Why Homosexuality MUST Be Recriminalized! Part 3

[aCultureWarrior]

Before I answer alwight the atheist's post, I see that my stalker biggest fan and TOL's pagan expert on theology WizardofOz (aka Captain Obvious, aka Aaron) is once again having fun with the tag at the bottom of the page. I also see that he gave me a negative rep for these words that I posted in another thread:

Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior

Question: How can someone knowingly go against the teachings of Jesus Christ and still call themselves a "Christian" (i.e. a follower of Christ)?
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4290384&postcount=2

While I highly doubt TOL's pagan expert on theology will have the courage to come into this thread and address the above statement, I would like anyone that calls themselves a Christian to address how someone could knowingly promote legislation that God abhors (homosexual marriage, civil unions, laws that allow homosexual behavior in the confines of ones sodomy chambers, etc.) and still call themselves a follower of Christ.

Before doing so, please read this article by Selwyn Duke entitled:

Why many American Christians really are un-Christian
http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/duke/100301

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
So people (i.e. children) just naturally have sexual desires for people of the same gender, their mother, father, sister or brother and animals?

So let's say that a 12 year old boy "just naturally" has sexual desires for 63 year old Peter (the pedophile) Tatchell, would it be unjust of society to have laws that prohibited the two from having consensual sexual relations?

If you're playing it safe and going to say that you're not for lowering and eventually abolishing all age of consent laws (as seen in the 1972 'gay' agenda), at what age should a youth who "just naturally" has same sex desires be able to legally pursue them, be it with an adult or someone of his own age?

I don't know why you seem to find this so difficult aCW? :idunno:

Ummm, because I don't think like a moral relative atheist?

Civil laws reflect the relative views of society in a democracy, not those of an almighty power, dictator or ruling elite, or even those of an unknown author of an ancient middle-eastern goat herder's scripture.

Actually Al, civil laws reflected the views of The Almighty (God) up until several decades ago in our once Constitutional Republic (the Founders were fearful of democracies, i.e. mobs that rule at the expense of others).

Most people, like me, seem to think that those below a certain age are not mature enough to fry an egg never mind engaging in sexual activities with third parties.

While I never have associated frying an egg with sex, I'll play along.

I haven't met anyone over the age of 12 that isn't allowed to fry an egg by her or himself.

Paraphrasing the words of Peter the pedophile Tatchell:

"The positive nature of some child-adult sexual relationships is not confined to non-Western cultures. Several of my friends – gay and straight, male and female – had not only fried an egg by themselves, but had sex with adults from the ages of nine to 13. None feel they were abused. All say it was their conscious choice and gave them great joy."

Which is why society has alighted on a specific age of consent, that could be changed if society's relative position ever changed.
No, it isn't written on holy tablets of stone or ancient scripture, it is relative and up to society as a whole to decide what it is. All a bit too scary for you perhaps aCW? lain:

Secular humanist/moral relativist man has spoken in favor of lowering (and eventually abolishing) all age of consent laws*.

*As long as that child can fry an egg by themselves.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

These 20 pages have some of the most informative posts in part 3, and I've highlighted a few of them in red as must reads.

Linda Harvey's "How you can change the word in 2015" needs to be read and read again by people of faith.

The LGBTQueer movement's focus on children and what they're doing to keep sexually confused youth from changing is addressed in numerous posts.

The shortened lifespan of those who engage in homosexual behavior is discussed, and I've thrown in a bit of mocking humor with "The Top 5 [homosexualist] Posts of 2014".

Table of Contents for pages 301-320
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4275913&postcount=6841

 

[alwight]

Ummm, because I don't think like a moral relative atheist?

So, mindless unthinking dogmatic Godbot it is then.

Actually Al, civil laws reflected the views of The Almighty (God) up until several decades ago in our once Constitutional Republic (the Founders were fearful of democracies, i.e. mobs that rule at the expense of others).

Naah, that was just the jargon of the times, when most people really believed all the same religious mumbo-jumbo or when those in power claimed to be divinely appointed by the same god.
They can't get away with that sort of thing any more and they know it. There are more gods around in society than you can shake a stick at, while disbelief in any continues to grow.
Without there being just the one central god entity, believed by all, there is just no way that any human moral value can be palmed off presented as absolute and objective by those in power, but it was a nice trick while it lasted.
Some people knew this many years ago of course.:
"Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by rulers as useful." - Seneca (ca. 4 BC –AD 65)

While I never have associated frying an egg with sex, I'll play along.

I haven't met anyone over the age of 12 that isn't allowed to fry an egg by her or himself.

Is that the sort of thing you routinely discuss with them aCW?

Paraphrasing the words of Peter the pedophile Tatchell:

When you say "paraphrase" aCW, why do I instantly think "distort"?

"The positive nature of some child-adult sexual relationships is not confined to non-Western cultures. Several of my friends – gay and straight, male and female – had not only fried an egg by themselves, but had sex with adults from the ages of nine to 13. None feel they were abused. All say it was their conscious choice and gave them great joy."

Nevertheless I personally support the age of consent, and not underage sex. What Tatchell thinks is up to him, but as far as I know he has never personally broken that law and is not campaigning for it to change, simply voicing an opinion, in which he specifically mentions that he wasn't condoning it iirc. I think you generally tend to skip over that bit.

Secular humanist/moral relativist man has spoken in favor of lowering (and eventually abolishing) all age of consent laws*.

*As long as that child can fry an egg by themselves.

:doh:

Anyway I will point out that my usage of "frying an egg" was not a euphemism for having gay sex, it really was only about frying an egg.
In your mind sadly, that kind of thing, all too rapidly, seems to become misdirected and misused as per your usual MO.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior Ummm, because I don't think like a moral relative atheist?

So, mindless unthinking dogmatic Godbot it is then.

One of the many pleasures of being a "mindless unthinking dogmatic Godbot" Al is that I don't have to worry about contracting HIV/AIDS and the other fun STD's that come with the lifestyle that you're defending.

Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
Actually Al, civil laws reflected the views of The Almighty (God) up until several decades ago in our once Constitutional Republic (the Founders were fearful of democracies, i.e. mobs that rule at the expense of others).

Naah, that was just the jargon of the times, when most people really believed all the same religious mumbo-jumbo or when those in power claimed to be divinely appointed by the same god.
They can't get away with that sort of thing any more and they know it. There are more gods around in society than you can shake a stick at, while disbelief in any continues to grow.
Without there being just the one central god entity, believed by all, there is just no way that any human moral value can be palmed off presented as absolute and objective by those in power, but it was a nice trick while it lasted.
Some people knew this many years ago of course.:
"Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by rulers as useful." - Seneca (ca. 4 BC –AD 65)

"So many false gods, so many sexually transmitted diseases" - aCW (4-16-15)


Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
While I never have associated frying an egg with sex, I'll play along.

I haven't met anyone over the age of 12 that isn't allowed to fry an egg by her or himself.

Is that the sort of thing you routinely discuss with them aCW?

No, but on occasion I do tell them that if they see a 64 year old male lurking around a playground with drool coming from his mouth, to report it to a nearby parent.


Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
Paraphrasing the words of Peter the pedophile Tatchell:

When you say "paraphrase" aCW, why do I instantly think "distort"?

Because your mind isn't open to the truth about the behavior that you so adamantly defend (yet so adamantly deny partaking in).


Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
"The positive nature of some child-adult sexual relationships is not confined to non-Western cultures. Several of my friends – gay and straight, male and female – had not only fried an egg by themselves, but had sex with adults from the ages of nine to 13. None feel they were abused. All say it was their conscious choice and gave them great joy."

Nevertheless I personally support the age of consent, and not underage sex.

I do believe that is called the "pedophile backpedal" Al, as you said something totally different in your above post:

Which is why society has alighted on a specific age of consent, that could be changed if society's relative position ever changed.
No, it isn't written on holy tablets of stone or ancient scripture, it is relative and up to society as a whole to decide what it is. All a bit too scary for you perhaps aCW?

What Tatchell thinks is up to him, but as far as I know he has never personally broken that law and is not campaigning for it to change, simply voicing an opinion, in which he specifically mentions that he wasn't condoning it iirc. I think you generally tend to skip over that bit.

Peter the pedophile Tatchell's letter to the editor told his feelings towards pedophilia and the fact that you still defend him tells yours.


Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
Secular humanist/moral relativist man has spoken in favor of lowering (and eventually abolishing) all age of consent laws*.

*As long as that child can fry an egg by themselves.

Anyway I will point out that my usage of "frying an egg" was not a euphemism for having gay sex, it really was only about frying an egg.
In your mind sadly, that kind of thing, all too rapidly, seems to become misdirected and misused as per your usual MO.

