Obama orders end to defense of marriage act

[glennac]

A molestor doesn't fall into either group, they exist in both and I can't see anyone thinking it's ok.

Well other than the fact that gays are only about 17 to 33 times more likely to be child molester per ca-pita in the gay population vs the heterosexual population. This depends on if you use 2% or 1% of the population is gay.

This is based on all the numerous studies done on the total number of kids molested by gays or heterosexuals and their respective percentage in the total population. Here is just one study there are many more saying the same thing. Thank you, thank you very much

"Drs. Freund and Heasman of the Clark Institute of Psychiatry in Toronto reviewed two studies on child molesters and calculated that 34% and 32% of the sex offenders were homosexual. In cases these doctors had handled, 36% of the molesters were homosexuals. (Freund, K. “Pedophilia and Heterosexuality vs. Homosexuality,” Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 1984; 10:193-200)
From these studies and many more, it is evident that homosexuals molest children at a far greater rate than do their heterosexual counterparts. While they comprise only 1-2% of the population, they are responsible for upwards of a third or more of all sexual molestations of children."


http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Evils..._molesters.htm

"The institute, after reviewing more than 19 studies and peer-reviewed reports in a 1985 "Psychological Reports" article, found that homosexuals account for between 25 and 40 percent of all child molestation."

http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=13722

Read more: Report: Pedophilia more common among 'gays' http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=13722#ixzz1EvCc36uN

[Roddy73]

Hmmm...I love coming to this forum, I always learn something.

I wonder how many of the abusers were in the closet and chose molestation to get their jollies and stay in the closet, (until they got caught).

Like would the stats change if it was more socially acceptable to be gay.

(not arguing, just wondering)

[garya505]

Hmmm...I love coming to this forum, I always learn something.

I wonder how many of the abusers were in the closet and chose molestation to get their jollies and stay in the closet, (until they got caught).

Like would the stats change if it was more socially acceptable to be gay.

(not arguing, just wondering)

You're suggesting that the abusers victimize children because they can't be openly gay, which is little silly. If they feel that way, they could just stay in the closet and find an adult to have homosexual sex with. There are plenty of them around.

No, they choose children because they are attracted to them sexually. That would be the same whether they were in the closet or openly gay. This is why the residivism rates are high for people who sexual abuse children.

[BACnet]

Well other than the fact that gays are only about 17 to 33 times more likely to be child molester per ca-pita in the gay population vs the heterosexual population. This depends on if you use 2% or 1% of the population is gay.

This is based on all the numerous studies done on the total number of kids molested by gays or heterosexuals and their respective percentage in the total population. Here is just one study there are many more saying the same thing. Thank you, thank you very much

"Drs. Freund and Heasman of the Clark Institute of Psychiatry in Toronto reviewed two studies on child molesters and calculated that 34% and 32% of the sex offenders were homosexual. In cases these doctors had handled, 36% of the molesters were homosexuals. (Freund, K. “Pedophilia and Heterosexuality vs. Homosexuality,” Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy, 1984; 10:193-200)
From these studies and many more, it is evident that homosexuals molest children at a far greater rate than do their heterosexual counterparts. While they comprise only 1-2% of the population, they are responsible for upwards of a third or more of all sexual molestations of children."

What are the numbers like if they take the priests out of the debate? I assume it comes closer to parity when Catholics are removed from the equation.

[Roddy73]

You're suggesting that the abusers victimize children because they can't be openly gay, which is little silly. If they feel that way, they could just stay in the closet and find an adult to have homosexual sex with. There are plenty of them around.

No, they choose children because they are attracted to them sexually. That would be the same whether they were in the closet or openly gay. This is why the residivism rates are high for people who sexual abuse children.

The power they would have over the child not telling is what I was thinking, safer than having a boyfriend. But I googled that NAMBA that was posted, holy crap! There are some twisted folks in this world.

[glennac]

What are the numbers like if they take the priests out of the debate? I assume it comes closer to parity when Catholics are removed from the equation.

