Tigermike 3,050 Posted March 24, 2005 Share Posted March 24, 2005 I have a question for our demo/lib posters here. Are the members of NAMBLA pedophile's or just homosexuals? NOTE: This is not a trick question, I would like to know your thoughts. Welcome to NAMBLA's Home Page NAMBLA's goal is to end the oppression of men and boys who have mutually consensual relationships. NAMBLA's membership is open to everyone sympathetic to ... http://216.220.97.17/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger Al 0 Posted March 24, 2005 Share Posted March 24, 2005 Why is this question directed only to us? Is there some implication there? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AURaptor 1,126 Posted March 24, 2005 Share Posted March 24, 2005 Why is this question directed only to us? Is there some implication there? 152602[/snapback] I suspect that it has something to do w/ the fact that you'll never see a Pro-NAMBLA sign at a GOP rally or any Conservative event. Just my guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 13,000 Posted March 25, 2005 Share Posted March 25, 2005 Why is this question directed only to us? Is there some implication there? 152602[/snapback] I suspect that it has something to do w/ the fact that you'll never see a Pro-NAMBLA sign at a GOP rally or any Conservative event. Just my guess. 152607[/snapback] I've never seen any "pro-Nambla" signs at an official Dem event and if I did, it would probably be because one of Rove's boys was trying to get a photo op to drive you guys into a lather about pedophile supporting Dems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 13,000 Posted March 25, 2005 Share Posted March 25, 2005 Why is this question directed only to us? Is there some implication there? 152602[/snapback] I suppose after Jeff Gannon there is actually more support for us posing Gay Male Prostitute questions exclusively to the Repubs/"Conservatives" on the board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piglet 0 Posted March 25, 2005 Share Posted March 25, 2005 And don't forget it was Bill Clinton who was responsible for getting NAMBLA passed and sending all our jobs to Mexico. ****** giant sucking sound.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tigermike 3,050 Posted March 25, 2005 Author Share Posted March 25, 2005 Why is this question directed only to us? Is there some implication there? 152602[/snapback] Al, I said it was not a trick question. I am not wanting to paint you into a corner. My only reason for directing it to the libs was that you are the only ones who defend homosexuals at every opportunity. Therefore I wanted your opinion on NAMBLA . Why is this question directed only to us? Is there some implication there? 152602[/snapback] I suppose after Jeff Gannon there is actually more support for us posing Gay Male Prostitute questions exclusively to the Repubs/"Conservatives" on the board. 152614[/snapback] Actually Jeff Gannon never entered my mind when I posted the question. Again I still say it was not meant to be a trick question nor am I wanting to knock your opinion after you post it. I only wanted clarification and an honest answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 13,000 Posted March 25, 2005 Share Posted March 25, 2005 Why is this question directed only to us? Is there some implication there? 152602[/snapback] Al, I said it was not a trick question. I am not wanting to paint you into a corner. My only reason for directing it to the libs was that you are the only ones who defend homosexuals at every opportunity. Therefore I wanted your opinion on NAMBLA . Why is this question directed only to us? Is there some implication there? 152602[/snapback] I suppose after Jeff Gannon there is actually more support for us posing Gay Male Prostitute questions exclusively to the Repubs/"Conservatives" on the board. 152614[/snapback] Actually Jeff Gannon never entered my mind when I posted the question. Again I still say it was not meant to be a trick question nor am I wanting to knock your opinion after you post it. I only wanted clarification and an honest answer. 152659[/snapback] Okay. The overwhelming majority of homosexuals are not pedophiles, and all pedophiles aren't homosexuals. I know of no one who supports NAMBLA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TitanTiger 20,510 Posted March 25, 2005 Share Posted March 25, 2005 I've never understood how one comes to this splitting of the homosexual and pedophile "orientations". Why is a man who is sexually attracted to young boys not considered a homosexual AND a pedophile and one who is attracted to little girls not considered "straight" AND a pedophile. Doesn't make sense to me that you can separate the two. In fact, this very argument sometimes gets thrown out by defenders of homosexuality anytime the pedophilia issue comes up. At some point, some smart cookie says something to the effect of, "Well, it isn't the gays you should be worried about. Most pedophiles are straight men preying on girls..." Why are the girl predators "straight pedophiles" but the boy predators aren't "gay pedophiles"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 13,000 Posted March 25, 2005 Share Posted March 25, 2005 I've never understood how one comes to this splitting of the homosexual and pedophile "orientations". Why is a man who is sexually attracted to young boys not considered a homosexual AND a pedophile and one who is attracted to little girls not considered "straight" AND a pedophile. Doesn't make sense to me that you can separate the two.In fact, this very argument sometimes gets thrown out by defenders of homosexuality anytime the pedophilia issue comes up. At some point, some smart cookie says something to the effect of, "Well, it isn't the gays you should be worried about. Most pedophiles are straight men preying on girls..." Why are the girl predators "straight pedophiles" but the boy predators aren't "gay pedophiles"? 