Posted on 08/30/2002 3:58:34 AM PDT by JCG
Edited on 05/07/2004 7:30:50 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
The recent decision of Big Brothers-Big Sisters of America making it mandatory for local chapters to accept homosexual volunteers makes no sense to any thinking adult or concerned parent. I am also very disturbed the Springfield News-Leader is endorsing this decision.
(Excerpt) Read more at springfieldnews-leader.com ...
This is the central point. The experience of the Catholic Church, in which a minority of priests (homosexuals), has caused 95% of the sexual molestations (against teenage boys) vividly illustrates the truth of Dr. Reisman's observations. Clearly, homosexual men a far, far more likely to molest teenage boys than heterosexual men are likely to molest teenage girls. If homosexual priests were not allowed close contact with teenage boys, the Catholic Church would not now be mired in deep shame, scandal, and the wreckage of lives its policies have produced.
This is a homosexual lie. Dr. Reisman's research, or the part I have seen, relies on numerous studies conducted over the years. Dr. Reisman has said on many occassions that the only reason she has undertaken this sort of research is to product kids - like the thousands of teenage boys molested by homosexual priests in the Catholic Church (and in the Boy Scouts - prior to the enactment of homosexual molestation prevention policies).
You're right. Her research is exhaustively documented and footnoted.
Of course. Which is why 85% of Boy Scout parents don't want their sons out on overnight camping trips with homosexual men.
That proves all your links are filled with invalid info and everything Kinsey said is absolute truth. It also proves his "research" methods and findings are beyond reproach. Therefore, Big Brothers and Big Sisters are correct in their assertions and the priests who molested boys are not gay.
Wow, thanks to Poppy Dixon for clearing all that up.
The ‘‘gay life’’ is short, lonely and filled with cheating, insecurity, disease and danger.
So they're not "gay" after all.
Dr. Cameron has been the Gay-stapo's whipping boy for everything involving research indicating that homosexuality is not consistent. I have listened to interviews with Judith Reisman and read many of the press releases on her site, and I cannot remember her citing any of Cameron's work for her conclusions. If they have to resort to the smear-by-association strategy, chances are she's clean as a whistle.
Dr. Reisman is a heroine of mine, because she had the courage to say loudly what others had known but were reluctant to say: Alfred Kinsey, the progenitor of the so-called "New Morality" that spawned a culture that constantly turns up the hedonism level (slowed only briefly by the first decade of AIDS) is the proverbial naked emperor, and a child-rapist on top of all that.
The contention in the Sheppard case was that he was killed because he was homosexual. That is why the media made a fuss: It was supposedly an example of the virulence of homophobia in our society, etc., etc. Therefore, it makes some sense to compare the Sheppard case to the murder of James Byrd, where the motivation for the killing was apparently the victim's minority status (in Byrd's case, as a black man).
As far as I know, no one has ever claimed that Dirkhising was killed because he was straight. (I don't know that it's ever even been established that he was straight.) Therefore, the Dirkhising case does not serve as a counter-example of the virulence of gays' hatred of heterosexuals, and so is not a useful comparison to the Sheppard case.
In fact, I can't think of any useful comparison to the Sheppard case, i.e., an instance when a couple of gay men beat a straight man to death because he was straight.
Nevertheless, it might make sense to compare the Dirkhising case to the many recent cases in the news where presumably straight men violated, then killed, little girls. In all those situations, the victim was killed in connection with a (twisted) sexual act.
But, of course, if we were to compare the Dirkhising case to the recent rapes/murders of little girls, it wouldn't be as satisfying would it? After all, the ratio of gay rapist/murderers to straight rapist/murderers wouldn't be one-to-one. So that wouldn't serve the "agenda" of the Reismanites.
If they were, they were dressed as altar boys.
Gotcha.
I can't think of any useful comparison to the Sheppard case, i.e., an instance when a couple of gay men beat a straight man to death because he was straight.
The motivation of the killers is more important than their actions? Huh?
Who has the agenda?
Consequently,if a person has done research that points to a certain element of society as being at fault,is on the payroll of someone you do not like,you need to share that information with us.After all it would indeed be tragic if we were all led down a path that led us to false conclusions.This would in truth,delay fixing the problem and more little boys might be abused and as I said earlier,we all know how incensed you are about that.
So speak up or I will believe that your only objective is to destroy the Catholic Church and make a little money from your lawsuit and provide work for your compadres in the legal profession.
Furthermore,you are incorrect in your assertion about her credentials and methodology and I would bet you know that too. With respect to the P.O. Box,do you understand the danger that people who are not p.c. are in? Professionally and phyically they can be silenced.She is very brave as are so many others who have done studies that have come to the same conclusions.
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.