It shows how serious you take child sex, i.e. as nonchalantly
as frying an egg.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Speaking of the UK homosexual/pedophile movement:

BBC refuses to axe show by paedophile supporter which calls for age of consent to be lowered

March 21, 2015

BBC bosses have sparked outrage by broadcasting a historic film presented by a notorious child sex campaigner – and have refused requests to remove it from the internet.

The documentary is presented by Ian Dunn, one of the founders of the Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE), which campaigned to legalise sex with children.

It is one of 30 archive films on the BBC’s website telling the history of the gay rights movement.

The 30-minute documentary – Glad To Be Gay? – portrays Dunn as a legitimate gay rights activist and makes no reference to his role in setting up the reviled group.

Victims of child abuse described as ‘horrifying’ the decision to upload the film.

When The Mail on Sunday contacted the BBC to point out the documentary was causing offence, the broadcaster refused to take it down – on the grounds that it is a ‘significant’ work on the history of gay rights.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ury-BBC-refuses-axe-paedophile-supporter.html

The documentary is presented by Ian Dunn (pictured) one of the founders of the reviled Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE)

 

[aCultureWarrior]

This is a real shock:

Those males who engage in homosex in the Philippines contract an incurable deadly disease just like their American counterparts do.

DOH: 20 new HIV cases a day

April 12, 2015

According to the latest report by the Department of Health (DOH) last February, 20 new cases of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) are diagnosed every day. This is almost 50 percent higher from the number of cases reported daily in 2012.

HIV leads to acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS), a condition in which the body’s immune system is attacked and compromised, making the patient vulnerable to opportunistic diseases that would ultimately lead to death.

In 2014, there were a total of 6,011 new cases of HIV reported nationwide. Of this figure, 543 were reported as AIDS cases. Last year, 188 deaths were recorded.

Last month alone, 646 new cases of HIV were registered by the DOH. This is the highest number of new cases reported in a month since 1984. The new cases brought the total number of reported HIV cases nationwide to 23,709 since 1984.

Out of the 646 new cases, Metro Manila accounted for 41 percent or 262 cases of the recent HIV cases, the highest among all regions.

DOH records showed that from 1984 to February 2015, most of the cases (about 79 percent) were transmitted by males who had unprotected sex with other males. Fifteen percent are transmitted between males and females who had unprotected sex while 5 percent are people who shared needles.


Read more: http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/684907/doh-20-new-hiv-cases-a-day#ixzz3XU9agHoR

 

[alwight]

One of the many pleasures of being a "mindless unthinking dogmatic Godbot" Al is that I don't have to worry about contracting HIV/AIDS and the other fun STD's that come with the lifestyle that you're defending.

I simply defend the rights of those born to be gay not to be mindlessly persecuted or criminalised by bigoted homophobic adherents to an ancient doctrine, as they mindlessly adhere to it aCW.

"So many false gods, so many sexually transmitted diseases" - aCW (4-16-15)

The less mindless will probably have some idea about safer sex, but those like you perhaps aCW will need to adhere even closer to whatever your ancient scripture, written by some anonymous ancient bloke, tells you.

No, but on occasion I do tell them that if they see a 64 year old male lurking around a playground with drool coming from his mouth, to report it to a nearby parent.

No doubt as you hand out candy and hope their parents don't spot you?

Because your mind isn't open to the truth about the behavior that you so adamantly defend (yet so adamantly deny partaking in).

On the contrary aCW, unlike you, my mind is capable of fair minded independent thought and do not blame all homosexuals for the deeds of a few any more than I'd blame all heterosexuals for what a minority may do.

I do believe that is called the "pedophile backpedal" Al, as you said something totally different in your above post:

Only in your fantasy realm mind aCW.

It shows how serious you take child sex, i.e. as nonchalantly
as frying an egg.

Unlike you or so it seems aCW I generally never even think about child sex, it's more your thing perhaps? :think:

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
One of the many pleasures of being a "mindless unthinking dogmatic Godbot" Al is that I don't have to worry about contracting HIV/AIDS and the other fun STD's that come with the lifestyle that you're defending.

I simply defend the rights of those born to be gay not to be mindlessly persecuted or criminalised by bigoted homophobic adherents to an ancient doctrine, as they mindlessly adhere to it aCW.

(Poor Al, forever using the LGBTQueer 'gay gene' lie).

Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
"So many false gods, so many sexually transmitted diseases" - aCW (4-16-15)

The less mindless will probably have some idea about safer sex, but those like you perhaps aCW will need to adhere even closer to whatever your ancient scripture, written by some anonymous ancient bloke, tells you.

