child sexual abuse as well. But, if the child has puberty early, say age 11, and BTW the average age has lowered a full year this past century, then the abuse is no longer pedophilia? That’s ridiculous. Even your enablers at the APA would disagree. The window is around 10 to 13 but can fluctuate a year on either end.
And making that distinction seems to be a problem for your sources:
Umm…nice try but none of those are sources for my definitions. What a waste of time by you hey? (Sound of giggling)
So, this distinction that you want to make certainly seems to be one of convenience -- not a single source of yours makes it. Do you want to agree that it's a non-issue, or do you still want to debate the lack of "definite distinctions of pedophilia that can be separated by age and exclusivity"?
Like I said, these aren’t my sources and should you offer a coherent argument proving me wrong then do so, otherwise it’s been fun. Nice try on the sophistry though, trying to redefine the argument was a neat little trick. The gray area between pedophilia and adolescent sex abuse is still called pedophilia; it’s the perfect age for homosexual recruitment. So I ask again, I’ll bet this period of your life is when you lost your virginity to an older boy/man…am I right?
To what does "Baldwin 1988" refer, and does he make said distinction?
What I cited before, keep up Josh.
Reading DATA with common sense is NOT hijacking anything. And I don’t think anyone around here is demonizing a group, we're simply finding a correlation between behaviors. Save the political rhetoric for the hay seeds, will you?
Freund made no age distinctions in any of his studies that involves pedophilia, they could have been a 3 yld or a 13 yld. Do you think they were offended against by the same kind of pervert?
Obviously, you do. Shall I quote: The pathology is same-sex attraction, if you got it you be “gay.”
"Words mean things."
We’re talking about a 3 year window where the body’s maturation occurs
Again, I quote: "The pre-pubescent, pubescent and post-pubescent boy is the desired age range for homosexual pedophilia"
If you meant "pubescent", then say "pubescent".
"pre-pubsecent" ("birth" to puberty)
"pubescent" (in puberty, when "the body’s maturation occurs")
"post-pubsecent" (puberty to adulthood or "voting", aka adolescent).
What was that I said about hijacking words?
So, if I'm reading your paragraph correctly, you're now claiming that homosexuals are most likely to attack boys in or near puberty? Um... do you have data on that?
nice try but none of those are sources for my definitions
Your definitions seem to be made up out of thin air. Your data sources, however, were given (after much prodding) as "dadi, TVA and AFA" -- there is no "TVA" (unless you can provide a link) so I assumed a typo of TVC (linked), I missed "AFA" (Note the extensive use of blah blah blah -- see previous reply to you), and DADI (Note the extensive use of blah blah blah).
So, do you have data to prove your newest assertations, or are you going to come up with some new ones?
And BTW, there is no "Baldwin 1988" -- Steve Baldwin is just another propaganda-monger for theocratic Christians, referring to a study by Erickson, Walbek, & Seely, in an article published only by Regent University Law Review. Which still makes no age-distinctions that you so desperately seem to think are relevant but noone seems to bother making.
So, more bluster or do you want to back up your claims?
I'll reply to you.
Your post is borne of ignorance and malice. It is detrimental to Christian interdenominational relations - therefore, the body of Christ on Earth.
So, Catholicism is a denomination now. Catholics have always denied that Catholicism is a denomination. You claim it is?!?!?!
Good grief!!! Which is it???
You call me ignorant and malicious for saying that the Catholic laity is ultimately responsible for the organization that they support and enable. If you support people who cover up for pedophiles, hide them, reassign them where they can molest other children, YOU ARE AN ACCOMPLICE to their crimes.
No, even with my constant perusal of GLAAD’s website over the LAST TEN YEARS I must have missed the ONE TIME that disdain was stated concerning pedophilia. < /sarcasm >
Or do you expect each and every individual “homosexual” to specifically denounce each and every pedophile and each and every incident? --Big Snip –
Homosexual denunciation as a group was implied leaving the next few paragraphs non-applicable. However, I have and would never defended a person guilty pedophilia simply because they are heterosexual. I am not saying that you would, but the original post that started this conversation appeared to do just that.
I do know that the heterosexual community was lambasted by the vast homosexual minority when Shepard was murdered by heterosexuals, but when Dirsking (sp) was murdered by homosexuals the homosexuals once again lambasted the heterosexuals for blaming the homosexuals.
Shepard = hate crime. Dirsking (sp) = accident / no crime.
Heterosexuals are not in denial when it comes to pedophilia.
You’re an idiot Josh…it’s really breathtaking! Why wouldn’t you even bother to do a simple google search? It really sheds some light on your credibility when you can’t get such a simple thing right when it’s so easily found.
prepuberty : the period immediately proceeding puberty. The prepubescent stage includes the first evidence of sexual maturation.
"pubescent" (in puberty, when "the body’s maturation occurs")
Not really in dispute here but from the Tanner Stages, stage 1 IS prepubescence and stage 4 is the postpubescence stage.
"post-pubescent" (puberty to adulthood or "voting", aka adolescent).
postpubescent occurring or being in the period following puberty. aka Stage 4 in the Tanner Stages. Maybe for you voting age followed your puberty but NOT for most people.
Your definitions seem to be made up out of thin air.
Actually they are well researched.
Your data sources, however, were given (after much prodding) as blah blah blah.
Again you’ve wasted your time monumentally, I wonder why? I cited dadi, et al because it’s where I first found these studies. Where I found them has no bearing to this debate, the study’s DATA support my analysis period. If you want me to cite sources for this post it would take a while because all the information comes from general reading plus simple definitions and facts from the APA, Federal Crime Statistics, the Jenny Study, Baldwin 19?? etc. etc. But unfortunately for you and your waste of time trying to pigeon hole me I didn’t use any info from dadi, TVC…for this post. Sorry.
