Another missing post

[_Nomomo]

I'm sorry that you are not educated or informed enough to engage in a thoughtful, evidence and logic based discussion on this issue.

There is a huge statistical correlation between male homosexuality and pedophilia, and a very well known one, and a fetish for very young, underage boys, known as "chicken" in Gay parlance, is a long established element within the male homosexual subculture.

Maybe you should stay away from this place for a while and do some reading.

Uh, Droopy, Chicken Hawks are not pedophiles. Pedophilia is an attraction to prepubescent children. Of course Chicken Hawks are more prevalent in the gay men population same as men who seek sex with underage females are more prevalent in the heterosexual men population which makes your attempted point completely worthless and meaningless.

[_Yoda]

BC disagrees with my decision to move his post to Telestial because he does not see his comment as a personal attack.

My position is that since BC is:

a) Claiming that one can choose whether or not to be homosexual.

b) Homosexuals have a greater tendency to be pedophiles.

It follows that BC is stating that those who choose to be homosexual also choose to be pedophiles.

If that is not a personal attack toward all homosexual parents (of which Paul is one), I don't know what is.

It was also off topic. The topic was whether gays have their church records permanently annotated. bc's lying attacks on gays was way off topic. For the record, I reported the post and asked it to be moved to telestial. I also engaged in personal attacks on bcspace. I stand by them, but would have bo problem if they were moved to telestial, since under the board rules they are not allowed in terrestrial.

Yes, it was off topic, but it also contained enough personal attacks, incuding the one I mentioned above, that I thought the split to Telestial was more appropriate than a simple Terrestrial split.

[Guest]

How could it possibly be Telestial?

I don't get it either. I don't see a rated R personal attack in what you said. Are we moving posts to telestial because it might hurt someone's feelings?

This seems like a step in the MAD direction.

Edited to add: if he started accusing a specific poster of being a pedophile because they were gay, I could see the reason to move. People post stupid, unfounded things all the time.

[_Droopy]

Uh, Droopy, Chicken Hawks are not pedophiles. Pedophilia is an attraction to prepubescent children.

You don't say?

http://www.odps.org/glossword/index.php ... a4b1a65aa9

Notice the PC disclaimer at the bottom? The reality is that the "gay community" has long been ambivalent toward the presence of such people among them, especially given its disproportion with regard to the presence of homosexuals in the general population (1%-3%)

[_Droopy]

How could it possibly be Telestial?

I don't get it either. I don't see a rated R personal attack in what you said. Are we moving posts to telestial because it might hurt someone's feelings?

This seems like a step in the MAD direction.

MAD, unfortunately, has caught the Gerald Bradford virus, and they've been moving in that direction for years. I think, realistically, in a few more years, FAIR will be much like a standard, liberal Protestant, ecumenical group that still "defends the Church" in some sense, but only in progressively more restrained and temporizing language and the primary emphasis being upon not rocking too many boats.

[_Nomomo]

Uh, Droopy, Chicken Hawks are not pedophiles. Pedophilia is an attraction to prepubescent children.

You don't say?

http://www.odps.org/glossword/index.php ... a4b1a65aa9

Notice the PC disclaimer at the bottom? The reality is that the "gay community" has long been ambivalent toward the presence of such people among them, especially given its disproportion with regard to the presence of homosexuals in the general population (1%-3%)

Droopy
If X = % of homosexual men who are Chicken Hawks (seek sex with underage boys)
And Y = % of heterosexual men who seek sex with underage girls
Then what evidence have you that X is larger than Y ?

[_America Jane]

Yes, it was off topic, but it also contained enough personal attacks, incuding the one I mentioned above, that I thought the split to Telestial was more appropriate than a simple Terrestrial split.

I think it was a good move. If I have ever seen a Telestial spirit, it is that fellow's.

[_DarkHelmet]

You don't say?

http://www.odps.org/glossword/index.php ... a4b1a65aa9

Notice the PC disclaimer at the bottom? The reality is that the "gay community" has long been ambivalent toward the presence of such people among them, especially given its disproportion with regard to the presence of homosexuals in the general population (1%-3%)

Droopy
If X = % of homosexual men who are Chicken Hawks (seek sex with underage boys)
And Y = % of heterosexual men who seek sex with underage girls
Then what evidence have you that X is larger than Y ?

There sure are a lot of different studies out there. I found this interesting:

http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/Articles/000,002.htm

Dr. W.L. Marshall and his colleagues conducted a similar set of phallometric tests on a sample of gay and straight men, except this time they used more photos of young boys and girls covering a wider age span. They noticed that for those gay men who were attracted to males under 18, they tended to be attracted to young men who were well past the age of puberty (age 15 or older), with fully-developed adult genitalia and other features that were characteristically masculine. But when heterosexual men showed an attraction towards younger males, they tended to be attracted to pre-pubescent males (ages 9-11):

Amongst the heterosexuals, the commonest remarks concerning attractive features of the victims, were that the young boys did not have any body hair and that their bodies were soft and smooth.31

This explains the apparent contradiction of straight men abusing young boys. They really are straight – they’re responding to the feminine qualities of pre-pubescent boys, qualities that gay men didn’t find appealing. After all, gay men are, by definition, attracted to men; the feminine characteristics of young boys were a turn-off to them.