GFR7
New member
aCW, What do you think of this story? :think:
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=4233570#post4233570
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?p=4233570#post4233570
Why Homosexuality MUST Be Recriminalized! Part 3
- Thread starter aCultureWarrior
- Start date
- Status
Feel free to talk about it here, and of course give the followers of this thread your LGBTQueer/sexual anarchist thoughts on the matter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
When I expose child molesters I want it to be noticeable.
Ummmm, I suppose I could go into the table of contents and find some quotes from an atheist from the UK who defended a famous homosexual activist from his country by the name of Peter Tatchell who wrote a letter to the editor saying the following:
OR I could look for other posts by that same atheist from the UK who joked about pedophilia/pederasty and topped it off with an absolutely brilliant phrase such as....
"Life's a female dog and then you die".
But since the table of contents tells no lies, I'll let interested parties find that information out for themselves.
Speaking of which....a table of contents update is coming soon!
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
When I expose child molesters I want it to be noticeable.
Ummmm, I suppose I could go into the table of contents and find some quotes from an atheist from the UK who defended a famous homosexual activist from his country by the name of Peter Tatchell who wrote a letter to the editor saying the following:
OR I could look for other posts by that same atheist from the UK who joked about pedophilia/pederasty and topped it off with an absolutely brilliant phrase such as....
"Life's a female dog and then you die".
But since the table of contents tells no lies, I'll let interested parties find that information out for themselves.
Speaking of which....a table of contents update is coming soon!
GFR7
New member
:wave2: So long, Shakespeare.
And I really think you ought to have weighed in on that thread; far more important than the dumb
'pediatrician wouldn't see lesbians baby' one, you first class idiot! :wave2:
TracerBullet
New member
Tatchell wasn't advocating child sexual abuse and and claiming he was is just another one of your blatant lies.Ummmm, I suppose I could go into the table of contents and find some quotes from an atheist from the UK who defended a famous homosexual activist from his country by the name of Peter Tatchell who wrote a letter to the editor saying the following:
He was referring to the Rind et al study and subsequent studies that actually looked at adult who had been sexually abused as children. The study found that a small but significant portion of sex abuse survivors were not traumatized and did not look at the experience negatively. It had been previously assumed that all such victims suffer trauma and view the experience negatively. The conclusions of hte study was that we can't just make assumptions about how sexual abuse effects individuals and more importantly that those survivors who don't view it as a negative need to be studies intently to find out just how and why they were able to overcome the abuse and apply those findings to the therapeutic help of other victims
But you get upset when people investigate your claims and find out the information you provide is just false
I guess I missed all of that information that you provided in homosexual activist Peter Tatchell's letter to the editor Traci.
Perhaps you can point out where he said those things?
Oh and Traci..."get tested" and more importantly, stay away from children.
alwight
New member
I didn't notice any abuse in your previous post that made the screen go too wide aCW.Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
When I expose child molesters I want it to be noticeable.
Ummmm, I suppose I could go into the table of contents and find some quotes from an atheist from the UK who defended a famous homosexual activist from his country by the name of Peter Tatchell who wrote a letter to the editor saying the following:
OR I could look for other posts by that same atheist from the UK who joked about pedophilia/pederasty and topped it off with an absolutely brilliant phrase such as....
"Life's a female dog and then you die".
But since the table of contents tells no lies, I'll let interested parties find that information out for themselves.
Speaking of which....a table of contents update is coming soon!
We've been through that Tatchell quote mine thing before aCW and is nothing to do with my position here, no matter how hard you try to paint it as such.
As I've said many times before, underage sex is against the law and imo should remain so.
However some sex happens between underage children themselves and Tatchell himself was not condoning it but was simply pointing out that not all such sex was unwanted nor in his opinion always did any damage. He actually implied that it was indeed generally wrong, just not always, which is imo arguably so at least.
CNN's Sally Kohn says 'I am gay and want my daughter to be gay too'
Homosexuality is: forbidden (Lev. 18:22), considered an abomination (1 Kin. 14:24), punishment for (Lev. 20:13), unclean (Rom. 1:24, 26, 27). :vomit:
Homosexuality is: forbidden (Lev. 18:22), considered an abomination (1 Kin. 14:24), punishment for (Lev. 20:13), unclean (Rom. 1:24, 26, 27). :vomit:
Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
Ummmm, I suppose I could go into the table of contents and find some quotes from an atheist from the UK who defended a famous homosexual activist from his country by the name of Peter Tatchell who wrote a letter to the editor saying the following:
(If only homosexualists took the indoctrination of innocent children by proud and unrepentant homosexuals as seriously as a wide screen...).
There are different kinds of abuse Al: Encouraging a child to partake in a filthy disease ridden behavior that often times brings early death and without repentance, will lead to eternal damnation is one of them.
Nice try Al, but Tatchell said no such thing in the attached letter to the editor when it came to sex between under aged children, he was only talking about adult-child sex.