And BTW, there is no "Baldwin 1988" -- Steve Baldwin is just another propaganda-monger for theocratic Christians, referring to a study by Erickson, Walbek, & Seely, in an article published only by Regent University Law Review. Which still makes no age-distinctions that you so desperately seem to think are relevant but noone seems to bother making.
There is a Baldwin study Child Molestation and the Homosexual Movement “Some admit to a focus on teenage boys, some on prepubescent boys, and many cross over between categories. All are subsets of the homosexual deviancy. Moreover, most pedophiles consider themselves to be gay. In a 1988 study published in the Archives of Sexual Behavior, 86% of pedophiles described themselves as homosexual or bisexual.”
Which still makes no age-distinctions that you so desperately seem to think are relevant but noone seems to bother making.
There’s nothing desperate about the truth, prepubescent, pubescent. and postpubescent, are age distinctions as you were so wrongly mistaken. Baldwin’s 19?? study clearly links the distinction, it’s cited and credible regardless of your disparaging remarks about the author. But sine any negative studies on homosexuality are ALWAYS wrong, ALWAYS discredited, ALWAYS ridiculous 100% of the time with no exceptions I’m sure we’ll see some HRC, GLAAD, FinnQueer attack on the truth. Waiting with high boots and shovel in hand.
Should you have anything to refute my statements I’ll be happy address it otherwise I’m prepared for more of your tired semantics games. BTW why won’t answer my question…I realize your answer would be anecdotal but I’ll assume “my bet” is right on the money.
Why don’t you take up my offer here and let us know. Either put-up or shut-up, otherwise your notion “that that organization ITSELF is virtually non-existent” is nothing more than hopeful fantasy.
Baldwin’s 19?? study clearly links the distinction, it’s cited and credible regardless of your disparaging remarks about the author
Care to highlight said distinction? It still says "pedophiles", which is any child under 16 so far as I can find, and it still references studies of "pedophiles" by the clinical definition. (It's 2002, BTW, not 19XX)
Pedophiles are pedophiles are pedophiles, whether they're attracted to children under 8 or between 10-14 or whatever grouping you wish to make, pedophiles are pedophiles. And pedophiles, as pointed out by professionals who care about the victims, are not homosexual and are not heterosexual.
Whoops, forgot this little ditty. That’s YOUR pathology. The pedophilic distinction I made was by age and exclusivity to that age, the point is the statistics for YOUR pathology offends disproportionately in the 9-13/14 age group. I’m not sure what the stats are for the minute 7% of exclusive pedophiles.
I did, they’re in between the quote marks.
It still says "pedophiles", which is any child under 16 so far as I can find, and it still references studies of "pedophiles" by the clinical definition. (It's 2002, BTW, not 19XX)
What “it” that says "pedophiles", which is any child under 16”??? What are you talking about?
Pedophiles are pedophiles are pedophiles, whether they're attracted to children under 8 or between 10-14 or whatever grouping you wish to make, pedophiles are pedophiles.
Correct! And it’s your pathology that’s disproportionately attracted to those with the capacity to consent.
And pedophiles, as pointed out by professionals who care about the victims, are not homosexual and are not heterosexual.
Toting the APA line is not the same as common sense reading of the DATA. But you hold on to that notion Josh, I know you need it to live with your pathology. In the mean time you stay away from my kids…OK?
Do you even live in this reality?
At the time you made that comment, you were still trying to defend those half-assed statistics that make NO distinction for age.
I did, they’re in between the quote marks.
No. What's between the quote-marks is non age-specific garbage, further obscured with "some" and "some" and "more" (hardly "data") and "pedophiles". Isn't that what you're complaining about -- "homosexuals" using the generic term of "pedophiles" for what you call "pederasty"?
And it’s your pathology that’s disproportionately attracted to those with the capacity to consent.
Which you still haven't proven.
Toting the APA line is not the same as common sense reading of the DATA.
So as soon as you provide some "data", we can work with it. And, by the way, would you care to explain what the non-APA definition of "pedophile" is?
Could you vague that up a bit? You might've snuck something provable in there somewhere. </sarcasm>
Again I have no idea what you’re talking about, is there a coherent question here? You’re calling Freund’s DATA half-assed? Yet again you’re playing a game of semantics and it’s getting very tiresome. I was answering another of your attempts to pigeonhole me into responding to points I’ve not made, ala quoting dadi, TVC et al, grow up Josh.
No. What's between the quote-marks is non age-specific garbage,
Did you bump your head before you wrote this? You don’t think prepubescent, pubescent and postpubescent is age specific? I give up; you’re a moron.
further obscured with "some" and "some" and "more" (hardly "data") and "pedophiles".
Even more semantics games huh Josh? Analysis from data is obscured by what, quantitative adjectives that denote parts of a group? What part of “part of a group” don’t you understand? Frequency and proportions have been established here as well as in Baldwin’s study, what more do you need?
Isn't that what you're complaining about -- "homosexuals" using the generic term of "pedophiles" for what you call "pederasty"?
You mean like “some,” “some” and “more”? Adjectives aren’t nouns and therefor they can’t be “terms” Josh, you’re not making any sense as usual. My complaint is with calling abuse to pubescent’s and postpubescent’s pederasty and NOT pedophilia. Did you know over 50% of child sex abuse happens at this age period?
Which you still haven't proven.
So as soon as you provide some "data", we can work with it.
See above.
And, by the way, would you care to explain what the non-APA definition of "pedophile" is?
You mean when pubescent and postpubescent abuse isn’t pedophilia. I believe I’ve covered that enough don’t you?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.