If those who have homosexual desires refuse to change through therapy and spirituality, I'd at least suggest they do what you've done Al:

30+ years of abstinence.

Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
No, but on occasion I do tell them that if they see a 64 year old male lurking around a playground with drool coming from his mouth, to report it to a nearby parent.

No doubt as you hand out candy and hope their parents don't spot you?

Says the guy who relentlessly defends pedophiles.


Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
Because your mind isn't open to the truth about the behavior that you so adamantly defend (yet so adamantly deny partaking in).

On the contrary aCW, unlike you, my mind is capable of fair minded independent thought and do not blame all homosexuals for the deeds of a few any more than I'd blame all heterosexuals for what a minority may do.

"All homosexuals" have one thing in common Al:

Engaging in an unnatural behavior that causes disease, misery and early death.

Regarding blaming "all homosexuals for the deeds of a few": Need we talk about the "homosexual collective" again?


Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
I do believe that is called the "pedophile backpedal" Al, as you said something totally different in your above post:

Only in your fantasy realm mind aCW.

Again, says the guy who relentessly defends pedophiles.


Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
It shows how serious you take child sex, i.e. as nonchalantly
as frying an egg.

Unlike you or so it seems aCW I generally never even think about child sex, it's more your thing perhaps?

What I think most about Al is what should be done to perverts that indoctrinate, "groom" and sexually molest children.

Not that it hasn't been fun chit chatting with a disciple of Peter Tatchell and P.I.E., but it really is time to...

move on.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Bryan Fischer again reminds us that people of faith do have a place in politics.


If godly men should stay out of politics, God is the biggest offender

April 16, 2015

The church of Jesus Christ is intended by God to be the conscience of America.

To be sure, the church is not called to run America, since we are not a theocracy but a democratic republic. If folks want a theocracy, in which clergy run the politics of a nation, then Muslim nations are the place for you.

But the church is called to be a clarion voice in the public square, calling public officials as well as the public itself back to the abiding moral principles of the laws of nature and nature's God.

Public officials are servants of God, according to Romans 13, whether they know it or not, and it is the job of the servants of God who fill our pulpits to faithfully remind public officials of their accountability to God and his truth.

Some today still argue that the church and its leaders should just stay out of politics because it's such a dirty business. Well, that's exactly why the church should be involved – somebody has got to start cleaning up that mess.

The church is called to be the "salt of the earth," which means the salt has to get out of the shaker (the four walls of the church) and into society. And the church is called to be the "light of the world," which means it needs to take its light out from under the bushel (the four walls of the church) and shine its light into every darkened corner in our world, including the world of politics.

If men of God are supposed to stay out of politics, then God himself didn't get the memo. If godly men are supposed to stay out of politics, then He himself is the biggest offender.

From virtually the beginning of the Bible to its end, God is shown constantly raising up men of faith to be political leaders. Almost every major figure in the Old Testament was a political leader, whether that figure was Joseph or Moses or Joshua or the judges or the kings of Judah and Israel, starting with Saul and David and Solomon.

And the major figures who weren't politicians were prophets who were sent by God to publicly rebuke or encourage politicians. In other words, it was the job of the clergy to speak truth to political power.

If you were to strip out of the Bible every book written by a politician, about a politician, or addressed to a politician by a member of the clergy, you'd have virtually nothing left.

No books of Moses, no books of Joshua and Judges. 1 Samuel all the way through 2 Chronicles, gone. Ezra, Nehemiah, gone. Esther, gone. Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, gone. All the prophets, starting with Isaiah and going all the way through Malachi, gone.

Your Old Testament would consist of the book of Ruth.

It doesn't get any better in the New Testament. John the Baptist was executed because he publicly rebuked a politician for his salacious private life. And Jesus was executed because...

Read more: http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/fischer/150416

 

[Arthur Brain]

Connie, Al "defends paedophiles" as much as you represent critical analysis.

I would say do the math but it would be a bit unfair really...

lain:

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Connie, Al "defends paedophiles" as much as you represent critical analysis.

I would say do the math but it would be a bit unfair really...

lain:

Then you, Al and I can all agree that those who indoctrinate, "groom" and physically molest have "consensual sexual relations" with youth should be severely punished?

 

[Arthur Brain]

Then you, Al and I can all agree that those who indoctrinate, "groom" and physically molest have "consensual sexual relations" with youth should be severely punished?