I googled the numbers. Well for that to be the case then with only 41,000 priests in the country with 310 million and say 1.5% gay you have a population of 4.6 million gays and lets say you have say 5% of the priests gay then that would account for only 2,050 gay priests.

Now with a composite average of 15% of all men and women have been sexually molested at least once that would make the number of cases in the US to be say more than 640,000 thousands cases a year. Go figure. Now you show me statistics where it is basically only RC gay priests doing committing this crime. You can't.

I'm sorry it is the gay community at large responsible for their hedious crimes against children in terms of 17 to 33 times that of heterosexuals. What is your thing with the gays anyhow? Thank you, thank you very much.

[Mr Bill]

No, they choose children because they are attracted to them sexually. That would be the same whether they were in the closet or openly gay. This is why the residivism rates are high for people who sexual abuse children.

I agree, also IMO any gay person, their hard drive is spinning but the OS hasn't been installed, there is no telling what else they are capable of were statistics of them being gay or not have been keep. There is no doubt I don't care what anyone wants to preach to me, they were not born gay, somewhere along life's road they chose that lifestyle. If people were born gay, why is there records of folks that were gay changed their life and are now straight?

[RoBoTeq]

Put aside your religious beliefs for a second, isn't freedom about everybody having the right to do what they want to without persecution?

It's kind of un-american to not allow gay marriage isn't it?

All the gay parents I've met are very stable people who love their child and work hard to be a good parents.

And equating homosexuality with child molesting is just silly.

It's no wonder your president won't say he supports it.

Would you please show us one thing about marriage ever in history that even hints to marriage, designed by the very religious beliefs that you would like for us to just toss aside, has ever been about anything other then a union between a man and a woman?

You so callously want to dismiss our theological beliefs on a subject that comes from those very beliefs. And then you have the audacity to be a blowhard about peoples rights?! I suppose to you, people of theological faith should have no rights! What a hypocrite!

[ga-hvac-tech]

In basic college psychology 101, we are taught the 'nature/nurture' influence on mental and emotional development. In a nutshell here it is:

Nature is what is born into folks; nurture is what folks grow up around and accept as 'normal' because it is what they grew up with. Example: A kid growing up in a household where alcohol is stocked and responsibly consumed, has a different attitude towards drinking than a kid that grew up in a household on the wagon... Simple common sense, right.

To say one was 'born' gay or lesbian is to say they have a different gene... However who is to say they did not learn the gay/lesbian (G/L) lifestyle because they grew up around it?

I read a VERY detailed report about a year ago... concerning diabetes. Seems someone that eats waaay too much sugar all their life... will contract 'type 2 diabetes'... we all know that... What was amazing is: The person that went down this road actually had a gene change... they now have a diabetic gene... something they were NOT born with. Folks, this is documented. SOOOO

Who is to say a G/L person was born with a different gene... perhaps they developed it by lifestyle choices?

It is just not part of nature to create a race that cannot reproduce... that is all the proof I need to say: G/L is NOT natural.

So if we say it is learned... then we have to accept that someone has to take responsibility for what kids learn... and traditionally that is the parents... But in reading this thread... I read that is seems PC to allow folks with twisted minds (G/L) to raise kids...

Someone tell me why this is not dangerous to the emotional health of the kids, and potentially the nation?

IMO it is not a rights issue... because the rights of one do not trump the rights of the many. If this were so, then I would have the right to build dangerous things that go boom... and we all know if I do that... I will end up loosing my freedom.

[ga-hvac-tech]

Would you please show us one thing about marriage ever in history that even hints to marriage, designed by the very religious beliefs that you would like for us to just toss aside, has ever been about anything other then a union between a man and a woman?

You so callously want to dismiss our theological beliefs on a subject that comes from those very beliefs. And then you have the audacity to be a blowhard about peoples rights?! I suppose to you, people of theological faith should have no rights! What a hypocrite!

