Judging Michael Jackson and ourselves

townhall.com ^ | 11/25/03 | Cal Thomas

[kattracks]

If Michael Jackson did, in fact, as it is alleged, have sex with a minor boy, what's wrong with that? The question is not meant to be cute; I am serious. If a male child was fondled or sodomized by Michael Jackson, why shouldn't he and the boy be allowed the orientation of their choice? If you disagree, who are you to impose your morality on them?

Are you outraged by this? Do you think we have gone too far? Not far enough, some say. Yesterday's unacceptable (divorce, premarital sex, abortion, homosexuality, group sex, domestic partnerships and, soon, same-sex marriage) are today's acceptable. It's just a matter of conditioning. Groups exist that promote adult-child sex. Expect an alliance - composed of academics, theologians and cultural commentators - to ram this home through the media, crushing whatever resistance remains.

[Lijahsbubbe]

And what the perverted will do is take the lowest common denominator among heterosexual adult couples (sad that I have to insert the word adult here) and give them as comparisons to the normalcy of the sexual perversion of the month. Such as:

Most marriages end in divorce.
There is domestic violence in marriage.

They state societies problems as a reason to advance their particular perversion, i.e., "pedophiles work and are family oriented too".

[tinacart]

You go, Cal!

[metalboy]

The deal with pedos is that they primarily engage in sex with other peoples kids. Groups like Nambla and that terrorist organization which is defending them, the ACLU, are basically saying "We have the right to screw your kid". To which my answer is, "If you believe that, then I have the right to take a basball bat and do a homerun on your head."

[lainde]

bttt

[Delta 21]

[Lijahsbubbe]

Now doesn' that picture make you sad? A life so messed up. Someone did something bad to that poor little boy.

[jedwardtremlett]

Yeah. His dad.

It's something of an open secret that Michael used to get the worst treatment out of all the Jackson Five. He was the youngest and most impressionable, and his dad took his childhood away so he could see his kids fulfill his spolied, unrealized dreams of stardom and success for himself. Is it any wonder this grown man acts like a little boy?

I hope it turns out Michael didn't do what he's accused of. If he did, then he should pay the price for it. But I hope that one day Papa Jackson is called into account for having helped turn Michael into the freakshow he is today.

J

[MattAMiller]

Why do we allow anything then? If it's a slippery slope then the whole slope is slippery.

Just because some people find a particular sort of sex icky does not mean that it's immoral. And if you think that argument can been easily used to encourage acceptance of pedophilia then I have to wonder if you just find pedophilia merely icky rather than devastating to its victims.

[wafflehouse]

can you please restate your arguement in more concrete, absolute terms?

someones opinion of 'icky' is not a consideration here.. it can be argued that, to say pedophilia is devastating to its victims is contrary to the UN drive for 'childrens rights'.. who are you to say what is right for a child, if they are able to choose for themselves?

if pedophilia is damaging to its victims, than the only difference between pedophilia and homosexuality, is the damage was done long enough ago to be difficult to scientifically correlate to a homosexual's current behavior..

[Fledermaus]

Maybe they should try it in the Mass. Supreme Court.

[Caipirabob]

If Michael Jackson did, in fact, as it is alleged, have sex with a minor boy, what's wrong with that? The question is not meant to be cute; I am serious. If a male child was fondled or sodomized by Michael Jackson, why shouldn't he and the boy be allowed the orientation of their choice? If you disagree, who are you to impose your morality on them?

Simple: Because that child could be MY CHILD, or my NEIGHBOR'S CHILD or the kid that lives down the street! And in such case I will not impose my morality upon the offender but instead, a baseball bat. In particular a Louisville Slugger TPX for extra power and distance.

[Conspiracy Guy]

Conspiracy Guy doesn't judge, he just brings them into custody. Photo of Conspiracy Guy bringing Jacko into LAPD.

[RWG]

Let's not Rush to judgement. If he admits errors and seeks treatment then he can be forgiven for his crimes.

[OldSmaj]

If you disagree, who are you to impose your morality on them?

Well, I'm pretty much a live and let live type, but if this piece of pus-filled perversion were attempting to molest/sodomize my child, I'd simply kill him.

I fail to see how this would be an imposition of my morality on the pervert.

As it is, I don't care if Michael Jackson lives or dies.

He means nothing to me, he has contributed nothing to my life, nor will he. I do not listen to his so-called artistry, his CD's/tapes have never been in my home, nor will they.

And were it not for the continuous slamming of this pervert into our faces by every known media, I seriously doubt that I would have ever known that he existed.

Nor would I have cared.

Now, one may argue that he has impacted my life, else I would not be responding to this posting and there is a certain truth to that.