There's no such thing as having consensual sexual relations with a child so of course. As you should be aware there are complete crackdowns on paedophile rings and child abuse in general - and rightly so. I'm sure Al would agree with me.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
Then you, Al and I can all agree that those who indoctrinate, "groom" and physically molest have "consensual sexual relations" with youth should be severely punished?

There's no such thing as having consensual sexual relations with a child...

So true, so we'll go with the term "physically molest", or "rape" is more appropriate, wouldn't you agree Art?

so of course. As you should be aware there are complete crackdowns on paedophile rings and child abuse in general - and rightly so. I'm sure Al would agree with me.

Yet the "crackdowns on pedophile rings and child abuse in general" has missed the biggest pedophile ring/child molesters/rapists of them all:

The Human Rights Campaign.

"Sex-crime-tolerator, the Human Rights Campaign, the largest homosexual lobbying group in the country, is moving into first place in disseminating “LGBT” propaganda to children. HRC will sponsor “Time to Thrive” over the weekend of Feb. 13-15 in Portland, Oregon. It’s a conference for educators who want kids to believe they were born homosexual or born in the wrong sex body. The Time to Thrive objective is for kids to maintain that confusion and somehow “thrive” while embracing these behaviors as identities that pose no threat to their future well-being.

There are 100 free registrations for youth to this conference for students as young as 13, while the adults pay up to $249 each. In the face of HRC’s silence about Bean, the conference should be monitored closely by local law enforcement.

Helping children change genders is one of the topics to be covered. “Beyond Bathrooms: What You Can Do For Your Transgender Students” will be presented by TransYouth Family Allies. Another discussion will focus on youth prostitution, called “survival sex.” The homosexual lobby is generally okay with “sex work” as they call it, as long as it’s not forced."

[But but but...]

There's no such thing as having consensual sexual relations with a child...

"During the youth program on the final day of the conference, kids will get advice from the Portland homosexual “Q Center,” where kids from 12 to 24 are welcome, because, you know, 12 -year- olds have so much in common with 24- year -olds. Like most of these “gay” community centers, it’s not part of a school and accountability is always a problem. Who’s watching to ensure these kids are not hooking-up with adults?...

And HRC itself will make a conference presentation entitled, “HRC Research: What’s It Like Growing Up in America if your Gender Isn’t Male or Female?” Since there are no such individuals, this will either be a silent time for the audience, or another nightmarish fairy tale spun by the sexual anarchists..."

http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4178617&postcount=4643

Then we can all agree that the pedophiles at the HRC who indoctrinate, "groom" and often times phyically molest/rape youth, should be dealt with severely Art?

 

[alwight]

Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
One of the many pleasures of being a "mindless unthinking dogmatic Godbot" Al is that I don't have to worry about contracting HIV/AIDS and the other fun STD's that come with the lifestyle that you're defending.



(Poor Al, forever using the LGBTQueer 'gay gene' lie).

Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
"So many false gods, so many sexually transmitted diseases" - aCW (4-16-15)



If those who have homosexual desires refuse to change through therapy and spirituality, I'd at least suggest they do what you've done Al:

30+ years of abstinence.

Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
No, but on occasion I do tell them that if they see a 64 year old male lurking around a playground with drool coming from his mouth, to report it to a nearby parent.



Says the guy who relentlessly defends pedophiles.


Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
Because your mind isn't open to the truth about the behavior that you so adamantly defend (yet so adamantly deny partaking in).



"All homosexuals" have one thing in common Al:

Engaging in an unnatural behavior that causes disease, misery and early death.

Regarding blaming "all homosexuals for the deeds of a few": Need we talk about the "homosexual collective" again?


Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
I do believe that is called the "pedophile backpedal" Al, as you said something totally different in your above post:



Again, says the guy who relentessly defends pedophiles.


Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
It shows how serious you take child sex, i.e. as nonchalantly
as frying an egg.



What I think most about Al is what should be done to perverts that indoctrinate, "groom" and sexually molest children.

Not that it hasn't been fun chit chatting with a disciple of Peter Tatchell and P.I.E., but it really is time to...

move on.

Codswallop.
Show me anything where I have ever supported paedophilia, or even Peter Tachell, you really don't seem to care what lies you make up, misinformation you dole out.

I really don't know why I go out of my way to help you aCW. :AMR:

 

[Arthur Brain]

So true, so we'll go with the term "physically molest", or "rape" is more appropriate, wouldn't you agree Art?

Absolutely, and completely unacceptable.