That being said: If "Several of my friends gay and straight, male and female had sex with adults from the ages of 9 to 13. None feel they were abused. All say that it was their conscious choice and gave them great joy" isn't straight out of the North American Man Boy Love Association/NAMBLA and Pedophile Information Exchange/PIE handbooks, nothing is.
I'll give you the same fatherly advice that I gave Traci and you can pass it on to Peter Tatchell and others that represent your "community":
Stay away from children.
Ummmm, I suppose I could go into the table of contents and find some quotes from an atheist from the UK who defended a famous homosexual activist from his country by the name of Peter Tatchell who wrote a letter to the editor saying the following:
(If only homosexualists took the indoctrination of innocent children by proud and unrepentant homosexuals as seriously as a wide screen...).
There are different kinds of abuse Al: Encouraging a child to partake in a filthy disease ridden behavior that often times brings early death and without repentance, will lead to eternal damnation is one of them.
Nice try Al, but Tatchell said no such thing in the attached letter to the editor when it came to sex between under aged children, he was only talking about adult-child sex.
That being said: If "Several of my friends gay and straight, male and female had sex with adults from the ages of 9 to 13. None feel they were abused. All say that it was their conscious choice and gave them great joy" isn't straight out of the North American Man Boy Love Association/NAMBLA and Pedophile Information Exchange/PIE handbooks, nothing is.
I'll give you the same fatherly advice that I gave Traci and you can pass it on to Peter Tatchell and others that represent your "community":
Stay away from children.
GFR7
New member
Okie :think:
First, What are the implications for family, marriage, parenting? The future? Ancestry and genetics?
Second, I think it's dreadful and evil and Frankensteinian; spitting in the face of natural law and nature and God. I think it is postmodern Orwellian horror, and threatens the fabric of life and the meaning of conception..........But I have been against ALL third party reproduction as my good scholars on Public Discourse have as well.....
http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2015/02/2...nts-could-become-a-reality-in-just-two-years/
Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior View Post
Again: Feel free to share it here, but I want your input before I comment.
Fair enough?
Here are my thoughts:
If your moral degenerate allies didn't learn their lesson with the HIV/AIDS/STD epidemic that plagues those who engage in homosex, wait until they go messing with unnatural human creation (i.e. it's not wise to mock God).
See what happens when homosexuality is decriminalized?
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior View Post
Again: Feel free to share it here, but I want your input before I comment.
Fair enough?
Here are my thoughts:
If your moral degenerate allies didn't learn their lesson with the HIV/AIDS/STD epidemic that plagues those who engage in homosex, wait until they go messing with unnatural human creation (i.e. it's not wise to mock God).
See what happens when homosexuality is decriminalized?
U.S. Appoints First-Ever Special Envoy For LGBT Rights
Homosexuality is: forbidden (Lev. 18:22), considered an abomination (1 Kin. 14:24), punishment for (Lev. 20:13), unclean (Rom. 1:24, 26, 27). :vomit:
Homosexuality is: forbidden (Lev. 18:22), considered an abomination (1 Kin. 14:24), punishment for (Lev. 20:13), unclean (Rom. 1:24, 26, 27). :vomit:
TracerBullet
New member
The letter to the editor is in reference to a book review that Tatchell disagrees with. The book, Dares to Speak is primarily about the work of several researchers, primary among them Rind, Tromovitch and Bauserman and what their research has found.
Again their study actually looked at adult who had been sexually abused as children. The study found that a small but significant portion of sex abuse survivors were not traumatized and did not look at the experience negatively. It had been previously assumed that all such victims suffer trauma and view the experience negatively. The conclusions of the study was that we can't just make assumptions about how sexual abuse effects individuals and more importantly that those survivors who don't view it as a negative need to be studied intently to find out just how and why they were able to overcome the abuse and apply those findings to the therapeutic help those who were traumatized by the experience.
I'm sure that since the basic facts of your claim have been found wanting you will now be posting pictures of either drag queens or leather men in attempt to divert attention.
GFR7
New member
:think: .................................. Daddy! :roses:
alwight
New member
Your idea of what constitutes abuse seems to be restricted only to gay people, and is easily disregarded when straight people do very similar things.
Unhealthy lifestyles are bad generally, not only when gays do it. Your mission is dogmatically homophobic aCW, nothing else matters to you apparently.
That's the way you want to read it aCW, but I suppose you would wouldn't you, but I've seen Tatchell in many debates on TV, as an activist, it's what he does, but he is no activist for underage sex and has said so more than once as I recall.
However he doesn't represent me and once again underage sex is not something that I at least am advocating and nether does it mean that because some people may do it, or are generally leading unhealthy lifestyles, that their whole sub-group should therefore be deemed culpable and criminalised.
