Just where do we stand?

[slontwovvy 10]

Everyone, where you are, stand up and clap for Pioneer DC. Even in front of your computer. He just hit the nail on the head. TOlerant homosexual activists are oxymorons.

 

It's sad that so many people misconstrue tolerance as letting everyone do whatever they want. It'll be a sad day when this definition comes to pass.

[Dedicated Dad 10]

 

Bob, youre welcome to disagree but you really havent offered any logical explanation or incongruence, other than your opinion, why incest or bestiality isnt morally equal to homosexuality. a relationship between a 45-year old man and a 12-year old girl is wrong today although I am sure that historically this was once looked at differentlyUmmthat is called pedophilia and a completely different topic. However, I respect your viewpoint, and do not view you as immoral or "meanspirited" (I hate the use of that term) for holding your views. Thank you, I do not view you as immoral either because not everyone wants to completely understand how base and repugnant their choice of behavior really is. Its more convenient to believe the practice as innate rather than as free will. Also, I do not view you as stupid (I hate the use of that term) for holding your views. I would rather have committed relationships of homosexual couples accepted. What about committed incestual or bestial relationships, why cant they be just as equal? Instead, let's object to harmful relationships and sexual practices. Why is incest or bestiality anymore harmful? Of course I would include your examples of bestiality and incest, and include general irresponsibility such as mate swapping, swinging, etc. You have two mutually exclusive and contradictory groups here. Multiple partners and promiscuity arent equivalent to monogamous incestual and bestial relationships. I would rather allow gays/lesbians to marry, and encourage such committed relationships, so that the gay/lesbian community can then object to the immoral portions of their communities, the bath houses and in-your-face shows of sexuality, etc.

Why cant there be inter family and animal marriages (though there is no real need for animals because they dont have rights) so that the incestual and bestial community can judge the immorality of incestual or bestial bath-houses and in-your-face shows of sexuality, etc? The sad thing is Bob, and I hope you can appreciate that I don not support incest and bestiality in any way, shape or form, is that it can be morally justified in each and every way homosexuality can be justified. There is no moral difference.

 

 

[Dedicated Dad 10]

I myself am a survivor from one of these perverts This is among the most heinous crimes on this earth. I cant possibly express my sadness and sorrow for you and your lost childhood and innocence, I pray the Lord has given you the strength to live your life without its burden. and he was NOT homosexual. If he diddled little boys he be gay, dont drink the Kool-Aid of their propaganda.

[Dedicated Dad 10]

homosexuals that lead a "normal" lifestyle the gay community can differentiate the mainstream from the fringe. There is no such thing, the practice of perversion can never be normal or mainstream. Monogamous incestuals and bestials can live a normal lifestyle too, can you explain how they are any less moral? so do we condemn all blacks? Race, color or gender are all innate, they are born that way. Why is a chosen behavior the same? But the same is true for heterosexuals Not true, can you please tell me how a normal man/woman relationship and the practice of homosexuality are alike?

 

 

 

 

[OldGreyEagle 5]

"Why cant there be inter family and animal marriages (though there is no real need for animals because they dont have rights)"

 

 

Dad, Dad, Dad, Dad, Dad

 

Animals TOO SO have rights, dont you keep up with PETA?

[Bob Russell 10]

DD, you have stated the following propositions:

 

"What about committed incestual or bestial relationships, why can't they be just as equal?"

"Why is incest or bestiality anymore harmful?"

"The sad thing is Bob, and I hope you can appreciate that I don not support incest and bestiality in any way, shape or form, is that it can be morally justified in each and every way "homosexuality" can be justified. There is no moral difference."

 

You cannot see the moral difference between a consenting committed relationship between two adults and bestiality and incest, but I believe that many more people can. Readers of these posts will decide for themselves. I will not convert you, and you will not convert me. But my view of these postings is not to convert, but to show those who view these posts, who vastly outnumber those of us who post, that within scouting, there is a wide variety of views on these issues. I hope you and others who share your views never feel morally forced to leave scouting, but I also want people who share my views to also not feel morally forced to leave. It is what Richard Nixon once called the silent majority who will read and listen to our discussions, here and elsewhere, and their views will be formed and reformed based upon what we all say.