152666[/snapback] I've never heard or used the term "straight pedophiles." If you want to call boy predators "gay pedophiles" go ahead. There are different types of pedophila which are described on this link: http://www.umkc.edu/sites/hsw/issues/pedophil.html This seems to be the type you are referring to: Same-sex pedophilia. While most pedophiles who engage in or fantasize about same-sex children do not participate in heterosexual adult sexual relations, they also deny being homosexual. Instead, the pedophiles are more sexually aroused by male and female children than by either gender of adults. Do you think most homosexual men are pedophiles? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger Al 0 Posted March 25, 2005 Share Posted March 25, 2005 My only reason for directing it to the libs was that you are the only ones who defend homosexuals at every opportunity. It isn't so much a defense of homosexuals as it is an opposition to bigotry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TitanTiger 20,510 Posted March 25, 2005 Share Posted March 25, 2005 i've never heard or used the term "straight pedophiles." If you want to call boy predators "gay pedophiles" go ahead. There are different types of pedophila which are described on this link: http://www.umkc.edu/sites/hsw/issues/pedophil.html Well, it they may not use the exact phrase, but when you argue that most pedophiles are straight men, you're saying the same thing essentially. And I've heard this retort numerous times This seems to be the type you are referring to: Same-sex pedophilia. While most pedophiles who engage in or fantasize about same-sex children do not participate in heterosexual adult sexual relations, they also deny being homosexual. Instead, the pedophiles are more sexually aroused by male and female children than by either gender of adults. Do you think most homosexual men are pedophiles? 152673[/snapback] No. Never said I did. I just wanted someone to answer this question of why people argue so vehemently to make pedophilia an "orientation" all to itself when it seem to me that it's really a combination of two "orientations": straight/gay AND attracted to young boys/young girls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 13,000 Posted March 25, 2005 Share Posted March 25, 2005 i've never heard or used the term "straight pedophiles." If you want to call boy predators "gay pedophiles" go ahead. There are different types of pedophila which are described on this link: http://www.umkc.edu/sites/hsw/issues/pedophil.html Well, it they may not use the exact phrase, but when you argue that most pedophiles are straight men, you're saying the same thing essentially. And I've heard this retort numerous times This seems to be the type you are referring to: Same-sex pedophilia. While most pedophiles who engage in or fantasize about same-sex children do not participate in heterosexual adult sexual relations, they also deny being homosexual. Instead, the pedophiles are more sexually aroused by male and female children than by either gender of adults. Do you think most homosexual men are pedophiles? 152673[/snapback] No. Never said I did. I just wanted someone to answer this question of why people argue so vehemently to make pedophilia an "orientation" all to itself when it seem to me that it's really a combination of two "orientations": straight/gay AND attracted to young boys/young girls. 152676[/snapback] I think an attraction to children tends to be a distinct orientation which most people that are truly attracted to adults of either sex don't have. In fact, pedophilia is recognized as a psychological disorder. Unfortunately, there are many people who do seem to think that homosexuals (i.e. those who have relationships with adults) also routinely prey on children, which isn't generally true. Such misinformation tends to flame (no pun intended) the bigotry that exist even further. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AURaptor 1,126 Posted March 25, 2005 Share Posted March 25, 2005 Why is this question directed only to us? Is there some implication there? 152602[/snapback] I suspect that it has something to do w/ the fact that you'll never see a Pro-NAMBLA sign at a GOP rally or any Conservative event. Just my guess. 152607[/snapback] I've never seen any "pro-Nambla" signs at an official Dem event and if I did, it would probably be because one of Rove's boys was trying to get a photo op to drive you guys into a lather about pedophile supporting Dems. 152613[/snapback] I note you were careful to add " official" Dem event. What about those protesting the GOP convetion? Or during the 'gay-pride' parades? It's safe to say that the NAMBLA gang is more comfortable around the Dems than the GOP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 13,000 Posted March 25, 2005 Share Posted March 25, 2005 Why is this question directed only to us? Is there some implication there? 