Reply With Quote
Sure, but you said you were against it because the extremist activism. And not all sexuals are extremist activists.
The same thing that wouldn't keep a sexual from adopting if they hid their sexuality.
Sure, but you said you were against it because the extremist activism. And not all sexuals are extremist activists.
That's my point - there needs to be a better screening process to weed out bad parents - all aspects of a person's life need to be taken into account, be that a violent and inappropriate Grand Wizard or a violent and inappropriate sexual. The thing is, though, that especially with a member of the KKK, those people are living in an organization based on hate, and they teach hate. Most sexual parents, even ones in your supposed "violent" groups don't teach hatred - they are trying to overcome it. Which then, is healthier for a child?
The bottom line is....I'm paraphrasing..but this rings true....
You need a license to drive and be a certain age to drink, rent porn, go to the bar etc....but you don't need any certain tangible or intangble basis to have and raise kids....that's the problem.
To have kids you need sperm and ova, something sexuals have yet to accomplish. Maybe you should rephrase...
God's weeding, by requiring the fertilization of an egg with sperm, is a good start.
Just to play devil's advocate, maybe some people were not meant to conceive.
As a side note, I read an interview with Rosie once, in which she admitted that her being gay probably made life more difficult for her children, but that she wouldn't change anyway. So, her priorities are obviously drawn.
Maybe I shouldn't say change. Maybe, stop practicing, instead.
That's some ty weeding then, because a lot of people that have had children by natural means shouldn't have.
And don't bring God into this, this is not a religious argument, it's about parenting. Unless you think that people can't be good parents if they aren't Judeo-Christian.
My mother being a Methodist minister and having completely conflicting ideals from my own made my life more difficult, but she's not expected to stop practicing.
If you don't mind my prying a bit, how did the different religious ideals make life harder? I'm sincerely curious.
Maybe the government should just regulate procreation. Parents should be required to take an intelligence test before having children, prove they are morally and financially secure, and maintain upstanding parenthood while raising the child... or have their children taken from them and placed in a children's home. We must think of the children at all costs, and the only way to do this is to eliminate all risk of ty parenting.
Unless it involves an unprepared parent having an abortion. Because that's murder, and should be punished as such.
I call BS on this one. Of all the cases that have brought child protection into the news, can you name one that involved gays?More importantly, of the recorded harms to children, which included molestation and physical abuse, 97 percent were attributed to the sexual parent.
If I understand correctly, those numbers only apply to disputes that involved a sexual parent vs. a heterosexual parent.
But like most WorldNetDaily articles and columns, it's conveniently vague.
Spurm has got it!!!!
Bring on the Blood Purity Clause!!! Even money say Bush, Frist, and Delay already have a draft worked up.
I'd hope we would hold God accountable for a better batting average than .500
Friday - June 1, 2001
sexuals more likely to molest kids, study reports
May 30, 2001
By Ken Walker
LOUISVILLE, Ky. (BP)--A social researcher who has studied sexual behavior for 24 years believes the Boy Scouts of America (BSA) has sound reasons for maintaining its prohibition against gay scoutmasters.
A sexual cannot automatically be considered a child molester, said Judith Reisman, president of the Ins ute for Media Education in suburban Louisville, Ky.
But with 17-24 percent of boys being abused by age 18, nearly as many as the 25 percent of girls, there is cause for concern, she said.
Since heterosexuals outnumber the sexual population about 44 to 1, as a group the incidence of sexuals molesting children is up to 40 times greater than heterosexuals, she said.
"You're looking at a much higher rate of abuse," said Reisman, a former university research professor who recently completed a study led, "Crafting Gay Children." "The Department of Justice just released data and the rate of abuse are off the charts."
BSA's policy has been the subject of constant attacks from gay activists, who have convinced a number of school boards to oust the Scouts from board property.
In a story that aired Apr. 1 on CBS, "60 Minutes" also questioned its validity. After California congressman Dana Rohrabacher called the prohibition common sense, reporter Lesley Stahl remarked that common sense turns out to be a myth.
According to the FBI and several clinical studies published in reputable journals, gay men aren't more likely to sexually abuse boys, she said.
"In fact, the largest database of child molesters in the country shows that those who molest boys are over three times more likely to be heterosexual in their adult relationships than sexual," she said.
But Reisman points to figures from a 1991 population study by the U.S. Department of Commerce.
It showed that 8 million girls were abused by age 18 by heterosexual men, a ratio of 1 victim to 11 adult men. However, 6-8 million boys were abused by age 18 by 1-2 million adult sexuals, a ratio of 3-5 victims for every gay adult.
Questioned about Reisman's claims, CBS stuck by its story.
i think gay people should be able to raise foster kids
i dont think you have people breaking the door down to become foster parents of kids whose parents were heterosexual anyway, if a family household that includes sexuals can provide a better home, then it seems like a good idea
and who gives a if they kids get scoffed, theyd get scoffed for being in foster home anyway, kids are assholes
theyd get scoffed for not having brand-name shoes, or for a parent being really fat or really hairy, or having thick glasses
thats the dumbest arguement ive ever heard
Extremely faulty logic.Since heterosexuals outnumber the sexual population about 44 to 1, as a group the incidence of sexuals molesting children is up to 40 times greater than heterosexuals, she said.
It showed that 8 million girls were abused by age 18 by heterosexual men, a ratio of 1 victim to 11 adult men. However, 6-8 million boys were abused by age 18 by 1-2 million adult sexuals, a ratio of 3-5 victims for every gay adult.
sexuals are also more likely to be prisoners, as evidenced by the amount of ass raping in jail cells.
Talk to the Department of Commerce about that. I don't writes 'em, I just reads 'em.
The is the Department of Commerce doing conducting a study of child molestation?
I was wondering that myself!
I have serious doubts as to whether the Dept of Commerce did a study on the sexual preference of child molestors.
I'm willing to bet money that the depart of commerce reported the following stats:
# of Teenage Girls Raped: 8 million
# of Teenage Boys Raped: 6-8 million
# of sexual Men: 1-2 million
The flaws in the logic:
1) The number of sexual men is most likely well understated
2) The assumption that all teenage boys raped were done so by sexual men. Of the young boy molestation I've heard of, a majority are committed by a middle class, married white male. Are these men counted as sexuals in the 6-8 million supposedly raped by gay men? I'm thinking no.
Just looking at the numbers should trigger some common sense... 3-5 boys molested per gay male? You've got a be a moron to buy that... especially since not all gay men are child molestors. Let's say that 20% are (extremely high number), that means that each is guilty of of 15-20 instances of molestation.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions