Child Molestation and the Homosexual Movement, by Steve Baldwin

Regent University Law Review ^ | Steve Baldwin

[Joe Republc]

I used to be very tolerant of homosexuality, thinking that was just the choice between two adults. Not anymore.

Read "Child Molestation and the Homosexual Movement," an article by Steve Baldwin. As noted on the web page leading to the article, it "addresses several recent attacks on our society driven by the homosexual movement. From the international campaign to lower or remove age of consent laws, to the recent assault on the Boy Scouts of America, homosexuals are waging an all out campaign to normalize homosexuality."

Reading through this makes a pretty convincing case that homosexuality and child molestation are well-tied.

[flyervet]

Just out of curiosity, what is behind your choice of names?

[Maelstrom]

I'm sorry, you're having problems understanding what has been written.

Homosexuality is an addictive behavioral disorder.

Other known addictive behavioral disorders include Anorexia, and Bulemia. Several other addictive behavioral disorders include chemical ingestion of one sort or another that do not form physical addictions.

I did NOT say that it wasn't a disorder. I explained that the medical community mistakenly de-listed it from the known list of disorders. The people responsible for de-listing it have since admitted their mistake (ie. They agree that it is a behavioral disorder and should never have been de-listed). BTW: Since then, the atmosphere in which it was de-listed has been shown to be coercive to the point of threatened violence against the psychiatrists in question. Most psychiatrists abstained from voting in response to this coercive pressure. This is typical of the gay community, even today, but it isn't any way to determine medical validity.

You can go to court and indict a ham sandwich...in today's court system, you can even convict it under civil forfeiture laws, but you haven't proven a thing.

You must rely upon science to prove a thing. To prove the case that homosexuality is an addictive behavioral disorder, given the sorry state psychology is in, it is only necessary to accept the fact that there are addictive behavioral disorders and draw the very real comparisons between them. Homosexuality meets the criteria for an addictive behavioral disorder as well as bulemia and anorexia. This includes predictive precursors to the behavior that have been mentioned by others on this list. A few of these are, low self-esteem, a feeling of rejection by one's peers, and a certain level of seduction, molestation, or sexual abuse.

[THROW?]

I said molesting a child was harmful, all you have to do is actually read what I wrote. Read the last paragraph of post #83 where I explicitly say that it is not only harmful but people like you are not listening to me when I do say it. Thank you for proving me right. As far as explaing the statement, I can't. That is because you misconstrued it into the opposite of what I said because you have your belief on who I am and what I think, so you obviously think that you don't need to read what I write.

The legal thing. Good job and good point. I used the legal view of a minor because you said "legal consent is aquiescence." I was just telling you that if you were referring to a minor, then you were wrong, which you are because legal consent is not aquiescence when dealing with a minor. Look it up. Law aside, my view is that a minor can not consent no matter where they are. They are too stupid and naive. Guess what, so was I and so were you.

I don't see what being pro-life has to do with gay people, but explain that one to me. And yes, just so you know I am pro-life because I belive all people are entitled to the 3 basic rights America gives to EVERYONE, including unborn children.

Now some other minors do have the ability to consent. We agree on that. Unfortunately, the United States doesn't have the benefit of hiring you and 1000 of your clones to go around to each and every case involving a child to do an extensive background check on said child so you can deem them mentally mature enough. We must draw an arbitrary line on where this is. Understand?

Your piont on the CDC is a good one as well. Now you are in a spot where I don't know where I stand, so I can not argue that point.

[THROW?]

LOOK UP what it takes to have an addicition. You will not find anorexia, bulemia, and homosexualtiy next to alcohol, nicotine, and heroin. They are no more than an addiction than ADD is an illness. If you could explain how they were an addiction using scientific terms, which you can't, then you already would have written that, which you haven't.

And as far as YOUR definition for addiction. Little Susie didn't make the basketball team, she feels low self-esteem, rejection by her peers, and feels like she needs to be on the team so she will try out next year and work hard in the off season. I guess she is addicted to playing basketball or not playing. I don't know, its your theory. Also, eating is and addictive behavioral disorder too, huh. An addiction must cause a chemical imbalance which is what causes withdrawl. When a man stops screwing guys or an anorexic stops working out or a bulemic stops puking, they don't have withdrawl, go into shock, or anything of the sort.

Go back, read some real medical journals with actual SCIENTIFIC evidence and come back to me.

[Solon]

Dennis Prager has the best view on the subject I have read...

What a gem that article was. Thank-you.

[Maelstrom]

Been there, done that...you're the one with the problem.

[Maelstrom]

The only differences between bulemia, anorexia, and homosexuality is the expressed symptoms of the disorder.

BTW: Suzie is vulnerable to the coach if she's a dyke, and promises to let her on the team for a quicky. (This also happens quite often, thank you very much.)

[THROW?]

Post #107 shows no evidence, again. Just keep telling yourself that the billions of people that don't think just like you have a problem, and you are perfectly normal. At least I am open to the fact that I am not always right or know all the answers as I have shown in this thread. Tell your brother GOD hi when you see him, since you are the only 2 perfect people that I know.

[THROW?]

The first line is only applicable if you can prove that bulemia and anorexia are addictions, which you can't.

[Clint N. Suhks]

I did give the legal standard for consent only for it’s high burden of proof and not that a minor can give legal consent, I’m sorry for the confusion. But this is beside the point.

Law aside, my view is that a minor can not consent no matter where they are. They are too stupid and naive. Guess what, so was I and so were you.

This is not true because “mental capacity” is measured by adult IQ and the lowest legal IQ for an emancipated individual, in most states, is 70 though a case can be made for “The Biology of g”. There are children whose adjusted adult IQ’s are well over this minimum adult functioning standard and therefor not only have the capacity but exceed a good deal of the adult population. I believe if memory serves, 9% of the population has an IQ of 70-80 and 16% from 80-95. So if the standard is applied equally a good deal of children, and we’re not talking all Doogy Houser's here, meet the arbitrary burden.

I don't see what being pro-life has to do with gay people, but explain that one to me.

You said insect produces birth defects and therefor not consensual, so why can’t they just have abortions to remedy your objection?

Now you are in a spot where I don't know where I stand

Giving up so easily? We haven’t even gotten to consensual bestiality yet. So you must concede if you can justify homosexuality you can therefor justify incest in exactly the same way, provided it’s a loving, consensual, monogamous, committed relationship of course. Incestuals should be allowed to marry too if homosexuals can, right? Adoption, survivorship, insurance benefits…too?

Animals give consent in many ways; we know this from their fight/flight/bite responses. I would like to see you approach/touch an animal who will not give you consent. And this is just the beginning unless you want to get into some really repugnant debate, it’s vulgar enough to try and prove a negative much less these correlations.

Anyway, if consent is the burden for homosexuality it is at least arguable that other perversions are equally justifiable. For every reason one can give for the practice of homosexuality, equally the same can be given for incest, bestiality and pedophilia.

It’s hypocritical to protect one class of perversion over another, slippery slope be damned.

[LarryLied]

Prager is terrific. The Torah started the first female liberation movement! That concept short circuts liberal brain cells. But it is true. Whatever channels guy's "energy" into the family is good for women.

[Maelstrom]

http://www.ashland.edu/seminary/semcours/PC%20877%20F01%20Black%20Detroit.htm

http://www.dana.org/books/press/progressreport/update02.pdf

http://content.health.msn.com/content/article/1700.50529

http://www.ott.emory.edu/share/technologies/descriptions/97057.html

Quoting the review of a book:

"Huebner, H. (1993). Endorphins, eating disorders, and other addictive behaviors.

New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Co.

UWEC Call #: RC 533 .H84 1993

In this book, a music therapist may find the considerations toward reward-mediated behavior very helpful when working with clients who have eating disorders. This book explains anorexia and bulimia very well, along with treatment methods specially designed for eating disorders. Other addictive behavioral disorders are discussed as well. "

Now, I don't agree with everything anybody says, but I sincerely hope we can now put this straw man to rest. Homosexuality is also an addictive behavioral disorder.

[Maelstrom]

Just keep telling yourself that the billions of people that don't think just like you have a problem, and you are perfectly normal. At least I am open to the fact that I am not always right or know all the answers as I have shown in this thread. Tell your brother GOD hi when you see him, since you are the only 2 perfect people that I know.

Are you still open to the idea that you're not right when you are right?
That might be grounds for necessary psychological counselling.

