Amazon offers pedophile handbook 'Our goal is to support freedom of expression'

By Jon E. Dougherty ) 2000 WorldNetDaily.com

One of the nation's largest online book retailers is offering a title promoting homosexual sex with children.

According to a description by the book's publisher, "Understanding Loved Boys and Boylovers," available on Amazon.com, attempts to debunk the "myth" that it is harmful to youth to engage in "intergenerational male/male sexual activities" -- or men having sex with young boys.

"The long assumed 'harm' of such activities has failed to be supported by research, and the sociocultural 'wrongness' based on this 'harm' is therefore left without any rational basis," said the review.

Written by David L. Riegel, the book also claims that despite "howls of protest" over its conclusions -- from "right wing radicals all the way up to and including the United States House of Representatives" -- earlier "no harm done" suppositions have "been judged to be true, accurate and objective science" after "having been subjected to intensive examination at every level."

Riegel states that he has spent years moderating websites "devoted to examining these issues." He said, "early on ... it became obvious ... that the men -- and a few boys -- who participate in these sites are not the stereotypical monsters that the media portrays."

Instead, he said, "they are sincere, concerned, loving human beings who simply have -- and were probably born with -- a sexual orientation that is neither understood nor accepted by most others."

"The condemnation and reprehension these boys and men are dealt by society are primarily the result of misinformation that has become institutionalized over time by those who are in positions to deceive and mislead public thinking and policy," Riegel added.

The author cites a controversial study published by the American Psychological Association in the July/August 1998 edition of the Psychological Bulletin called, "A Meta-Analytic Examination of Assumed Properties of Child Sexual Abuse Using College Samples."

The report was widely criticized, most prominently by nationally syndicated talk host and columnist Dr. Laura Schlessinger, who said the report "states that sexual relationships between adults and willing children might be positive to children."

So offensive were the conclusions in the report that a year ago Rep. Matt Salmon, R-Ariz., sponsored House Concurrent Resolution 107, condemning and denouncing all suggestions promoting boy-men sex contained in it. The resolution passed 355-0, with 13 abstentions, Schlessinger reported in her column last August. House Majority Whip Tom DeLay also participated in a press conference denouncing both the report's conclusions and the American Psychological Association for publishing the findings.

After the uproar over the report, the APA said that though it did not support child sexual abuse, it could not "censor [its] journals and avoid articles that might cause controversy."

"However, we have to realize that in the age of Internet, cable and instantly accessible information, our journals no longer speak only to scholars," said American Psychological Association CEO Raymond D. Fowler, Ph.D. He also hinted that the report had been "misinterpreted" and that his organization "must work harder to explain psychological research to policymakers and the public."

"If our scientific publications, sometime written in arcane language difficult for non-psychologists to understand, are likely to be misinterpreted by the public, we have to find ways to explain them or we will pay dearly for their confusion," Fowler wrote in a column explaining the APA's position on the research involved in producing the report.

Several psychiatric professionals agreed with Schlessinger and debunking the report as "junk science," including Dr. Paul Fink, head of the Leadership Council and past president of the American Psychiatric Association.

For its part, Amazon.com takes the issue of what kind of content to offer "very seriously," according to company spokesman John Schommer.

"Our goal is to support freedom of expression and to provide customers with the broadest selection possible so they can find, discover and buy any title they might be seeking," Schommer told WorldNetDaily.

"That selection includes some titles which most people, including employees of Amazon.com, may find distasteful or otherwise objectionable," he said, quick to point out that the online bookseller "does not sell pornography or child pornography."

Schommer said the company "believes it is censorship not to sell certain books because we believe their message repugnant, and we would be rightly criticized if we did so." He added that unless prohibited by law, Amazon.com would continue to make controversial titles available.

"It's important to note that we do not endorse any opinions expressed by individual authors, musical artists or filmmakers," he said.

-- perverts-r-us (kcdecker@nambla.org), June 12, 2000

Answers

Link

-- very sick (freightrain@to.hell), June 12, 2000.

This is sick enough but the fact that perverts addresses this to Ken shows just how sick he is too.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), June 12, 2000.

oops hit the submit button too quickly. The sick one is pervert not Ken.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), June 12, 2000.

I agree, Maria. Perhaps this is a case of projection?

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), June 12, 2000.

sounds like "hawk" or netghost, at it again.

-- the doomer perverts are still at it (sigh@*bigger.sigh*), June 12, 2000.

The title of the post was not meant to imply Ken is a boy-lover, we all know his tastes are more 'animal' in nature...

The reference to Ken is because he claims that society is no 'sicker' now than it was in 1930 or 1970. I don't know of many books like this one that would have made it to the shelves back then.

-- clarification (anon@not.here), June 12, 2000.

This is just a glimpse into our future. For those who would blindly support the gay community and demand their acceptance into mainstream society I say to youGet Educated! There are many aspects of the homosexual lifestyle that the average person would gag on if only publicized. Once you have been tricked into legitimizing gays, then the rest of it will follow. If you have no problem with the concept of boy-love than so be it. God help your children.

Amazon.com is in a no-win situation on this one. Nobody will accept censorship on principal but just how far can we go in allowing books of this nature to hit the market unrestrained? Try and imagine what might be next.

What a wonderful world we live in.

-- The (fact@fan.attic), June 12, 2000.

Thank you for the link. The reviewers were very harsh and decried the misuse of the original study, as well as the sick practice itself. One would hope that this will speak to some who otherwise might purchase this book!

Every time there is a case study of a male who comes forward to testify against his adult male seducer in his childhood, that poor man discusses how he is scarred for life. In our ministry many, many years ago there was a whole age group of young middle-aged males whose lives were ruined by a Scout leader who also taught boys in Sunday School, and who had seduced them. Some couldn't marry, one tried suicide, etc. Not a pretty picture. When we speak of an adult having sex with a child, that is not "man-boy LOVE," it is man-boy RAPE!

-- Elaine Seavey (Gods1sheep@aol.com), June 12, 2000.

The kind of response Ken Decker elicits, even after all this time, remains largely a mystery to me. He is almost invariably polite, he writes clearly, his points are intelligently presented, and his observations and assessments have proved essentially accurate.