152602[/snapback] I suspect that it has something to do w/ the fact that you'll never see a Pro-NAMBLA sign at a GOP rally or any Conservative event. Just my guess. 152607[/snapback] I've never seen any "pro-Nambla" signs at an official Dem event and if I did, it would probably be because one of Rove's boys was trying to get a photo op to drive you guys into a lather about pedophile supporting Dems. 152613[/snapback] I note you were careful to add " official" Dem event. What about those protesting the GOP convetion? Or during the 'gay-pride' parades? It's safe to say that the NAMBLA gang is more comfortable around the Dems than the GOP. 152688[/snapback] Regardless of TigerMike's intention, this is where this thread was destined to go. So what's your point? I haven't notice NAMBLA publicly protesting anywhere, not saying they haven't, and I doubt most gay pride groups care to be associated with them, but references to Sen. Byrd's affiliation over 60 years ago aside, the KKK and Aryan Nations are probably more "comfortable" with your/GOP views on affirmative action. David Duke was so "comfortable" with the GOP that he ran as one. So what? What conclusions are we to reach from this? This is another one of those extreme groups that GOP tries to tie to the Dems, with no real basis, to further foster a cartoonish view of what the party is. I've never heard a single elected Dem promote or praise the group or seek their favor. The same isn't true of the GOP and white power extremists, however. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tigermike 3,050 Posted March 25, 2005 Author Share Posted March 25, 2005 Why is this question directed only to us? Is there some implication there? 152602[/snapback] I suspect that it has something to do w/ the fact that you'll never see a Pro-NAMBLA sign at a GOP rally or any Conservative event. Just my guess. 152607[/snapback] I've never seen any "pro-Nambla" signs at an official Dem event and if I did, it would probably be because one of Rove's boys was trying to get a photo op to drive you guys into a lather about pedophile supporting Dems. 152613[/snapback] I note you were careful to add " official" Dem event. What about those protesting the GOP convetion? Or during the 'gay-pride' parades? It's safe to say that the NAMBLA gang is more comfortable around the Dems than the GOP. 152688[/snapback] Regardless of TigerMike's intention, this is where this thread was destined to go. So what's your point? I haven't notice NAMBLA publicly protesting anywhere, not saying they haven't, and I doubt most gay pride groups care to be associated with them, but references to Sen. Byrd's affiliation over 60 years ago aside, the KKK and Aryan Nations are probably more "comfortable" with your/GOP views on affirmative action. David Duke was so "comfortable" with the GOP that he ran as one. So what? What conclusions are we to reach from this? This is another one of those extreme groups that GOP tries to tie to the Dems, with no real basis, to further foster a cartoonish view of what the party is. I've never heard a single elected Dem promote or praise the group or seek their favor. The same isn't true of the GOP and white power extremists, however. 152713[/snapback] Usually when there is a gay pride march/parade/protest, the NAMBLA folks march/parade/protest, with them. This is another one of those extreme groups that GOP tries to tie to the Dems, with no real basis, to further foster a cartoonish view of what the party is. I've never heard a single elected Dem promote or praise the group or seek their favor. Much like you did with this statement: I haven't notice NAMBLA publicly protesting anywhere, not saying they haven't, and I doubt most gay pride groups care to be associated with them, but references to Sen. Byrd's affiliation over 60 years ago aside, the KKK and Aryan Nations are probably more "comfortable" with your/GOP views on affirmative action. David Duke was so "comfortable" with the GOP that he ran as one. So what? What conclusions are we to reach from this? And much like the democrat leadership has recently done with the references to the Nazi's? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tigermike 3,050 Posted March 25, 2005 Author Share Posted March 25, 2005 My only reason for directing it to the libs was that you are the only ones who defend homosexuals at every opportunity. It isn't so much a defense of homosexuals as it is an opposition to bigotry. 152674[/snapback] I am amazed that the bigotry/homophobe card has not been played before this. Because a person is opposed to the political and social agenda of the gay lobby does in no way make them a bigot. Just as taking up for or overlooking deviate behavior does not indicate a higher moral awareness. I asked in another thread if any considered homosexuality a sin. One answered and two abstained from answering that question. Here is another question. If Christians see sin and don't bother to condemn the sin and love the sinner, are they being open minded in order to not be labeled a bigot? At the same time if they condemn the sin and point it out why are they bigots? Why is it that calling homosexuality a sin makes one a bigot, but calling gambling a sin does not? Or calling divorce? Or anything else, it does not matter, pick the sin and call it sin. But the moment you call homosexuality a sin and you are a homophobe and a bigot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 13,000 Posted March 25, 2005 Share Posted March 25, 2005 Why is this question directed only to us? Is there some implication there? 