Yet the "crackdowns on pedophile rings and child abuse in general" has missed the biggest pedophile ring/child molesters/rapists of them all:

The Human Rights Campaign.

Oh please. Spare me your usual crackpot paranoia and copy/pastes. There is zero tolerance for grooming, molesting or abusing children under law. This also has squat to do with homosexuality so get a grip.

:hammer:

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
So true, so we'll go with the term "physically molest", or "rape" is more appropriate, wouldn't you agree Art?

Absolutely, and completely unacceptable.

As in every major icon of the modern day homosexual movement including HRC founder Terry Bean is a "child rapist".*

*Bean has not yet been convicted of diddling little boys.

I'm glad that we agree on at least one thing Art.


Quote:
Yet the "crackdowns on pedophile rings and child abuse in general" has missed the biggest pedophile ring/child molesters/rapists of them all:

The Human Rights Campaign.

Oh please. Spare me your usual crackpot paranoia and copy/pastes. There is zero tolerance for grooming, molesting or abusing children under law. This also has squat to do with homosexuality so get a grip.

(Art didn't get the title "The Queen of Denial" for nothing).

How about over on your own turf where homosexual activist Peter the pedophile Tatchell wrote openly in a letter to the editor that "...not all sex involving chidren is abusive, unwanted and harmfrul"?

Or how about what's going on at the BBC:

"BBC bosses have sparked outrage by broadcasting a historic film presented by a notorious child sex campaigner – and have refused requests to remove it from the internet.

The documentary is presented by Ian Dunn, one of the founders of the Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE), which campaigned to legalise sex with children.

It is one of 30 archive films on the BBC’s website telling the history of the gay rights movement.

The 30-minute documentary – Glad To Be Gay? – portrays Dunn as a legitimate gay rights activist and makes no reference to his role in setting up the reviled group."
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4291541&postcount=7146

What should be done with these "child rapists" and their accomplices Art?

 

[Arthur Brain]

Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
So true, so we'll go with the term "physically molest", or "rape" is more appropriate, wouldn't you agree Art?



As in every major icon of the modern day homosexual movement including HRC founder Terry Bean is an accused "child rapist".

I'm glad that we agree on at least one thing Art.


Quote:
Yet the "crackdowns on pedophile rings and child abuse in general" has missed the biggest pedophile ring/child molesters/rapists of them all:

The Human Rights Campaign.



(Art didn't get the title "The Queen of Denial" for nothing).

How about over on your own turf where Peter the pedophile Tatchell wrote openly in a letter to the editor that "...not all sex involving chidren is abusive, unwanted and harmfrul"?

Or how about whats going on at the BBC:

"BBC bosses have sparked outrage by broadcasting a historic film presented by a notorious child sex campaigner – and have refused requests to remove it from the internet.

The documentary is presented by Ian Dunn, one of the founders of the Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE), which campaigned to legalise sex with children.

It is one of 30 archive films on the BBC’s website telling the history of the gay rights movement.

The 30-minute documentary – Glad To Be Gay? – portrays Dunn as a legitimate gay rights activist and makes no reference to his role in setting up the reviled group"?
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4291541&postcount=7146

What should be done with these "child rapists" and their accomplices Art?

Righto Connie, so the recent events in regards to Jimmy Saville, Rolf Harris, Stuart Hall and a bunch of others in regards to child molesting and rape are just a blip on the radar where it comes to not only cracking down on such in the present but also delving into the past for heinous crimes committed?

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Righto Connie, so the recent events in regards to Jimmy Saville, Rolf Harris, Stuart Hall and a bunch of others in regards to child molesting and rape are just a blip on the radar where it comes to not only cracking down on such in the present but also delving into the past for heinous crimes committed?

No one said that the golden egg of your LGBTQueer movement has been totally accomplished Art (the complete legalization of having sex with children), but as has been shown, not all pedophiles are behind bars.

What should we do about the HRC, the BBC and homosexual activist Peter the pedophile Tatchell who openly admitted that child rape is not always unwanted Art?

 

[Arthur Brain]

No one said that the golden egg of your LGBTQueer movement has been totally accomplished Art (the complete legalization of having sex with children), but as has been shown, not all pedophiles are behind bars.

What should we do about the HRC, the BBC and homosexual activist Peter the pedophile Tatchell who openly admitted that child rape is not always unwanted Art?

As has been pointed out there is no tolerance towards the abuse of minors over here. That includes 'sexual congress' with 15 year old girls so I'm presuming you're full of righteous vitriol for any crank who would advocate such?