Nonetheless, he seems to have attracted a dedicated group of kneejerk attackers. The members of this group have several things in common:

1) They always attack the person, and never address the points he makes.

2) They are always anonymous.

3) The correctness of Ken's predictions is utterly irrelevant to them.

The best theory I can come up with is that Ken's writing style has a way of making inferior people *feel* inferior. Which they demonstrate by lashing out mindlessly. It would seem that those who sense vaguely that they've been failures in life, accommodate this sensation by tearing down those who succeed, at least in their own minds. I think Ken's contributions constitute a measure of adequacy -- adequate people address Ken's points (whether agreeing or disagreeing), and inadequate people can do no more than attack while hiding in anonymity.

As for this book itself -- sad.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), June 12, 2000.

Elaine, you have given us all a bitter taste of reality regarding this degenerate practice of boy-love. The gay community however has a different slant on this sick activity. This is their farm system or recruiting center if you wish. In the homosexual world there exists a desire to convert children at an early age to their sexual lifestyle. Studies have shown that many young boys that are molested by gay men will grow into the homosexual lifestyle as an adult, some out of shame, some out of ignorance, and some that elect to do so. The tobacco companies are certified experts in this practice.

If we as a society are willing to allow this to happen what will stop the older male sexual predators from engaging in the same activity with young girls, with our consent? Where is the line drawn? If we are to continue to be imprisoned by the restraints of political correctness and unbridled personal freedoms there is no bottom to this moral abyss. No longer will our childrens teachers, male or female, be reluctant to engage in sexual activities with their students.

This madness will only cease when we as a people refuse to allow it to continue. Think about this the next time you are proudly attending a gay pride parade or some such event.

-- The (fact@fan.attic), June 12, 2000.

Fan in the attic, I think you're mixing homosexuality with sexual abuse of children. You know little to nothing about the homosexual lifestyle otherwise you wouldn't be "talking" this way. Give it a rest. I'm in favor of to each his own but draw the line when it comes to children.

Clarification, I remember those posts between a and Ken. I tend to agree with Ken. Life isn't that different. This kind of behavior went on back in the early century but not made public. It was always swept under the carpet. In today's openness, it's simply being talked about a whole lot more. Back then, not many cried "child abuse", yet many were abused as children; just take a look at the prison population. That's just the way it was.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), June 12, 2000.

Fan in the closet:

You said:

Studies have shown that many young boys that are molested by gay men will grow into the homosexual lifestyle as an adult

References to the peer reviewed literature please.

Best wishes,,,,

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), June 12, 2000.

Z1X4Y7 , happy reading. Try the first and last link then work your way into the middle.

http://www.frc.org/insight/is94e3hs.html

http://www.thelinkup.com/stats.html

http://www.soc-um.org/pedo.html

http://www.hotstreak.net/anti/home.htm

http://www.gospelcom.net/mlm/Ped.html

http://www.chatelaine.com/read/news+views/pedofile.html

http://www.crosswinds.net/~fathersforlife/gaysuic.htm

http://www.duke.edu/web/SXL/LGBhistory.html

-- The (fact@fan.attic), June 12, 2000.

Any perv that messes with my underage son or daughter gets a bullet between the balls.

-- (nemesis@awol.com), June 12, 2000.

Z1X4Y7, in case you are a hard sell this first link should do it for you!

http://www.afa.net/afajournal/1999/june/activists.htm

You need more?

http://www.corpus-delicti.com/incest.html

http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_chil.htm

http://www.ncjrs.org/txtfiles/163390.txt

http://www.brown.edu/Administration/George_Street_Journal/cheit.html

-- The (fact@fan.attic), June 12, 2000.

Z1X4Y7, Im not called the Fact Fanatic for nothing. More of your requested data will be seen on these high quality links. Next Question!

http://www.all.org/encyclopedia/plae121.htm

http://www.ziplink.net/~glen/cameron.html

http://www.familyresearchinst.org/FRI_EduPamphlet2.html

http://www.mfc.org/resources/backgrounders/homosexuality.htm

http://www.leaderu.com/offices/rekers/docs/handbook-ch14.html

-- The (fact@fan.attic), June 12, 2000.

Fan in the closet:

I am asking for a reference to the peer reviewed literature. You now the stuff. I can't access it on the web unless I am a suscriber. I can go to my library and find the professional journals. Thanks.

Best wishes,,,,

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), June 12, 2000.

By the way fan, to make it easier use the common format:

Author's name, Date, Title, Journal name, Citation.

As in:

Smith, A. and B. Jones. (1999) The critical point value of nothing. J. of Thermodynamics. 22:221-227.

The actual form depends on the journal, but we don't need to be formal here.

Thanks for your help. I will them up when supplied.

Best wishes,,,,

Z

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), June 12, 2000.

Maria, you are correct! I AM blending homosexuality with child molestation/abuse. Why? Because they go hand in hand (pardon the pun) and because I DO know a lot about the gay lifestyle and homosexuality. Am I gay? No. Am I a wild-eyed religious zealot? Not at all. Am I a fact driven realist? Absolutely! You too can get an education by reading the material and studies I have linked to in the above posts. You neednt be embarrassed regarding your ignorance for you have a lot of company.

-- The (fact@fan.attic), June 12, 2000.

Fan in the closet:

I assume this means that you have no references to the peer reviewed literature; jus' them ol' links to web sites. OK, I will give up.

Best wishes,,,

Z

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), June 12, 2000.

Z1X4Y7

I think you wouldnt care how much certified data was presented to you.

I think you have not read any of the studies that Ive linked to for your review.

I think you would always need to see one more document.

I think the continued request for peer request literature is your way of admitting your lack of debating skills and the inner certainty that you have wandered too far out of your limited arena of knowledge.

I think you are the type of individual that does not get alone very well with facts that oppose your viewpoint.

I think you are not worth anymore time on my part.

Have a great day!

-- The (fact@fan.attic), June 12, 2000.

Fan in the closet:

I think you are not worth anymore time on my part.

I am not sure how yours ol' web sites are certified data. But you are correct. As I said, give me references from peer reviewed journals. You can't; therefore further attempts on your part would not be useful. Nice day yourself.