[Dedicated Dad 10]

You cannot see the moral difference between a consenting committed relationship between two adults and bestiality and incest, but I believe that many more people can. I would like to know how the many more people can see the difference. Why cant you explain that? I just dont understand. A committed consenting monogamous loving relationship between two adults in the same family or with an animal is exactly the same thing. You cant frame it any other way. If youre an attorney, surely you have the intellectual capacity to articulate the difference. How is the silent majority supposed to understand if you, a lawyer, cant demonstrate any discernable distinction between homosexuality incest and bestiality? The truth is, you cant councilor!

[Bob Russell 10]

"I would like to know how the "many more people" can see the difference. Why can't you explain that? I just don't understand."

DD, I believe that any poll of individuals will reveal that a significant percentage of people do not disapprove of committed homosexual couples. I am sure that a huge percentage would disapprove of bestiality and incest. So I am sure that many people can see the difference. Do I have a cite to such a poll - no. And I am not going to look for one. I'll just go with common sense on this one.

 

"If you're an attorney, surely you have the intellectual capacity to articulate the difference. How is the "silent majority" supposed to understand if you, a lawyer, can't demonstrate any discernable distinction between "homosexuality" incest and bestiality? The truth is, you can't councilor!"

 

In my profession, and in life generally, we learn that some questions simply do not warrant a response. I see no need to further this part of the discussion, so just as I ceased a topic with Merlyn on religious discrimination (where I took a position I suspect you agreed with), I will stop now.

 

To paraphrase Fox News, we have reported, others will decide.

[Dedicated Dad 10]

I believe that any poll of individuals will reveal that a significant percentage of people do not disapprove of committed homosexual couples. If the poll said incest and bestiality would be all right, by you logic, then that would be OK, right? Morality by vote, whatever the majority thinks is OK? Is that what you would tell your scouts if they asked, if a poll said prostitution or fill in _______, is OK then that should be good enough for them?

some questions simply do not warrant a response. Why? Because you have no way to explain any moral differences. Because you cant possibly justify one over the other. Because they are all the same whether the majority votes it is or not. Your warrant is disingenuos and a dodge. we have reported, others will decide. You have reported nothing but the gay agenda. How sad.

 

 

 

 

[Pioneer DC 10]

DD makes a valid point about non-differentiation between different forms of perversion but he may be just a bit ahead of the curve here. As something of a trend tracker, I can clearly see a greater and growing acceptance of what today we would clearly agree would be unacceptable forms of perversion. Today, we are asked to accept "committed" homosexual couples as just a normal, alternative lifestyle. That doesn't appear to be too much to ask, right?

The problem is that is today. Tomorrow, we will be asked to accept sadism and masochism as just an alternative lifestyle and the day after that - how about pedophilia? Before you go and say that would never be acceptable, look at the trends and the fact that the North American Man Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) is gaining increased exposure in the media with, for the most part, a neutral (for now) reaction. They are positioning themseleves exactly where the "ordinary" homosexual community was approximately 20 years ago. As we here more about the rights of NAMBLA members to engage in their activities as just another alternative lifestyle, look back and see the effects of what I call "incrementalism." The way to acceptance of these ammoral lifestyles is a slow, constant and relentless push gain first a neutral image and then a positive image for them.

I've been following these trends for going on ten years now and when I look back, it is amazing how much our values as a society have been degraded over that short a period of time just little by little. A court decision by a liberal judge here, an ordinance passed by a liberal city council member, legislation pushed by state senators, "tolerance" programs introduced in schools, the list goes on. Each little step to moral decline does not seem like such a big deal in and of itself, but there is a plan and the sum total of all those little steps is a complete decay of our entire value system.

[Khepera 10]

Crafting Gay Children

 

An Inquiry Into the Abuse of

Vulnerable Youth

via

Government Schooling

&

Mainstream Media

by

Judith A. Reisman, Ph.D.

http://rsvpamerica.org/crafting%20august%202001.htm#title

[Pioneer DC 10]

Khepera - good one! I just had time to scan through it, but bookmarked it to read later.

Interestingly enough, just after I posted my message above, I was reading through my March 2002 edition of Citizen magazine, which is published by Focus on the Family. They have a very informative article in there on the tactics of pedophiles to legitimize their sexual preferences, mainly through the use of "scientific" research which shows young children can make choices on sexual partners and that children who have had sexual relationships with older men have no negative psychological impacts from the experience. I will quote more later.

So what did I say above? It's happening...