One might also argue that a pile of dog excrement has influenced my life also, since if I were to encounter it on my path, it would cause revulsion and force me to step around it.

Michael Jackson and all his entourage and apologists are much like the pile of dog excrement.

Even though that pile of dog excrement causes me revulsion and forces me to step around it, the media keeps picking up the pile of dog excrement and dumping it in front of my every step.

[ConservativeStLouisGuy]

Judging Michael Jackson And Ourselves - Cal Thomas

If Michael Jackson did, in fact, as it is alleged, have sex with a minor boy, what's wrong with that? The question is not meant to be cute; I am serious. If a male child was fondled or sodomized by Michael Jackson, why shouldn't he and the boy be allowed the orientation of their choice? If you disagree, who are you to impose your morality on them?

Are you outraged by this? Do you think we have gone too far? Not far enough, some say. Yesterday's unacceptable (divorce, premarital sex, abortion, homosexuality, group sex, domestic partnerships and, soon, same-sex marriage) are today's acceptable. It's just a matter of conditioning. Groups exist that promote adult-child sex. Expect an alliance - composed of academics, theologians and cultural commentators - to ram this home through the media, crushing whatever resistance remains.

Nothing shames us. In pursuit of freedom we have embraced license and now licentiousness, throwing off all restraint.

The Abercrombie & Fitch Christmas Field Guide magazine, targeted to 10- to 13-year-olds, contains 45 specific portrayals of sexual imagery in the first 120 pages, according to Kevin McCullough, who counted them for an essay on WorldNetDaily.com. The images, he writes, "include overt portrayals of group sex, lots of teen and young adult nudity, men kissing and teens/young adults frolicking in a river engaging in sexual activity in multiple group settings." The company now markets thong underwear to girls between 8 and 10.

Should we be surprised when some people act on the permission the media give them? Seen those Calvin Klein underwear commercials featuring children in poses appealing to pedophiles?

The early sexualization of children has produced ever-earlier sexual activity (and pregnancy) among those children.

Professional organizations are trying to catch up in the race to normalize what we once called "depravity." The American Psychiatric Association (APA), which declared homosexual practice normal, has recently entertained the notion of similarly downgrading pedophilia. The APA's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM) once contended that merely "acting upon" one's urges toward children was enough to generate a diagnosis of pedophilia (DSM-III). But in the revised DSM-IV, a person who molests a child is considered psychiatrically sick only if his actions "caused clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational or other important areas of functioning."

That seems to mean that if the molester is OK with it and the child doesn't complain, it's healthy. It can't be wrong if it feels so right, right?

The National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH) challenged the APA's stand. Writing on NARTH's Web page (www.narth.com), Linda Ames Nicolosi notes that a different organization, American Psychological Association, has published the "Rind" study, which downplays the effects of man-boy sex. Rind supported the "finding that quite a few of the boys remembered their childhood sexual experiences positively," she writes. The association later apologized for the study and then seemed to backpedal. But then it issued a surprisingly unscientific statement that no matter what the research might show about the psychological effects of pedophile relationships (and there is plenty of other research that shows extremely negative consequences), pedophilia remains, in its opinion, "morally wrong." Since when did science concern itself with morality?

The sexualization of children is supported by state governments, many of which mandate sex education as early as kindergarten. School nurses dispense contraceptives and abortion advice without parental knowledge or approval. Teen magazines such as Cosmo Girl and Seventeen promote sexual activity for minor children. A British charity publishes a children's sex guide, "Say Yes, Say No, Say Maybe." It explains various positions and the excitement of intercourse.

English philosopher Roger Scruton has written, "The hysteria over pedophilia is indicative of a society that has come to the brink of self-destruction and stands there accusing the void. People reach for their old certainties: words like 'pervert' and 'perversion' suddenly seem right to them; they look round for the culprit with a view to shaming, humiliating and ostracizing him. And they recognize the vastness of the evil that is around them and within them, an evil they only imperfectly confess to." (Published in "Modern Sex: Liberation and Its Discontents." Edited with an Introduction by Myron Magnet. Ivan R. Dee publishers, 2001, Chicago.)

It's too late for any of that now. For some, Michael Jackson is not a pervert but a pioneer.

____________________________________

An excellent article NAILING this whole Michael Jackson "stuff" -- worthy of a full post....

- ConservativeStLouisGuy

[Delta 21]

If he admits errors and seeks treatment then he can be forgiven for his crimes.

Thats the best bit of sarcasm I've heard all day!!

[Helms]

Lobsters thrashing around the pot as the heat is gradually turned up????? Think of this the next time you patronise Hollywood.

[gcruse]

to ram this home through the media

Ram it, Cal, ram it.