http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2007/jan/07011908.html

Black people call one another ‘nigger’ all the time. Homosexuals call each other queer. How come no-one else can?

Pretty discriminatory, I think. Feels like that “Big Brother” syndrome. Or is it “domestic terrorism”? Commenter molestation?

Call the cops!

Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth says, “isn’t it telling most of the tiny number of homosexual male U.S. Congressmen have been caught in sex scandals-remember Barney Frank, who let his male lover, a hustler, run a prostitution ring out of his D.C. apartment? And Massachusetts Rep. Gerry Studds, who had sex with a 17-year-old boy and then turned his back on fellow House Members during the censure vote against him? And Bob Bauman, who in 1980 was charged with soliciting a 16-year-old boy for sex?”

Adding it up, LaBarbera says, “Let’s see: three homosexual Congressmen involved in sexual seductions of minor boys-ages 16, 17, and 17 (Foley). And yet homosexual activists ridicule anyone who suggests there is a predatory or pedophilic component to male homosexuality”

A Big Duh

Robert deleted my reference to CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly reference about the cost of homosexual behavior to healthcare — billions and comparable in cost and average lifespan to IV drug users.

Your the boss of this comment page, so what’s objectionable to you is out. I don’t want my comments deleted so instead of qu**r, I’ll substitute the word “T-Shirt” from now on whenever I feel the need to use that word.

We are all different and that’s why in my posts I support freedom rather than everyone becoming the same in what they like and don’t like.

“T-Shirt” can’t be all that bad, certainly not as bad a nigger or chink as you allege if a national TV program can use the word in its title and have three “T-Shirts” on the program, giving others advice. But then, maybe if you offer “T-Shirts” enough money, anything objectionable can be changed to no longer be objectionable. Right? Or is this just a difference of opinion?

Should someone go to jail for being a molester?

Sure, an unreasonable person just might MAKE or TAKE an impression, but I certainly didn’t give one. You infer what I did not imply. The inference is entirely of your own invention.

This mentation you exhibit is precisely what is wrong with the whole sexual ‘crime’ business. The police and DAs hardly bother to seek evidence these days. Evidence is seldom called for in our Courts where a man is concerned. The simple accusation is enough. We are becoming slaves to that very ‘Authority’ that was so vividly displayed in the famous psychological experiments of 40 years ago. Someone in a white coat – or a blue uniform – says this and we jump to obey. All the way to the electric chair in some cases.

Robert, I am too old and overburdened with the weight of dismay to jump. Why not dispense with a trial altogether and just hang the man. You do a good impression of a lynch-mob leader.

The way some of these MND folks talk about women so hatefully, I am surprised they haven’t “come out of the closet”. LOL.

I don’t support child porn and never said I did. Personally, I don’t particularly like hardly any porn. What a waste of good, hard-earned money! Speaking of bad reading comprehension! What I do support is putting people in jail for what they DO, not for what they THINK! Looking at a picture should not be against the law. It only involves thinking and hurts no one. Abusing a child SHOULD be against the law and the creator of the real child porn, if a child was used in its creation (child porn creators, I’ve heard, often use adults who look like teenagers), should be prosecuted.

By the way, if a teenager voluntarily participates in the creation of real child porn, should the teenager likewise be prosecuted? No? Are there any other crimes that you feel teenagers should be immune from prosecution? Are minors only minors when sex crimes are involved? If Shawn Hornbeck was the one who downloaded the kiddie porn that may have been found on Devlin’s computer, should Shawn be prosecuted? If not, doesn’t that support child porn based on your logic?

Excellent point that no one else seems to have thought of. Authorities did not indicate the context in which the pictures present, merely leaked the existence of it. Which of course leads those who are quick to judge to make all manner of suppositions that may or may not be true.

And I also do not trust authorities due to exploitative experiences close friends have undergone at the hands of DA offices and other politicians and their local police departments.

“Robert Paul Reyes – Wow! Accuse someone who disagrees with you that if they continue their point, they are supporting kidnappers and child molesters and everyone shuts up! Wow! You must really be proud of yourself.”

******************************

Dittohead, your support of child porn is reprehensible and your reading comprehension is terrible.

This is what I actually wrote:

“Amfortas, if you want to make a case that “the authorities” misuse child pornography laws to prosecute individuals with innocent photographs of children, do so in a free-standing essay. Don’t do it in the context of a discussion of a kidnapper and child molester. By making your case in this thread, you are giving the impression that you coddle child molesters.”

