[Coeur de Lion]

I agree the risk of a heterosexual molesting a boy is virtually zero, given that females molesting boys is exceptionally rare. The point I was trying to make was to confute the argument that homosexuals raise with respect to being Big Sisters or Big Brothers. That argument is that we impugn the moral character of homosexuals and that's not fair. We know that's not the issue at all. One wouldn't allow a dirty old man to be a Big Sister--now would we?

[At _War_With_Liberals]

I agree. Most of their arguments include a twisting of logic or common sense.

[John O]

The point I was trying to make was to confute the argument that homosexuals raise with respect to being Big Sisters or Big Brothers. That argument is that we impugn the moral character of homosexuals and that's not fair.

The fallacy here is that 'homosexuals' have no moral character. If they did they wouldn't practice sexual abomination

In order to keep our children safe every 'homosexual' must be considered a child molester.

The first law of homosexuality:

'Homosexuals' don't reproduce, they recruit

The third law of homosexuality:

Any exposure of children to homosexual behavior is child abuse