There is nothing wrong in not being right. However, there is something wrong in not accepting the fact when you are right. Acknowledging when someone is right on one very narrowly defined subject with respect to a specific question doesn't make that person perfect. Neither is it a reason to become upset.

I can acknowledge my mistakes when they happen. However, I believe there are some things are important enough not to back down without conclusive evidence that I'm wrong. Now that I have children, the homosexuality issue becomes very important due to the fact that it's being trained to children in elementary schools.

It wasn't as important when I was much younger, and first began my research in this area due to the frequency and persistence of homosexual advances. I had no problem with the attitude, "live and let live". That came to a crashing halt when I had children and learned that children were being presented with homosexuality as an acceptible lifestyle for the children to follow, complete with depiction, description and simulation.

[Uncle Bill]

A UNICEF-funded book being passed out at the United Nations Child Summit encourages children to engage in sexual activities with other minors and with homosexuals and animals

Child sex book given out at U.N. summit

Should Supreme Court justices be horsewhipped? - Virtual Child Porn's Very Real Consequences

Baby rape: Epidemic of abuse in South Africa

The deaf baby cult: Joseph Farah on lesbians who hoped for kids with disability

Lesbians: We Made Our Baby Deaf on Purpose

Bush Appoints Four More Homosexual Activists

The Truth About Homosexuals

Veteran Teacher Traumatized at "Fistgate."

Homosexuals Plan "FistFest" At California Sex Club

Same-Sex 'Marriage' Goes Global

Sex, Lies, Videotape, Teenagers, Drugs, Blackmail, and Death

Bush Considers Political Alliance With Gays

Bush "Better Person" After Meeting with Homosexual Republicans

Bush and Homosexual Agenda

An extremist homosexual activist has been hired to a prominent position in the Bush Administration

The Increasingly Homosexual Bush Administration

Bush Paves Way for GOP Homosexual Embrace

Bush’s Homosexual Outreach

Bush's openly homosexual appointments bother conservatives

Homosexual GOP Convention Will Celebrate Bush

Child Molestation and Homosexuality

Violence and Homosexuality

Medical Consequences of What Homosexuals Do

Homosexuality and Child Molestation; The Link, The Likelihood, The Lasting Effects

How Homosexual Activists Intend to Capture the Next Generation

Web-porn scandal rocks White House - West Wingers downloaded gay, bestial, teen sex videos, jamming firewall system

Cyberporn scandal hits Commerce Department Personnel security officer suspended; follows HUD, White House abuses

Porn downloaders 'ought to be fired' White House personnel chief condemns abuse of government time and computers

The Commerce sex scandals

Molestation as protected behavior

PROVINCETOWN INTRODUCES SODOMY TO PRESCHOOLERS

White House, Gore, liberal democrats recruiting homosexuals

Will the GOP Become the Party of Gays and Lesbians?

How pedophiles have targeted the Boy Scouts

Fierce effort to destroy the Boy Scouts

The Truth About Homosexuals

Homosexual Activists Want to Silence Nation's Youth

The Center for Arizona Policy - GLSEN in Public Schools

Teachers Union Plans To Take Up Homosexual Resolution,IT'S BEING TAUGHT IN SCHOOLS NOW!

Gay-straight clubs growing in schools

NEA OKs Resolution to Protect Gays

Dobson to Californians: Quit public schools

---

The Homosexual Lobby

Laissez Faire City Times
By Robert L. Kocher
Vol 5, No 43, October 22, 2001

Partial Excerpt:

My theoretical views are held without apology. While homosexuality is of several forms, I consider it overall to be a serious disorder marked by various forms of highly motivated thought process distortion which adherents, especially with the rise of the gay and lesbian movement, demand be found accepted, militantly proselytize, and forcefully inculcate, or in other cases transmit because it is the basic believed operating premise in their life and they know nothing else. Many gay personalities are characterized by instability with unpredictable and driven impulses which may be only transiently resisted or transiently oriented in direction. For this reason I am adamantly against homosexuals having access to, or being conferred legitimizing authority over, kids. It is ill-advised and imprudent to the point of violating a fiduciary responsibility to, and disregard of a reasonable or prudent standard of care for, the kids. The courts and other parts of the legal system, if they are not willing to recognize this fact, should at least allow parents or organizations entrusted with the care and maturing of children and teenagers the right to make such evaluation themselves and act accordingly—and in a free society the primacy of such rights supersedes the wishes being asserted by the homosexual world.

