Dr Rick

versus A not so subtle shift from your usual broad-brush, yguy; of course some homosexual activists and some others as well, are complicit with pedophiles, but that hardly damns the whole movement. See, there is hope for you, afterall...

yguy

I find this sentiment utterly incomprehensible, since my position hasn't changed a lick from the beginning of the thread, despite your juxtaposition of two of my quotes as if to say they contradict each other. They don't.

Hedwig

Actually, if you read what I posted, there is some doubt that NAMBLA was at the gay pride parade of NYC. If they were, they might not have been marching.

Dr Rick

The only sentiment I expressed is that there's hope for you; feel free to argue otherwise, but I won't

No contradiction, just a shift; you've gone from condemning the homosexual rights movement to disparaging some activists. The latter is defensible, the former is not.

Autonemesis

I don't see the self-destruction thing happening, so I am not worried. Every year there are fewer and fewer people like you who care to make a public policy issue out of who sleeps with whom. Why, we even got the Supreme Court to defy stare decisis and overturn itself this year. Things are generally going great for the gay rights movement, though as with any social process, there are some messy bits around too. But overall, I think progress is being made. As for NAMBLA "blackmailing" straight America, I am sure the whole Megan's law thing can be explained away as a diversionary tactic by the pedophile lobby? You really don't have any desire to connect your thoughts to reality, do you?

Fortunately for us, most people do not suffer from your inability to separate the issues of homosexuality among adults, and pedophilia, as evidenced by the trend towards liberalizing the former, while cracking down on the latter.

yguy

You mean this?

"Interesting little side note to all of this, I visited the Heritage of Pride website again today and they had the photos up. To view photos there is a drop list you have to click on and select which entry you want to see before continuing. I went through that list entry for entry and I didn't see NAMBLA anywhere. There is a discliamer on the bottom saying that they tried to get everyone but they might have missed a few...but still, I have to wonder if what the reporter saw were NAMBLA people who were on the sidelines or milling about near the parade route but not actually participating."

That isn't the least bit exculpatory. All it shows is that there are no indications on that site that NAMBLA members were in the parade...just as at sfpride.com, Harry Hay is lionized without any mention of his support for NAMBLA. And a search of either site for NAMBLA yields zero results. How much would it hurt them just to put up a sentence dissociating themselves from these creeps, for crying out loud?

I have a credible witness (assuming he's not some fundamentalist double agent, in which case I'd think they'd smoke him out pretty quick) who claims to have seen a NAMBLA contingent at the parade, and I have you who, never having been to the parade, tell me you don't see them on the website. Were you in my shoes, whose testimony would you find more compelling?

yguy

I meant NAMBLA blackmailing the "gay" rights movement, not straight America.

If anyone is NOT cracking down on pedophilia, it is homosexual activists, generally speaking.

lunachick

I'm sure there are many gays out there who are very vocal about their disgust at paedophiles, and will argue for the child's rights over the adults, and demand incarceration for active paedophiliacs. I know this to be true, because some of those vocal gays are right here at IIDB.

(Edit: Actually, I'll tell you who does the LEAST to crack down on paedophilia - in fact, will even go out of it's way to hide it, or has quiet, unwritten policies that even facilitate paedophilic opportunities - the Church, that's who!)


Incidentally - I find it rather amusing that you had a friend recognise a Nambla supporter at a gay rally. A - one! I bet he'd find even more paedophiles of both gay and straight persuasion at the local Xmas parade.

Also, the Church has a very large proportion of child molesters - I think we should make the Church illegal.

Oh, and - if you look at the stats surrounding paedophilia - victims and offenders - you will see that the far greater proportion of offenders are straight men - and the far greater proportion of victims are girls. Not all. Of, course, not all. But MOST.

[rant] yguy - you are dangerous to little girls because your myopia with regards to the issue of paedophilia refocusses what is a serious child abuse issue into a homosexuality issue. By doing that you give all those men who abuse little girls a great cover (only gays do that kind of nasty thing), and you demonise otherwise innocent people. This does not help to alleviate the problem of child abuse at all. All it does is excerbate it by throwing hate at an unrelated group and blaming them. No evidence, no nothing. It's just their fault - lets' lynch 'em. Reminds me a bit of the days when black men would be lynched over the rapes that wealthy white men had committed. Hey, they were horny savages - must've been them - there's no way it could've been that nice white city official!! [/rant]

Autonemesis

Fred Phelps is the same way, he shows up at pride events even when it's made clear to him that he's not welcome. But you know, a parade on a public street or a festival at a public park can't exclude members of the public from attending, as long as they maintain order. Show me a photo of a NAMBLA contingent in a parade, or of the NAMBLA booth at a festival, on the festival grounds. Show me a copy of a pride weekend program with NAMBLA featured or their endorsement acknowledged. NAMBLA has as much to do with gay pride festivals as does Fred Phelps. The creepy uncle is an apt analogy.

yguy

So do I. Those aren't the people I have a problem with.

Indeed, I've had an acrimonious debate with Catholic on another board about this. Were this board a hotbed of Catholicsm, it would likely happen again here. However, I don't agree that the RCC is more a promoter of pedophilia than militant "gays".

Dane Hall would not, I'm sure, consider me a friend. Since you likely missed the article I posted a few pages back, here's a piece of it:

http://www.gayasburypark.com/rainbowroom/rr061203.htm

A guaranteed inclusion in any piece broadcast on New York City’s Gay Pride Parade: The camera lingers on a shot of middle-aged men, some walking alongside boys who clearly have a number of years to go before they can remove the description “teen” from their on-line chat room profiles. The banner this group marches behind? NAMBLA, aka “The North American Man/Boy Love Association,” – the utterly appalling “organization” who’s stated goal is “to end the extreme oppression of men and boys in mutually consensual relationships.” NAMBLA’s focus, by the way, is one newscasters never fail to point out in their reports.


What does "large" mean?

The far greater proportion of the populace is straight men, so I see nothing noteworthy about that.

That is not my intent with this thread, though you are not alone in that misapprehension.

The only people I'm aware of having "demonized" in this thread are Harry Hay and Allen Ginsberg - and they bloody well deserve it, to say the least.

I haven't thrown hate at anyone, and I'm not blaming homosexuals for pedophilia.

Seems to me I've presented plenty of evidence that at least some homosexual activists are in varying degrees beholden to those who see no problem with pedophilia.

Come on now. You know very well I never said anything like that.

Presumably there was no valid reason to think these men had done anything wrong. There is plenty of reason to think NAMBLA supporters may have done something wrong - and those who make excuses for them are every bit as guilty as the priests you revile.