He still isn't advocating underage sex, and the fact that some underage sex just didn't leave bad feelings or trauma is simply how it is, even if you and your homophobic agenda can't accept that.
You're so full of crap aCW, it's almost funny.
Sorry but your crocodile tears really aren't fooling anyone. :nono:
Could I just point out here that you campaign tirelessly against homosexuality, not the defence of children ...unless of course there is a homosexual involved and a tale you can use or spin. Just like you use your God and ancient scripture as and when it suits your homophobic agenda.
Seriously aCW my fatherly advice to you is that you really have absolutely no credibility at all... find some.
lain:
Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
I guess I missed all of that information that you provided in homosexual activist Peter Tatchell's letter to the editor Traci.
Perhaps you can point out where he said those things?
Boy Traci, you're sure reading a lot into what Peter the pedophile Tatchell said in his Letter to the Editor.
"Several of my friends gay and straight, male and female had sex with adults from the ages of 9 to 13. None feel they were abused. All say that it was their conscious choice and gave them great joy.
While it may be impossible to condone pedophilia, it is time that society acknowledged the truth that not all sex involving children is unwanted, abusive and harmful..
(Because in the your and Peter the Pedophile's LGBTQueer world 9 year old boys and girls really "want it" don't they Traci?)
Hey, did you hear about the new study that just came out? It was done by a group of fathers whose sons were molested by homosexuals. The study shows that the homosexual pedophiles are very clumsy and...
fall down go boom....
a lot.
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
I guess I missed all of that information that you provided in homosexual activist Peter Tatchell's letter to the editor Traci.
Perhaps you can point out where he said those things?
Boy Traci, you're sure reading a lot into what Peter the pedophile Tatchell said in his Letter to the Editor.
"Several of my friends gay and straight, male and female had sex with adults from the ages of 9 to 13. None feel they were abused. All say that it was their conscious choice and gave them great joy.
While it may be impossible to condone pedophilia, it is time that society acknowledged the truth that not all sex involving children is unwanted, abusive and harmful..
(Because in the your and Peter the Pedophile's LGBTQueer world 9 year old boys and girls really "want it" don't they Traci?)
Hey, did you hear about the new study that just came out? It was done by a group of fathers whose sons were molested by homosexuals. The study shows that the homosexual pedophiles are very clumsy and...
fall down go boom....
a lot.
While I normally don't take any interest in the LGBTQueer "studies" that Traci posts throughout this thread, when it comes to kiddy sex and a study showing in essence that these victims of sexual abuse weren't harmed and in fact in many cases "really wanted it", I thought I'd look into the Rind, Tromovitch and Bauserman study (which undoubtedly was financed with LGBTQueer money).
An article, "A Meta-analytic Examination of Assumed Properties of Child Sexual Abuse Using College Samples," published in the July 1998 edition of the Psychological Bulletin resulted in an unprecedented amount of media attention and became the first scientific article to be formally denounced by the United States House of Representatives. The study's authors analyzed the findings of 59 earlier studies on child sexual abuse (CSA) and concluded that mental health researchers have greatly overstated CSA's harmful potential. They recommended that a willing encounter with positive reactions no longer be considered to be sexual abuse; instead, it would simply be labeled adult-child sex . The study's conclusions and recommendations spawned a debate in both the popular and scholarly press. A number of commentators suggested that the study is pedophile propaganda masquerading as science. Others claimed that the authors are victims of a moralistic witch-hunt and that scientific freedom is being threatened. After a careful examination of the evidence, it is concluded that Rind et al. can best be described as an advocacy article that inappropriately uses science in an attempt to legitimize its findings.
http://www.leadershipcouncil.org/1/res/dallam/5.html
Those little boys really "wanted it" didn't they Jerry?
An article, "A Meta-analytic Examination of Assumed Properties of Child Sexual Abuse Using College Samples," published in the July 1998 edition of the Psychological Bulletin resulted in an unprecedented amount of media attention and became the first scientific article to be formally denounced by the United States House of Representatives. The study's authors analyzed the findings of 59 earlier studies on child sexual abuse (CSA) and concluded that mental health researchers have greatly overstated CSA's harmful potential. They recommended that a willing encounter with positive reactions no longer be considered to be sexual abuse; instead, it would simply be labeled adult-child sex . The study's conclusions and recommendations spawned a debate in both the popular and scholarly press. A number of commentators suggested that the study is pedophile propaganda masquerading as science. Others claimed that the authors are victims of a moralistic witch-hunt and that scientific freedom is being threatened. After a careful examination of the evidence, it is concluded that Rind et al. can best be described as an advocacy article that inappropriately uses science in an attempt to legitimize its findings.
http://www.leadershipcouncil.org/1/res/dallam/5.html
Those little boys really "wanted it" didn't they Jerry?
TracerBullet
New member
That is rich considering the false witness you have engaged in concerning Tatchell
TracerBullet
New member
- Status