I agree Robin, hypocrite. To say 'leave your theology behind'... yet ask one to respect others 'views' is wanting to define the coin based on who holds it. Two-faced thinking IMO... or denial might be a better word.

IMO what the liberal element wants is a 'no responsibility' lifestyle, where their brains are 'gods'... Imagine: If I think it, I can do it... If I do not like it... I do not have to do it... The ultimate narcissism IMO.

[RoBoTeq]

Why do people care so much about what happens in other people's bedrooms?

This has nothing to do with marriage. I don't care who you want to do what ever you want to do it with as long as it doesn't involve children. That has noting to do with homosexual's attacking marriage.

If marriage is bastardized by homosexual's into being something it was never intended to be, then marriage is no longer the thing it was designed for and therefore no longer has any meaning or value for it's original intent.

Marriage is a theologically designed union between a man and a woman and there is absolutley nothing in history to deny or defy that fact. Why in hell can't obnoxious fags just leave others alone and stop attack the values of those who try to live by theologically moral standards? Most people have no problem if homosexuals want to be commited to one another in a civil union, giving them all of the governmental rights that a married couple have. Why do these arrogant, hateful deviants insist on attacking the values of others?

[RoBoTeq]

Not gay related.
Not gay Related
Not gay Related
Not gay Related
Ok- this one is gay related
Not gay Related

Looking over your list of issues, it seems pretty clear that you dislike your new theoretical neighbors because they are flaming liberals, not because they are liberal flamers.

Don't get me wrong, I don't know anyone who would want to live next door to the people you described either. I just don't think that their bedroom is the issue here...

Why do you keep mentioning the bedroom? Do you believe that marriage only has to do with the bedroom? There are people who have sex with animals in their bedroom, should they be able to marry those animals? Marriage is not about physical activity in the bedroom. Marriage is about a man and a woman being united together as one in the sight of God and with the blessing of God. Marriage is based on theology. Homosexuals are attacking theology when they insist on defying values and virtues of theology.

[RoBoTeq]

The gay sector of our society has the same deversities as the straight sector. A young chick dressing like a slut in public is the same as a young fag prancing in a pride parade.

We really don't need to know this much about your sexual preferences.

My kids went to school with other kids that had gay parents, boring old gay parents. We'd stand around at school functions and birthday parties and make small talk the same as usual.

I too have had many social interactions with homosexuals in various context's including one of my sons better teachers and a man I highly respected as a Scout leader in the Boy Scouts of America. What does this have to do with homosexuals attacking the rights for heterosexuals to follow theological practices?

I've fixed furnaces for old gay couples that are just as picky and nervous about the job as old straight people.

Once again; so what? Several of my better customers were homosexuals with two of the real flamers. None of them showed any desire to attack my beliefs and try to demean the sanctity of marriage as a man/woman relationship steeped in theological origins and traditions.

What they do in their bedroom grosses me out too but I don't think it's right not to acknowledge their unions and ability to raise a family.

They have every right to civil unions with all of the legal benefits of a married heterosexual couple. That is not good enough. They don't just want rights for themselves, they want to destroy the rights of others. As far as their ability to raise a family goes, do you not think that children have a right to both maternal and paternal parentage? It's bad enough that we have so many single parent homes as it is, now you are proposing making it even more difficult for children being raised by two moms or two dads.

My kids reactions to gay parents and the transgender couple we had living in our apartment in Vancouver really surprised me. We just explained that they were different than us but nice people that derserve a hello and that's what my girls did.

I got no problems with that. All people should be treated as they behave. A good neighbor is a good neighbor no matter what he or she prefers to do naked with other people.

When they start to learn about sex in a few years I'm sure I'll have more questions but that really is a seperate issue than their friends nice parents.

Good luck with that one. If you tell your children that homosexuallity is just as ok as any other form of sex, then you cannot have any problems with your children becoming promiscuous with both males and females because; what the hay; anything goes....right?