Best wishes,,,,

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), June 12, 2000.

Lasting Effects

This section reviews research on long-term effects of childhood sexual abuse in men's lives. Several articles and books are listed along with the symptoms and other effects. The complete citations for these articles and books, which you can get from libraries and bookstores, are on the next section of this page. Findings on the long-term effects of child sexual abuse in males have been more consistent than those on prevalence. Methodologies for determining symptomatic outcomes are relatively straightforward, and many studies have utilized standardized measures that are widely accepted in the field. First, I want to recommend a paper by David Lisak, Ph.D. This paper contains many powerful quotations from interviews with male survivors of sexual abuse. Lisak groups the quotations into themes, and discusses them with remarkable insight and compassion. The themes are:

 Anger

 Fear

 Homosexuality Issues

 Helplessness

 Isolation and Alienation

 Legitimacy

 Loss

 Masculinity Issues

 Negative Childhood Peer Relations

 Negative Schemas about People

 Negative Schemas about the Self

 Problems with Sexuality

 Self Blame/Guilt

 Shame/Humiliation

One man emailed me to share this experience: "reading [Lisak's article] was the first time I realized that other people have the same issues I have. I sat in the library and cried when I read that article. Not the usual reaction to scholarly research, but I'm sure Prof. Lisak wouldn't mind" (used with permission).

Lisak, D. (1994). The psychological impact of sexual abuse: Content analysis of interviews with male survivors. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 7, 525-548.

Using standardized measures of symptoms, researchers have found that men who were sexually abused in childhood, whether or not they seek out mental health services, may suffer from:

 Anxiety



 Depression  Dissociation  Hostility and anger

 Impaired relationships  Low self-esteem  Sexual dysfunction 

Sleep disturbance  Suicidal ideas and behavior The following researchers have used standardized measures and found different combinations of the above symptoms:  Bagley, Wood, & Young, 1994  Briere, Evans, Runtz, & Wall, 1988  Collings, 1995

 Fromuth & Burkhart, 1989  Hunter, 1991

 Olson, 1990  Peters & Range, 1995

Therapists working with men who were sexually abused in childhood have conducted clinical case studies and consistently reported findings on long-term problems including:

 Guilt and self-blame Lew, 1988; Myers, 1989; Hunter, 1990.

 Low self-esteem and negative self-image Lew, 1988; Myers, 1989.  Problems with intimacy Bruckner & Johnson, 1987; Dimock, 1988; Lew, 1988; Krug, 1989; Hunter, 1990.  Sexual problems, compulsions, or dysfunctions Bruckner & Johnson, 1987; Johnson & Shrier, 1987; Dimock, 1988; Lew, 1988; Myers, 1989; Hunter, 1990.  Substance abuse and depression Krug, 1989.

 Symptoms of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Myers, 1989.

Some of the long-term effects of sexual abuse are related to the development of gender identity. A number of clinicians' case studies indicate that male survivors of childhood sexual abuse may experience:

 Attempts to "prove" their masculinity by having multiple female sexual partners, sexually victimizing others, and/or engaging in dangerous or violent behaviors

Bruckner & Johnson, 1987; Lew 1988.  Confusion over their gender and sexual identities

Nasjleti, 1980; Bruckner & Johnson, 1987; Johnson & Shrier, 1987; Dimock, 1988; Lew, 1988; Myers, 1989; Gilgun & Reiser, 1990.

 Sense of being inadequate as men

Dimock, 1988; Lew, 1988; Myers, 1989; Pierce & Pierce, 1985.

 Sense of lost power, control, and confidence in their manhood

Myers, 1989.

Finally, some clinicians have noted that sexually abused males often experience confusion and distress about their sexuality

 Confusion about their own sexual orientation

Nasjleti, 1980; Dimock, 1988; Lew, 1988; Myers, 1989; Gilgun & Reiser, 1990.  Fear that the sexual abuse has caused or will cause them to become homosexual

Nasjleti, 1980; Finkelhor, 1984; Dimock, 1988; Gilgun & Reiser, 1990; Lew, 1988; Myers, 1989.  Homophobia, an irrational fear or intolerance of homosexuality

Gilgun & Reiser, 1990; Lew, 1988; Myers, 1989.

-- The (fact@fan.attic), June 12, 2000.

Fan in the closet:

You aren't getting this. In that long post, you gave me one Journal reference. I just ask to have them all. I will, in my own sweet time, read them. That is what this is all about.

Nasjleti, 1980; Dimock, 1988; Lew, 1988; Myers, 1989; Gilgun & Reiser, 1990. ? Fear that the sexual abuse has caused or will cause them to become homosexual Nasjleti, 1980; Finkelhor, 1984; Dimock, 1988; Gilgun & Reiser, 1990; Lew, 1988; Myers, 1989. ? Homophobia, an irrational fear or intolerance of homosexuality Gilgun & Reiser, 1990; Lew, 1988; Myers, 1989.

This tells me nothing. Let me guess; you don't really work in this area; you are a shill for some cause. If you give me references, I can read them and talk to the experts on campus. Being at a major research university has its advantages.

Best wishes

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), June 12, 2000.

I read all the links.

1. Paul Cameron reference. Cameron states that all the studies are skewed. He's a psychologist who thinks he knows better than the studies.

2. no reference to homosexuality AND pedophilia.

3. same

4. search engine.

5. letter to a pedophile who wrote in previously?

6. story of a heterosexual pedophile.

7. high suicide rate in gays.

8. Specifically says "A homosexual orientation does not automatically lead to pedophilia; and MOST homosexuals do not abuse children." Then it went on to reference a Holmes & Slap 1988 review as written up by the AMA. A further search on the AMA simply says that molestation of young males tends to go unreported and folks ought to keep an eye on their boys as well as their girls.

9. book reviews

10. "Probably the majority of adults in North America incorrectly believe that there is a high degree of pedophilia in the adult homosexual community." link

11. about incest - almost exclusively heterosexual.

12. nothing about homosexuality and pedophilia.

13. defines pederasty and pedophilia, but author believes that pedophiles CARE about the sex of the child.