Are there vast psychodynamic differences between people who engage in homosexual acts with adults versus those who engage in homosexual acts with kids? It could be argued to be so, and is being so argued. Anything and any position can be argued. However, given the serious pathology of either condition I would doubt trustworthiness or stability of the distinction between the two. Don't expect any slack. Get your head straight before being allowed access to kids. In a free society I am allowed to hold that position and apply it in my own life. In a free society I am allowed to form associations with those of similar views and we have the right to apply those views within that association.

Competent, and that means COMPETENT, psychotherapy would in many cases relieve homosexuals of internal stresses they don't know they have while also relieving them of their condition. Whether they want to undergo that difficult process is their own decision. Whether they want to vehemently deny such possibility exists for purposes of defending biological/organic permission or other argued validities of homosexuality is also their decision.

Doing It For, and With, the Children

In 1973 the homosexual lobby was powerful enough to succeed in getting homosexuality removed from the list of mental disorders acknowledged by formal psychiatry despite the fact 70% of psychiatrists still considered it a disorder. This has since been celebrated by the gay and lesbian movement as uncontrovertable certification of non-pathological normality (which it wasn't) that has become both a social assertion and has also worked its way into being enforced under law. We are now at the point where reputable psychological journals are publishing papers describing sex between men and boys as benign "intergenerational intimacy." There was some apology after exposure and strong public criticism, but the demonstrated inclination by some journal editors was to view the position as acceptable enough to publish. The view is looked upon as too premature in terms of public acceptance rather than personally or scientifically objectionable. The view finds sympathy in some university departments training students and clinicians. Concurrently, I am seeing a campaign to marginalize any effects of adult homosexual activity with kids on the kids.

At the present rate, within a few years, prohibition of homosexual relationships with children will be overturned as a form of discrimination. This has already been facilitated by legal reasoning that considers activity only as a civil rights issue while skipping over pathological or consequence matters. There is nothing in recent laws or court decisions to prevent it while the logical consequents of laws and court decisions are easily applied in that direction, in some cases by deliberate strategic intention. The arguments are being marshaled with increasing boldness. This was well on its way to becoming de facto law with successful legal action against the Boy Scouts for discrimination against homosexuals with their refusal to let gays become scoutmasters. Lower court actions forcing gays into scout leadership were barely overturned by the United States Supreme Court in a five to four decision affirming Boy Scouts' constitutional right to freedom of association. With the change in one supreme court justice, the court will overturn the previous decision through employment of slightly changed suit wording and manipulation.

Here are excerpts from The Orange County Register, July 28, 2001. Authors: Greg Hardesty and Monica Valencia

Kenneth Teague, who abused as many as 15 boys, remains unremorseful.

Kenneth Eugene Teague, who testified that having sex with boys as young as 9 was therapeutic for them, did not speak at the sentencing, which ended a lurid trial in which the former computer consultant from Irvine acted as his own lawyer.

"I don't consider these to be criminal or bad acts," Teague, 43, said in a jailhouse interview. "I consider myself to be a political prisoner. I'm going to be imprisoned for what I believe, just like a lot of other folks have been." "I've just always had this capacity" for being sexually attracted to boys, Teague said.

In his defense he cited a 1999 study published by the American Psychological Association, the so-called Rind study that concluded child sexual abuse is not necessarily harmful — especially for males. "If done right, in my opinion, it can be a positive experience, a constructive experience," Teague said.

Teague said the activities were a successful way to break down communication barriers with boys and improve their grades in school. They also were acts of love, he said.

"If done right, in my opinion, it can be a positive experience, a constructive experience," Teague said. As Hillary Clinton would say, it's for the children.

It can be seen that various published studies and recent rationalizations have become integrated into his mentality and arguments. This has become a serious trend.

If Teague had not acted as his own attorney but had instead procured a clever civil rights lawyer, he would have stood a good chance of getting a similar ruling by an appeals court that Goins did through parallel rationale.

The present rationale consists of a pattern of leapfrogging over specific reality and important intermediate elements into bland or glittering abstraction. The abstract argument is made, and accepted by the courts, that a person is being persecuted for his beliefs or discriminated against merely for being different. The integrity, quality, rationality, or sane acceptability of those beliefs or differences is skipped over. The distinction between discrimination versus prudent observation and recognition has long sense become a lost concept since the construction of a pathological and sadistic language structure during the 60s. In response to legitimate parental criticism 30 and 35 years ago, a generation of radical or irresponsible brats retorted they were being persecuted for what they believed in. Now, the same illogic is in the court and educational systems.