152602[/snapback] I suspect that it has something to do w/ the fact that you'll never see a Pro-NAMBLA sign at a GOP rally or any Conservative event. Just my guess. 152607[/snapback] I've never seen any "pro-Nambla" signs at an official Dem event and if I did, it would probably be because one of Rove's boys was trying to get a photo op to drive you guys into a lather about pedophile supporting Dems. 152613[/snapback] I note you were careful to add " official" Dem event. What about those protesting the GOP convetion? Or during the 'gay-pride' parades? It's safe to say that the NAMBLA gang is more comfortable around the Dems than the GOP. 152688[/snapback] Regardless of TigerMike's intention, this is where this thread was destined to go. So what's your point? I haven't notice NAMBLA publicly protesting anywhere, not saying they haven't, and I doubt most gay pride groups care to be associated with them, but references to Sen. Byrd's affiliation over 60 years ago aside, the KKK and Aryan Nations are probably more "comfortable" with your/GOP views on affirmative action. David Duke was so "comfortable" with the GOP that he ran as one. So what? What conclusions are we to reach from this? This is another one of those extreme groups that GOP tries to tie to the Dems, with no real basis, to further foster a cartoonish view of what the party is. I've never heard a single elected Dem promote or praise the group or seek their favor. The same isn't true of the GOP and white power extremists, however. 152713[/snapback] Usually when there is a gay pride march/parade/protest, the NAMBLA folks march/parade/protest, with them. This is another one of those extreme groups that GOP tries to tie to the Dems, with no real basis, to further foster a cartoonish view of what the party is. I've never heard a single elected Dem promote or praise the group or seek their favor. Much like you did with this statement: I haven't notice NAMBLA publicly protesting anywhere, not saying they haven't, and I doubt most gay pride groups care to be associated with them, but references to Sen. Byrd's affiliation over 60 years ago aside, the KKK and Aryan Nations are probably more "comfortable" with your/GOP views on affirmative action. David Duke was so "comfortable" with the GOP that he ran as one. So what? What conclusions are we to reach from this? And much like the democrat leadership has recently done with the references to the Nazi's? 152715[/snapback] Usually when there is a gay pride march/parade/protest, the NAMBLA folks march/parade/protest, with them. This is your belief/assumption. It is also an unsupported assertion. I haven't notice NAMBLA publicly protesting anywhere, not saying they haven't, and I doubt most gay pride groups care to be associated with them, but references to Sen. Byrd's affiliation over 60 years ago aside, the KKK and Aryan Nations are probably more "comfortable" with your/GOP views on affirmative action. David Duke was so "comfortable" with the GOP that he ran as one. So what? What conclusions are we to reach from this? "Much like did with this statement"? Hardly. I followed it with a, "So what?" The GOP wasn't comfortable with Duke, no matter how comfortable he was with them. Besides, the fact that people may protest the GOP hardly means they're comfortable with the Dems, and it certainly doesn't mean the Dems are comfortable with them. And much like the democrat leadership has recently done with the references to the Nazi's? If you got a specific quote I'll respond to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger Al 0 Posted March 25, 2005 Share Posted March 25, 2005 But the moment you call homosexuality a sin and you are a homophobe and a bigot. Or maybe it has to do with the term "fudge packer" from another thread. Hardly the language of someone who merely disagrees with anothers actions. Regardless, my use of the word "bigotry" wasn't directed toward you but it must have been at some time or another, judging by your reaction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tigermike 3,050 Posted March 25, 2005 Author Share Posted March 25, 2005 But the moment you call homosexuality a sin and you are a homophobe and a bigot. Or maybe it has to do with the term "fudge packer" from another thread. Hardly the language of someone who merely disagrees with anothers actions. Regardless, my use of the word "bigotry" wasn't directed toward you but it must have been at some time or another, judging by your reaction. 152736[/snapback] So me using the term fudge packer" (in order to elicit a response or emotions, I might add) in your mind makes me a bigot. How intolerant! But intolerance is the norm with those pushing their opinions and agenda on others isn't it. And used to extreme by democrats, liberals, and the gay/lesbian lobbies. The gay lobby and their supporters are quick to apply the bigot/homophobe label to anyone who disagrees with their agenda. You know it as well as anyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.