14. Cameron again.

15. Cameron again.

16. References for footnotes 21 and 22 reference K.Jay & A. Young "The Gay Report", 1979 and W.L. Marshall's "Early Onset & Deviant Sexuality in Child Molesters", Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 6;1991, p e23-336.

17. "A still prevalent conception of homosexuality is that it results from a seduction or recruitment by a homosexual adult or older adolescent. Bell, Weinstein, & Hammersmith, (1981), p. 101) reported that they found no evidence for this. A Shrier & Johnson (1988) study was mentioned, as well as Finkelhor 1979 survey. Both of these studies mentioned what Holmes & Slap said about lack of reporting, adding that this could cause confusion on sexual orientation in the youngster.

I think my numbering is off by one. The government study saw no correlation between homosexuality and pedophila, and I don't recall them mentioning any relationship between early childhood homosexual experiences with older men.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), June 12, 2000.

Anita:

I read them too. You are too kind. I just want Fan in the Closet to come up with real information. He can't. Hence, I must assume that he/she doesn't know what he/she is talking about. A pre-progammed speech.

Best wishes,,,

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), June 12, 2000.

One last note:

The original post came from the WorldNetDaily.com

This is a publication that I place well above the NY Times but well below the Dry Gulch Review; or did I get that backwards. :^)

I just can't remember these things.

Best wishes,,,,,

Z

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), June 12, 2000.

Anita:

One final last comment; this is not a hard science; very subjective. I would like to see many refernces from the late 90's. Not stuff from the 80's. And I certainly wouldn't trust information selected by someone with an axe to grind.

Best wishes,,,,

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), June 12, 2000.

Z:

I've already been through this exercise on EZBOARD. I thought attic had something new to offer, but half the links didn't address the topic at all, and several specifically argued against him. I agree with you on the date of reports. That's why I didn't bother to research Jay and Young.

attic:

It's true that rape causes anxiety, and all the other symptoms you mentioned in your lastest post. These same symptoms occur for female rape victims. Women don't worry about their sexual orientation, but they think they've somehow CAUSED this to happen. They're more likely to think of themselves as sluts. It's extremely important that ANY rape victim receive counseling to correct these misconceptions. This is why Holmes & Slap, Shrier & Johnson, etc. were so interested in bringing these symptoms to the forefront.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), June 12, 2000.

Rape is to sex as baseball is to being beaten with a bat.

-- Tarzan the Ape Man (tarzan@swingingthroughthejunglewithouta.net), June 12, 2000.

Mr. Z and Anita.

I am sitting here wondering why anyone would question my original statement addressed to Elaine Seavey:

Elaine, you have given us all a bitter taste of reality regarding this degenerate practice of boy-love. The gay community however has a different slant on this sick activity. This is their farm system or recruiting center if you wish. In the homosexual world there exists a desire to convert children at an early age to their sexual lifestyle. Studies have shown that many young boys that are molested by gay men will grow into the homosexual lifestyle as an adult, some out of shame, some out of ignorance, and some that elect to do so.

At the risk of alienating you two I have to ask this simple question.

Do you both believe there are fabrications or mis-representations in this statement, and if so where? Sounds like you both might be in denial but that is the case with a good portion of todays society. You know, try not to think about the bad things..theyll just go away. Why do you need to have someone prove to you how harmful the practice of boy-love is? If I tell you that the Sun will rise tomorrow how much proof do you require? Your ability to ignore these problems may give you some piece of mind but it scares the hell out of me.

-- The (fact@fan.attic), June 12, 2000.

Fan in the closet:

Sounds like you both might be in denial but that is the case with a good portion of todays society.

You confuse disagreement with your scientifically unsupported opinions with denial. You should go to EZ board. Few will question you there [a few will]. In your case with your documentation, it would be easier to preach to the converted.

Best wishes,,,,

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), June 12, 2000.

By-the-by:

Please note: Mr. Z and Anita

Does the use of Mr. remind you of someone who has posted here for sometime under another name. Ah, memories.

Best wishes,,,,

Z

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), June 12, 2000.

What's an EZ board?

-- The (fact@fan.attic), June 12, 2000.

perverts-r-us,

Late to the forum here. This is ugly crap and you should (never happen right little fella?) be ashamed.

Charlie

-- Carlos (riffraff@cybertime.net), June 13, 2000.

RANT!!!!!!!!!! ON!!!!!!!!!

FUCK YOU!!!!!!!! perverts-r-us,I think your handle fits you perfectly,as does the dick in your mouth,belly FULL??? you cheap shit scum bag,YOU ARE the primary reason to keep abortion legal!!!

If you need attention to your posts why do you need to drag someone elses name into it? Because you are a brainless fudge packin' moron? guess so,you have proven that.

Rant over.

-- capnfun (capnfun1@excite.com), June 13, 2000.

I seem to recall that a while back Amazon pulled a book about Scientology that was non-complementary about that organization. After a wide outcry they supposedly put it back on their list, but just try to purchase it now. Last time I looked all such books were unavailable for various reasons (like maybe the publisher went bankrupt in the interim).

I guess it's only censorship if Amazon approves of the content.

-- Newsman (searchig@for.the.truth), June 13, 2000.

attic:

Nobody has to prove to me that man/boy love is unhealthy. You went on, however, to DECLARE that the gay community recruited homosexuals from the child base. This assertion is TOTALLY unfounded, and even one of your own links states explicitly that the gay community does not wish to be associated with the very small percentage of folks who enjoy this practice. "Allowing" these folks to march in gay parades does NOT condone their practice anymore than a town that grants a parade permit to KKK indicates that racism is condoned.

Furthermore, you claim an association with pedophilia and homosexuality. This is again unfounded, and I saw that misconception in one of your links. Pedophiles in general, choose the weakest youth. Most often, this is a female child, but sometimes the child is male. Weak is weak. Your tendency, and the tendency of the author in the link to which I refer go from a) the pedophile chose a male victim to b) therefore the pedophile is homosexual. This is simply not true.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), June 13, 2000.

Fan in the attic is gay. Homophobia run wild. So afraid others will know that he is gay, he continues to bash gays.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), June 13, 2000.

