Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
So Vidal's ties to NAMBLA and trips to Thailand for boy sex were fabricated by the Family Research Council? (How do they find the time? First the gay agenda and now poor innocent Gore Vidal).
I never claimed Vidal was innocent aCW, straight men also go to Thailand for sex, so what? Should all heterosexuals be criminalised?
Thanks for pointing out that there's enough immoral acts in this world without making an inherently perverse act (homosexuality) something that society should openly embrace.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
Regarding your new hero being "highly intelligent and articulate":
I'm told that pedophiles have to be smooth talkers to coax 8 year old boys into their car with them (candy doesn't always do it).
Why on earth would you think Vidal represented a typical homosexual anyway?
"Homosexual" and "paedophile" describe two different things after all, that's why they are two different words aCW.
You're now acting like that "highly intelligent and articulate" man is someone that should be scoffed at Al. He's just doing his own "thing"; surely you're not against someone doing their own "thing" just because he has a taste for little boys?
Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
I guess I missed your response to what should be done with the 15 year old supposed "gay youth" out in Sprague WA Al:
Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
Then what should be done with this terribly confused youth who has desires for not only 11 year old boys, but very possibly 2 year old boys as well?
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums...postcount=6403
It's your claim that he is "terribly confused" in fact this whole question is something mainly contrived by you in your enthusiasm for conflating gays with paedophiles.
I'm sorry to burst the bubble in your ever so morally confused world Art, but a 15 year old that attempts to "lure" a younger boy away from his home and a year later attempts to kidnap a 2 year old boy is "terribly confused".
If he is a danger to others then of course they must be protected, he must be physically kept away from them. Why would I say anything else, do you really think I would ever suggest supporting anyone's self serving desires to harm others?
So this 15 year old's same sex desires would be grounds to "keep him away from others"?
As I told your fellow homosexualist Brit: Why not address the problem when the criminal is a young age instead of "keeping him away from others" and having him be a monster as an adult?