dk

1) What OF an adult that solicits a post pubescent 12 year old boy or girl for sex with candy/money/attention?

2) What OF an hiv+ adult that solicits sex ...ditto... boy or girl?

3) What OF an adult that introduces kids to anonymous sex venues where people share partners, drugs and needles?

4) Does the phrase "defining down deviance" ring a bell?

dk

Education, health, and military are examples of compulsory institutions across all Civilizations. If compulsion is wrong then please explain what’s wrong with compulsory quarantines used to contain the SARS epidemic?

RevDahlia

I do not believe I am doing any such thing. In no way have I ever endorsed or approved of such activities, as my posts show.

My point is and was:

That 1 through 3 of the above are terrible things indeed.
That gays are by no means the only people who engage in such activities.
That you are unfairly targeting gays, based on an icky childhood trauma and your disapproval of the gay rights movement's "in-your-face" style, and you're ignoring the fact that straights do EXACTLY the same things. This last is apparently okay with you, though, for as you have said "at least some straight people object". "Defining down deviance"?
That simply having contact with homosexuals when one is growing up is not any more dangerous than having contact with straights. I'd guess that a kid who doesn't know not to take candy from strangers is going to find himself in real trouble anyway, regardless of the sexual orientation of the candy-wielder.

At least in you have finally used language which condemns all adults who take advantage of children, not just gays.

Fact is: too many grownups have prurient interest in children, and behave inappropriately towards them. You have yet to prove satisfactorily that the majority of such adults are homosexual, or that homosexuals should always be kept away from kids.

I am sorry you had a bad childhood experience, but it is unfair of you to base a sweeping generalization on that experience.

Kimpatsu

The military isn't compulsory. Education is compulsory for children only. And health is not compulsory; you have a right to refuse treatment if you wish.

dk

RevDahlia: That 1 through 3 of the above are terrible things indeed.
That gays are by no means the only people who engage in such activities.
dk: I don’t want any proponents of anal sex to have intimate access to children.

RevDahlia: That you are unfairly targeting gays, based on an icky childhood trauma and your disapproval of the gay rights movement's "in-your-face" style, and you're ignoring the fact that straights do EXACTLY the same things. This last is apparently okay with you, though, for as you have said "at least some straight people object". "Defining down deviance"?
dk: My childhood wasn’t traumatic. The Gay Rights Movement fights for legitimization of anonymous anal sex, intimate access to kids, and lower age of consent laws. You figure it out, I already have.

RevDahlia: That simply having contact with homosexuals when one is growing up is not any more dangerous than having contact with straights. I'd guess that a kid who doesn't know not to take candy from strangers is going to find himself in real trouble anyway, regardless of the sexual orientation of the candy-wielder.
dk: Its contact of the intimate kind that troubles me.

RevDahlia: At least in you have finally used language which condemns all adults who take advantage of children, not just gays.
dk: My target has been Gay Rights Movement, but if you know of any other groups that promote anal sex to children I’ll be happy to target them.

RevDahlia: Fact is: too many grownups have prurient interest in children, and behave inappropriately towards them. You have yet to prove satisfactorily that the majority of such adults are homosexual, or that homosexuals should always be kept away from kids.
dk: Why do you think the Gay Rights Movement fights in court for pornographic theatres, statutory rapists, intimate access to children and sex venues?

RevDahlia: I am sorry you had a bad childhood experience, but it is unfair of you to base a sweeping generalization on that experience.
dk: I specifically target the Gay Rights Movement, hardly a sweeping generalization.

dk

You crack me up, don't worry your pretty little head.

Kimpatsu

There, straight from the horse's mouth: an admission of bigotry.

dk

The Gay Rights Movement is no more a sacred cow than the KKK.

Kimpatsu

You're comparing the gay rights movement to the KKK? :banghead:

RevDahlia

Now, hold on just one doggone minute. Where has any mainstream gay rights group (ie, NOT NAMBLA,) advocated anal sex with children?! Have ACT UP or Queer Nation or the Log Cabin Republicans or or or... said anything at all about anal sex with children?

dk, i think you're conflating two separate issues. The gay rights movement has traditionally used pretty explicit imagery, tis true, I can understand how that could make you -- and a lot of people-- uncomfortable. But what has that to do with anal sex with children?

Can you find me one published statement by a mainstream gay rights group which advocates anal sex with children? Just one? If the movement as a whole cheerfully advocates as much, this should be easy.

Well, damned if I didn't find a porn video with an anal scene or two in my stepfather's underwear drawer when I was thirteen. And here I am, a drug-addled gutter prostitute, just as you predicted will happen if "proponents of anal sex" have access to children.

Straight couples have anal sex all the time. It is becoming increasingly popular, even among (gasp) married couples. Should straight couples who practice anal sex not be permitted to have children, or access to other people's children? How do you propose to enforce this? Kindly answer my question, please, and don't dodge it with another absolutist statement.

Since when does "intimate access to children" guarantee that sexual abuse will take place? Some straight men molest little girls; does that mean my straight father should not have had "intimate access" to me when I was little?

You make a huge assumption here. By "intimate access" you are referring to gay marriage and adoption, and you also are referring to molestation.
For the last time: where did you get the idea that all, or even most, or even a significant number, of gay people molest kids?
Also for the last time: how is this any different from straight people molesting kids?

I won't even get into the fact that placing porn theaters on the same level as stautory rape is laughable on the face of it. I won't even bother digging up any articles about heterosexual skin-flick proprietors fighting to keep their smut shacks open.

You keep making these assertions about the alleged misdeeds of the Gay Rights Momvement as a whole; I challenge you to come up with ANYTHING ANY mainstream gay rights group has published or stated which condones child molestation.

NAMBLA does not count, as it's been an embarrasment to the mainstream gay rights movement for years and has a tiny membership.

Last:
Every fact i stated above is true, but the thesis is not.... obviously. Why?

[Edited to fix some typos]