From: Preparations, ` la Carte (pic), near Monterey, California

The anonymous poster of the Jon E. Dougherty article from WorldNetDaily.com, which originates this thread, suggests in the title of the thread that the book Understanding Loved Boys and Boylovers is a "pedophile handbook." According to the reviews of the book at amazon.com (both positive and negative) it is not such an instructional handbook, but rather an examination of a broad range of attitudes and behaviors in relationships between men and boys. These include clearly abusive and non-abusive relationships, as well as a large gray area about which attitudes obviously vary all over the map. The book apparently examines these relationships, as well as societal attitudes about them in considerable detail, by way of a fictional account of a courtroom drama centered around a false abuse accusation made by a boy who had been earlier abused by others.

The fact@fan.attic takes the opportunity to make a gratuitous swipe at gays for being somehow responsible for the fact that some men are neither heterosexuals nor homosexuals, but instead oriented toward children. As has been much played up in the far right media, Laura Schlessinger similarly goes on the attack. When asked to provide documentation of these claims fact@fan.attic and Laura come up empty handed. But does this stop them? No. They claim that it is up to those who disbelieve their outrageous statements to prove a negative.

I agree with Elaine that intergenerational sex, when the younger partner is a minor should remain the crime that it is, statutory rape. The power dynamic between kids and adults in our culture is such that kids can not be self-sufficient until their late teens. Thus, they cannot be considered to be making free choices about sex with adults.

It is a sad fact that children who are sexually abused by adults are most often victims of a family member. Next most often the offender is a leader in the family's religious life. Pedophiles are also especially likely to have worked themselves into positions of authority over children, such as by teaching or serving as youth group leaders.

It is my impression that the Boy Scout organization today generally does a very good job of preventing situations in which children could be sexually abused by adults. This may have been a problem in years past, but I believe they have good double teaming rules in place to safeguard the children, now. I do believe, though, that the BSA's insistence upon excluding gay men from leadership roles is misguided.

I agree with Ken, if he did actually say so, that the good old days weren't necessarily so morally good as they're cracked up to be. A lot of bad behavior gets swept under the rug when people cannot bring themselves to talk openly about sex and religion. The act of sweeping things under the rug, all by itself, is psychologically crippling, as has been well explained by Alice Miller.

PLEASE, don't quote the next sentence out of context. Having said all of this, I believe that it is probably possible for a child to have a positive sexual experience with an adult, (assuming the child is sexually mature), and that that probably happens more often than we might think. We just wouldn't tend to hear about those cases. The problem is that a sexually aroused adult is in no position to be evaluating the best interests of the child.

In western cultures there has been only a few generations since the time when people would get married at ages thirteen and fourteen, as soon as they were sexually mature. There exist, even today, some cultures where marriages happen this early. A few generations earlier yet, most people did not live much beyond age thirty. We may be hardwired to be sexually attracted to youth. The pedophile may not be the unimaginable monster we believe them to be.

Unfortunately, I think it could be very damaging for a child to see his parents absolutely freaking out upon learning of his sexual encounter with an adult. Seeing a "lover" go to prison could also be unsettling, if there hadn't been an element of force. What about prevention, then? Stranger danger lectures could certainly be overdone. We don't want to make kids paranoid about their sexuality. Where to go with all of these inconsistent thoughts, though? What's a mother to do?

-- Dancr (addy.available@my.webpage), June 13, 2000.

Direct from today's AP Wire, with the usual disclaimers:

Hare Krishna Organization Sued

by SUSAN PARROTT Associated Press Writer

DALLAS (AP) -- More than three dozen former students of Hare Krishna boarding schools filed a $400 million lawsuit against leaders of the religious community Monday, alleging years of sexual, physical and emotional torture.

The 44 plaintiffs in the suit allege child abuse over two decades at boarding schools in the United States and India.

The federal lawsuit names the International Society of Krishna Consciousness(ISKCON) as lead defendant, along with 17 members of the group's governing board of top leaders and the estate of the movement's founder, A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada.

Plaintiffs' attorney Windle Turley called the abuse ''the most unthinkable abuse and maltreatment of little children we have seen. It includes rape, sexual abuse, physical torture and emotional terror of children as young as 3 years of age.''

He said ISKCON knowingly allowed suspected sex offenders to work in its boarding schools. A Hare Krishna spokesman in Washington, Anuttama, said Monday that Krishna leaders have acknowledged abuse in the boarding schools and worked to provide counseling and financial support to victims.''It's disappointing that it had to go to a court situation,'' he said. ''We will try to do anything we can to address their needs.''

ISKCON's Child Protection Task Force, formed in 1998, has compiled the names of 200 people who allegedly inflicted abuse in the 1970s and '80s, said director Dhira Govinda. The office has finished investigating more than 60 cases, he said.

''There is no doubt many children did suffer ... while under the care of the organization,'' Govinda said. He said Krishna leaders have pledged $250,000 a year to investigate past child abuse and aid survivors.

Turley said the abuse started in 1972 at ISKCON's first school in Dallas, and continued in six other U.S. schools and two in India. He said he believes more than half of the children in the schools were victimized. ''We believe the facts as they are developed will reveal more than 1,000 child victims, many of whom have already taken their own lives or are today emotionally and socially dysfunctional,'' said Turley, whose Dallas law firm won millions in a sex abuse case against the Roman Catholic Church in 1997.

In a statement faxed to The Associated Press late Monday, Vinod Patel, president of the Dallas Krishna Temple, said the temple is a ''different corporation with different by-laws, management and staff from the organization that ran the school during the 1970s.''

''Not a single person involved with this temple since 1980 had anything to do with the Krishna boarding school named in the lawsuit,'' Patel said.

Among the allegations against ISKCON are that young girls were given as brides to older men who donated to the religious community. The lawsuit also claims that children were: --Forced to sleep in unheated rooms and walk great distances in bitter cold without coats or shoes;

--Deprived of medical care for malaria, hepatitis and broken bones;

--Scrubbed with steel wool until their skin bled;

--Moved to different schools in different states without their parents' consent.

Plaintiff Greg Luczyk, 30, said he was beaten four or five times a day with a two-by-four while in a Krishna school in India in the early 1980s. He said his mother tried to remove him from the school and sent him plane tickets to come home, but teachers would tear up the tickets in front of school assemblies.