By Amfortas making a case that the laws against chld porn are sometimes misued by authorites,in a forum discussing a child molester, he was GIVING THE IMPRESSION that he coddled child molesters.

BIG DIFFERENCE

I strongly disagree with those who support child porn, if I really wanted to “shut up” the opposing view, I would simply delete all your comments.

Just out of curiosity, when the cops and media gave you all the initial “facts” of the Duke lacross team rape allegations via the media, were you sure of the lacross team’s guilt? Did you advocate frying them? Do you still believe that they are guilty? If so, why? Based on what evidence? If not, why? What changed your mind? Was it the lack of DNA on the woman? The DNA of several men in the woman that the prosecutor and DNA lab kept a secret for so long? The 100% lacross team line-up? Was it their alibis? Do you still believe they are guilty because women never lie about rape? After all, why would they lie about something like that? And we all know that no woman would ever support putting a man in jail and destroying his life over something he didn’t do.

Nothing the cops say in the news media means squat. Cops and DA’s lie all the time to make their cases, influence public opinion and the potential jury pool and manipulate suspects into telling them what they want to hear. Not all cops are always after the truth. In fact, the courts have already ruled that it’s OK for cops to lie to obtain confessions, including what they tell the suspect the results of confessing to a particular crime that the suspect supposedly did, will be. And that’s because nobody would ever, for any reason, confess to a crime that they didn’t commit, right? It also doesn’t matter if the cop lies to the suspect about what will happen and won’t happen to them if they do confess to the crime.

It is apparent to me that this guy who is accused of kidnapping this kid is already being “nifonged”. It is customary for cops to keep details of a crime secret. Why do you suppose they leaked the small detail that “kiddie porn” was found on this guy’s computer? Since there were two persons in the house and the boy probably spent more time in the house than this guy did since this guy was supposedly holding down two part-time jobs, and we know that the boy was using the computer to surreptitiously talk with his real father without the father knowing who he really was, changing his last name to that of the “kidnapper”, how do we know that the kiddie porn wasn’t downloaded by the boy? How do we know that the boy didn’t go there of his own free will? How do we know that he didn’t enjoy his life better with this guy than with his parents and that’s really what we have here.

By the way, what is “kiddie porn” anyway? Is it porn for kiddies? Is it cartoons of sex acts instead of real pictures? Is kiddie porn different from child porn? And if it is cartoons of sex acts, is it just as bad as real pictures since there are obviously no real children involved being abused? Does it even matter when we are putting men in jail for what they are thinking rather than what they do?

Many years ago when the horror of rape and domestic violence wasn’t so high in the consciousness of us all, we used to hear every so often about a large percentage of women having dreams about being raped. I wonder what percentage of today’s women still have these types of dreams? Should we give all women mandatory lie-detector tests to find out which women are having this fantasy so we can put them in jail before they act out on their fantasy by putting themselves or someone else in harms way or asking their boyfriends or husbands to act out their fantasy for them? Rape is against the law, after all. And what we actually do doesn’t matter anymore, right? Is thinking about something really that much different from looking at a picture and thinking about it? After all, if we think about something, how long is it before we start doing it?

You said in a previous post “…everybody agrees that Devlin is a pedophile pervert who should burn in hell. I don’t need to argue that point.”

I don’t agree. Not because I know he isn’t one but because I don’t know the facts one way or the other. And neither do you.

I don’t trust the cops, DA’s, or the media to tell me the truth about anything and anyone who does is either deluding themselves or is a brainwashed feminist kiss-up.

I know! I know! We have to protect “the children” so whatever we do or say towards that end is totally OK! God help us all when we each turn 18! Particularly us men! And I can assure you that when you are falsely accused of a crime and nifonged up the a**, nobody is going to look back at your past opinions in support of “the children” and say “This guy couldn’t have done it. Here, read what he previously said in support of “the children”. What they’ll say is, “Look at this kiddie porn! This proves he’s guilty! This is what they say in public to hide their real selves!” And everyone will agree with the cops because we all know that cops and DA’s and the media don’t lie. Whatever is on TV or in a newspaper or magazine has to be true otherwise the editors wouldn’t allow it to be printed or broadcast. Riiiiiight!

By the way, have you read that an Arizona legislator just proposed a bill that would make a large percentage of the minutemen who are helping to patrol our border with Mexico “domestic terrorists”? Kiddie porn? Terrorists? Guilty? Who cares? The end justifies the means! Let’s just do away with the court system and throw all men in jail based on whatever the cops, DA’s, legislators and the media decide is best for “the children”. Look at all the money we’ll save! And all that extra money can go to “the children”!