The Right to a Child

The gay world wants free access to kids. One can argue about what personal investment and ultimate reason there is for their wanting that access. In all matters of human dispute and intent, a mask of insincere pretext can be synthesized and attempted to be substituted for true intention while both denying and ultimately obtaining that intention. In the field of international politics and negotiation, this tactic is a freely practiced expectation. It is now becoming standard procedure in various organized social movements who are hiring and otherwise employing the techniques of convoluted legal advocacy and public relations with increasing cleverness and strategic plan to obtain their goals.

It is either arguable, or deniable, that access to kids obtains the ultimate goal of providing homosexual elements with targets of opportunity for sexual practices. The underlying truth may be completely contradictory to the verbal assertions.

There is also the element of pathological evolution. A given form of pathology demanding to be accepted as healthy and normal receives criticism from the social environment. To defend themselves from this initial criticism various rationalizations are devised and superficial forms of behavioral changes may be adopted by the pathological. In response to still further observations and criticisms, further rationalizations and behavioral changes are interposed in defense. These rationalizations and changes were not a part of the original condition, but are subsequently adopted defenses to obscure, and deflect criticism of, the condition. They continue to be created and superficially adopted to plug holes in the dike. They become desperately held and take a pathological life; including a social, theoretical, and political life; of their own, and may even obscure the original condition from the people with that condition. As part of the evolving theoretical life of its own, there are lesbian professors at what are for practical purposes gay and lesbian departments at universities moving heaven and earth to prove lesbians make the best mothers, with students being expelled for doubting it. As the evolutionary process continues to develop and new layers are added to it, finding the real basis and purpose of anything becomes more difficult.

Pathological evolution is much like a person creating an onion around a self core. New layers of distortion are grown to protect the distorted core in response to external stresses and criticisms. There are assertions and attempts to believe in the layers by those creating them. Successive layers my not even agree with each other, but the outside most recently created layer takes precedence in the attempts to construct defenses.

The homosexual community wants to argue that they are healthy normal. To do so they are pursuing superficial imitation of normality in which heterosexual institutions are being mimicked and the trappings of participation in heterosexual activities will be strategically employed as both argument for, and verification of normality. Thus, although common usage and the dictionary define marriage as a union between a man and a woman, homosexuals demand their activity be called marriage also. Nothing less will do. Conformity to that demand is being imposed by law. For the same purpose homosexuals demand participation in normally heterosexual institutions involving kids. Forced certification of physical trust with children is part of the long term strategy legitimizing and enforcing an image of normality.

So the homosexual world has a number of vested interests in securing free access to kids, any of which may be denied. Anybody is, of course, allowed to disagree with what I've said here. Take your choice of what to believe.

At various homosexual demonstrations one hears the chant, "We're queer. We're here. We've come for your kids." Others in the gay and lesbian world say such people are too radical and don't represent the true gay and lesbian world. Make your own evaluation, sort out who's who, and believe what you will.

"The homosexual community wants to
argue that they are healthy normal."

---

Not a hate crime - 13-year-old Jesse Dirkhising

Jesse Dirkhising's deliverance

The Washington Post gets nasty

Guilty verdict in Dirkhising case

Media tune out torture death of Arkansas boy

[EdReform]

Bump!

Assemblyman MOUNTJOY opposes promotion of homosexuality in public schools.

[tutstar]

bump

[ethical]

Rampant, overt homosexuality has hurt the church, the boy schouts, the girl scouts, public schools, private schools, the movie industry, the medical profession and on and on and on.

[arthurus]

mean ANY group of people and you will be able to find some sicko losers that discredit that group

Unfortunately that homosexual GROUP haas a much higher percentage of sickos, ect. than other groups. Or rather other groups with such large portions of screwballs attempt to isolate themselves from the culture at large whereas it is the goal of the publicly apparent homosexuals to make us all part of their weirdness.

[Clint N. Suhks]

Ed, I'll see your bump and raise it two.

A big fat bumpedy, bump, bump to you Uncle Bill!

[A. Pole]

Bump