''The parents were trying to get us out, but the ring of molesters had tight control,'' said Luczyk, who lives in Vancouver, British Columbia.

The Hare Krishna spiritual community flowered in the 1960s when Prabhupada brought his distinctive form of devotional Hinduism to the United States. Soon, thousands of Westerners were wearing saris and pajama-like dhotis, living in Hare Krishna temple compounds, and chanting the mantra they believed would lead to a greater awareness of God known as Krishna.

Prabhupada said children should be sent to boarding schools at age 5 so they could learn to be pure devotees, freeing parents to sell devotional books and do other jobs.

By the end of the 1970s, 11 schools, known as gurukulas or houses of the guru, were operating in North America with several more around the world. Now, the only boarding school in the United States is in Alachua, Fla., home to the largest American Hare Krishna community.

^------=

On the Net: Attorney Windle Turley: http://www.wturley.com

International Society of Krishna Consciousness: http://www.iskcon.com

-- Elaine Seavey (Gods1sheep@aol.com), June 13, 2000.

Tracie, I've read your post three times and I have just one question for you:

'Would you explain your views to your children as you have to us?'

You are unfit woman.

-- Ra (tion@l.1), June 13, 2000.

Dancr:

Thank you for the Alice Miller reference, although the link didn't work. A search on Google presented many others, the first of which is Alice Miller.

Ra:

I think Tracie specifically asked that her comment not be taken out of context expecting exactly the type of comment you just made. In reviewing the material yesterday, I couldn't help but notice one thing. While statutory rape laws tend to apply to females under 18, the literature surrounding the homosexual experience refers to children as boys 19 and under. We all know that boys 14, 15, 16, and older [even perhaps YOUNGER] are engaging in rape of females, and even engaging in concensual sex with females. Similarly, boys and girls in these age groups may experiment with each other in homosexual behavior and have no negative psychological impacts. Similarly, females who are under the age limit of statutory rape may engage in concensual relationships with men much older than they, and boys may engage in concensual relationships with men much older than they. The key word here is concensual, but even Tracie admits that we do not trust our youths to make these decisions for themselves. As parents, we understand the curiosity and if the situation arises wherein the child encounters an experience, our goal is to help the child, not label the child.

I may disagree with Tracie on chemtrails, but I have no disagreement with her parenting skills.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), June 13, 2000.

Fan, WHY did you lump me with someone else and say WE were not facing the truth, or whatever that line was you spouted? My entry was QUITE CLEAR in expressing my view that man-boy "love" is rather, man-boy "rape," and I clearly gave a small part of the long, sad story of the age group to whom my counselor/clergyman (doctorate in pastoral psych and counseling) tried to minister healing due to their horrible results of being so-called "loved" by a male adult who used two covers in which to do his dirty work: Boy Scouts and Sunday School. What more would you wish me to have said to have understood me?

Please see above the AP Wire story I put here today, which shows what adults forcing sex upon (or introducing sex to) underage children can do to their psyche and entire life.

-- Elaine Seavey (Gods1sheep@aol.com), June 13, 2000.

attic:

Here's a link from the U.S. Dept. of Justice with stastics on rape of children under 12. U.S. Dept. of Justice statistics on rape of children under 12.

Notice that 99% of the predators are male, yet 91% of the victims are female.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), June 13, 2000.

My spelling is atrocious. Please read stastics to be statistics, and concensual to read consensual.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), June 13, 2000.

Whoa there Elaine, Im with you all the way on this issue. Not sure how you saw otherwise but let me assure you that we are allies on this subject.

Anita, your reference to the DOJ statistics is valid only if you are willing to discount the incidents that are unreported. I think I will move on to another subject as there is simply no debating someone who would take any time to offer excuses or support for the homosexual lifestyle. This is one issue that I personally see as black or white. Either you is or you isnt.

Maria, let me assure you that I am not gay and do not have any latent problems with my own sexuality. I just refuse to accept the gay community as anything but what they are; Very sick people. You of course are entitled to your opinion, which I respect.

Dancer, you have put forth some very good points but for some reason I feel like you are also attempting to excuse the man/boy sexual behavior. Certainly your right but I will disagree for reasons previously stated.

Although it would seem that my viewpoints are in the minority on this forum I'm still pleased to have found this place where such a wide variety of subjects can be thrown about. My heartfelt thanks go out to the moderators, whomever they may be.

-- The (fact@fan.attic), June 13, 2000.

"I think I will move on to another subject as there is simply no debating someone who would take any time to offer excuses or support for the homosexual lifestyle. This is one issue that I personally see as black or white. Either you is or you isnt."

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), June 13, 2000.

Anita, I enjoyed the cartoon. Too bad that lifes realities cant be displayed in six frames. By chance, do you live in the country?

-- The (fact@fan.attic), June 13, 2000.

Attic:

Where I live has WHAT to do with this topic? You've already attempted to propogate rumors regarding homosexuals, strictly for the purpose of gaining support for your own opinion of homosexuals in general. You've already tried to state that your opinions were correct because YOU have all this experience with the gay community. It doesn't matter to you that the studies all dispute what you say. You'll find SOME misinformation and project it as truth. I don't think anyone here is unfamiliar with this process. In fact, it's the main reason most of us ARE here...to separate the truth from the propoganda.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), June 14, 2000.

Anita, it's hard to deal with closed minds, isn't it? Fan will never realize his invalid categorization of gays. Sad, but we have to accept this narrow-minded thinking in an open society.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), June 14, 2000.

My, my Anita, arent we the touchy one today. I asked if you lived in the country because you didnt appear to be very sophisticated regarding mainstream realities. Oh, I know it is so easy to write-off anyone that opposes the gay community as a raging redneck but that is not the case I can assure you. There is a good portion of the population that regards homosexuality as a sickness. I just happen to be someone that is not afraid to speak my mind for fear of offending folks like you. Besides, I know that most people will say one thing to be proper and think something else altogether. Sound familiar?

After looking through the many threads on this forum I see you are one of, if not the major contributor on each subject. I agree with much of what you have said and dont agree with some. You obviously have more time than anyone else to participate so that tells me that you may be sitting around at your PC for many hours with nothing else to do. You do have a well-rounded mind but I suspect you dont get out much these days.

Im new here but I have no problem jousting with an old timer like you. I respect your views and trust you will do the same. I have never learned the art of HTML and would love to be able to put up cartoons like you have done above. Help anyone?

-- The (fact@fan.attic), June 14, 2000.

Some 'truth' and 'reality' for those of you stuck in the denial mode. If you are just going to discount this report on merit, save your breath as it will just confirm your blatent ignorance on the subject matter.

Violence and Homosexuality

By Paul Cameron, Ph. D. Dr. Cameron is Chariman of the Family Research Institute of Colorado Springs, Colorado USA. Click here for more information about this organization. You may contact him at: Family Research Institute, PO Box 62640, Colorado Springs, CO 80962 USA. Phone number: (303) 681- 3113.

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- In 1992 two Jeffersonville, Indiana lesbians, aged 17 and 16, abducted a 12-year-old girl whom they accused of trying to "steal a girlfriend." The little girl was pushed into the trunk of a car, stabbed repeatedly, and beaten with a heavy metal bar. While still struggling, they poured gasoline on her and set her ablaze. Later that year a Fort Lauderdale, Florida 14-year-old was convicted of first-degree murder for helping to kill his 40-year-old father. The father "was stabbed 45 times and beaten so badly with an iron skillet that the skillet shattered." The boy confessed that he helped his fathers former homosexual lover and roommate kill him so he and the 31-year-old "could live together." These murders fit traditional psychiatric opinion: excessive violence is naturally associated with other forms of social pathology. From this perspective, those who rebel against societys norms  homosexuals, prostitutes, alcoholics, etc.  are more apt to be violent also. Gay leaders reply that they are not pathological, rebellious, or sexually deviant. They contend that gays are gentle, loving people and that the violence they experience proves that they need special hate crime laws to protect them from non- homosexual gay bashers.

Whos right? Does the excess of violence naturally well up from within a pathological gay subculture or do outsiders direct it toward homosexuals? Keeping in mind that only about 2%3% of adults are homosexual or bisexual, (1) let's examine varieties of violence.

Murder and Mass Murder

Although the total number of victims dispatched by a given killer is often in doubt, (e.g., homosexual Henry Lucas claimed that he killed 350), it appears that the modern world record for serial killing is held by a Russian homosexual, Andrei Chikatilo, who was convicted in 1992 of raping, murdering and eating parts of at least 21 boys, 17 women and 14 girls. The pathology of eating ones sexual victims also characterized Milwaukee's Jeffrey Dahmer in 1992. He not only killed 17 young men and boys, but cooked and ate their body parts.

The top six U.S. male serial killers were all gay:  Donald Harvey claimed 37 victims in Kentucky;

 John Wayne Gacy raped and killed 33 boys in Chicago, burying them under his house and in his yard;

 Patrick Kearney accounted for 32, cutting his victims into small pieces after sex and leaving them in trash bags along the Los Angeles freeways;

 Bruce Davis molested and killed 27 young men and boys in Illinois;

 A gay sex-murder-torture ring (Corll-Henley-Brooks) sent 27 Texas men and boys to their grave; and

 Juan Corona was convicted of murdering 25 migrant workers (he "made love" with their corpses).

Lesbian Aileen Wuornos laid claim in 1992 to "worst female killer" with at least 7 middle-aged male victims. She singlehandedly topped the lesbian nurse team of Catherine Wood and Gwen Graham, who had killed 6 convalescent patients in Grand Rapids, Michigan.

The association between serial murder and homosexuality isnt recent. Two gays compete for the spot of "worlds worst murderer." During the Nazi reign of terror, Auschwitz executioner Ludwig Tiene strangled, crushed, and gnawed boys and young men to death while he raped them. Though his grand total is uncertain, he often murdered as many as 100 a day. Gilles de Rais (Bluebeard) brutally destroyed the lives of 800 boys. Each lad was lured to his home, bathed and fed. Just as the poor boy thought "this is my lucky day," he was raped, then killed by being ripped or cut apart and either burned or eaten.

A study of 518 sexually-tinged mass murders in the U.S. from 1966 to 1983 determined that 350 (68%) of the victims were killed by those who practiced homosexuality and that 19 (44%) of the 43 murderers were bisexuals or homosexuals.(2)

Though probably less than a majority of mass murderers are homosexual, given that no more than 3% of the populace is gay, homosexual murderers show up much more frequently than one would expect (even Richard Speck engaged in homosexuality). Along with serial murder, there appears to be a connection between homosexuality and murder. Evidence from before the gay rights movement is limited. Of 444 homicides in one jurisdiction from 1955-1973, investigators noted 5 clear "sexual motivation" murders. Three of the 5 involved homosexuality and 2 involved heterosexuality. (3)

Probing more deeply into the connection between murder and homosexuality, Jim Warren, who worked as a counselor at the Washington State Corrections Center, did the intake interview for almost all the younger murderers (i.e., under age 36) in the state of Washington from 1971-82 (during the growth of the gay rights movement). He was "probably the only one who examined the entirety of each of their case files." Warren testified (4) that he was struck with how frequently homosexuality turned up in the cases.

Starting with a trickle of 2 or 3 murders/year in 1972 until dozens/year by the 1980s, he noted a recurrent pattern: Although the motive listed in the report was often robbery or theft, "about 50% of the time" it was also associated with homosexuality. Typically, a homosexual would meet someone at a bar or park and invite him to his home. Before the morning, an argument would ensue and he or his visitor would be dead.

Violent Sexual Practices

A substantial minority of homosexuals (between 22% (5) to 37% (6,7) ) indulge in painful or violent sex (e.g., bondage and discipline [B/D], where the partner is physically restrained and mildly tortured, or sadomasochism [S/M], where partners are tortured or hurt during sex). Even in the 1940s, psychiatrist David Abrahamsen (8) noted, "It is well known that homosexual inclinations may be accompanied by sadistic or masochistic tendencies.... These perversions play a great part in many sexual offenses and in many cases of murder." In a national survey of random samples of homosexuals and heterosexuals, (7) 32% of those males who called themselves homosexual or bisexual versus 5% of heterosexual males reported having engaged in sadomasochism; 17% of lesbians versus 4% of heterosexual women also admitted to S/M. Likewise, gays and lesbians were about four times more apt to engage in bondage than were heterosexuals.

 Homosexual books and magazines celebrate the "fun" of violent sex. For instance, a Denver gay columnist (the "leathersex fairy"), told his readers how to strangle and flog ones partner during sex. He also extolled the practice of "hanging from a tree by meat hooks through the pectoral muscles" and described "guys who like to have burning cigars, cigarettes, or matches held near or pressed into their skin." (9) Likewise, national and international gay tour books matter-of-factly list places where sadomasochistic sex can be obtained. (10)

 In 1993, London gays raised #100,000 to appeal a conviction in which the judge ruled that "sex is no excuse for violence.... Pleasure derived from the infliction of pain is an evil thing." The crime? "Nailing a foreskin and scrotum to a board" and "pouring hot wax in a urethra." (11)

 The 1980 CBS-TV documentary, Gay Power, Gay Politics reported that about 10% of the accidental deaths among young men in San Francisco resulted from sadomasochistic sex gone awry.

Deliberately Infecting Others During Sex

Gay activists often argue that what consenting adults do in private is nobody elses business. However, gays have sex with so many different partners (5,6,7) that they increase their risk of getting or transmitting sexually transmitted diseases (STDs). Indeed, homosexuals are considerably more apt to get STDs than are non- homosexuals. (12)

Most who get an STD decide that they will do all in their power not to infect others. But others  an important minority  decide that they will make their partners suffer as much as they have. As Mirko Grmek (13) noted "every historian of disease knows that such an attitude of vengeance, or at least of recklessness, had contributed in other times to the spread of tuberculosis and syphilis." Limited evidence suggests that, compared to heterosexuals, homosexuals are more apt to harm their sexual partners deliberately. The only comparative study (5,9) on this issue found that about 1% of male and female heterosexuals compared to 7% of gays and 3% of lesbians admitted to deliberately passing on STDs that they had acquired.

When the disease is AIDS, the personal and social costs of deliberate infection are exceptionally high. Several examples of homosexuals who were deliberate spreaders of AIDS have been documented, (13) but the most notorious is that of "patient zero," the Canadian flight attendant who, until his death at age 32, shared his body and infection with 250 men every year. From the late 1970s through the early 1980s he was personally responsible for at least 40 of the first 248 American cases of AIDS and told public health officials in San Francisco it "was nobody elses business but his own."

There also appears to be a connection between the practice of violent sex and ones willingness to deliberately infect someone else. Dividing our random national sample (7,12) into those with no interest in homosexual activity (non-H) and those with at least some homosexual interest (H)  and combining males and females  we found that 4.0% of the non-Hs vs 21.8% of those with at least some homosexual interest said that they had participated in sadomasochism (S/M); 7.8% of the non-Hs admitted to bondage (B/D) vs 27.5% of the Hs. Further, those who had engaged in violent sex of either type were twice as likely to have deliberately attempted to infect a partner than those without such violent experience (see Figure).

In 1992 three London STD clinics reported that almost half of their homosexual patients who knew they were infected with HIV had then gotten rectal gonorrhoea. (14) These gays were not permitting their deadly infection to spoil their sexual fun. By 1993 over 100,000 U.S. gays had died of AIDS and tens of thousands had died of hepatitis B. Most of these had been infected, many deliberately or carelessly, by other homosexuals.

Homosexual Rape

The National Crime Survey (15) reported that about 1 of every 10,000 males over the age of 11 is raped each year (vs 13 of every 10,000 females)  that is, about 7% of rapes are homosexual. In two jurisdictions, Columbia, SC (16) and Memphis, TN, (17) males accounted for 5.7% of the victims of rape reported to authorities  in only one instance was the assailant a woman.

Along with the rise of the gay rights movement, homosexual rape of men appears to have increased in the past few decades. (5,15,16) Homosexual rape is twice as common in urban areas where gays congregate than in suburban or rural areas. (15) It may also be more common where the gay subculture is accepted: a 1970 study in San Francisco found that 9% of male heterosexuals and 24% of gays; 2% of female heterosexuals and 11% of lesbians reported having been homosexually raped. (18) In our 1983 national urban survey (which did not include San Francisco), 1.3% of heterosexual men vs 12.5% of gay men and 0.6% of heterosexual women vs 8.6% of lesbians reported having been homosexually raped. (5,10)

More alarmingly, between 15% to 40% of statutory rape (child molestation) involves homosexuality. (19) In one study, 25% of white gays (18) admitted to sex with boys 16 or younger when they were aged 21 or older.

Rape at any age is violent and emotionally devastating. But it can also edge victims toward homosexuality. In our national study, almost half the lesbians said they had been heterosexually raped  perhaps gravitating to homosexuality because of the experience. Males often react differently. Thus the Masters and Johnson Institute reported that a "25-year-old man had had his first sexual experience when he was 13 years old. It was arranged by his lesbian mother with an older gay man. After that episode, his imagery and interpersonal sexual experience were exclusively homosexual." (20) Likewise, "Mr. K, age 22, felt that his change in sexual preference was related to his having been raped by two men.... After the assault he experienced sexual identity confusion and began engaging voluntarily in homosexual activity. When he was seen for evaluation he labeled himself as openly homosexual." (21)

Impact of Violence On The Homosexual Lifespan

A study of 6,714 obituaries (22) in gay newspapers across the U.S. revealed that 3% of 6,574 gays and 20% of 140 lesbians had died violently:

 1.4% of gays and 7% of lesbians were murdered (rates over a hundred times those of non-gays);

 0.6% of gays and 5.7% of lesbians committed suicide (rates dozens of times those of non-gays); and

 0.6% of gays and 4.3% of lesbians died in motor vehicle accidents (over 17 times the rate of non-gays)

These events, coupled with various STDs (especially AIDS) gotten from other gays, resulted in a median age of death of 40 among gays and a median age of death of 45 among lesbians. In the same study, comparison samples of married men had a median age of death of 75 and married women a median age of death of 79. For divorced or single persons the median age of death was 57 for men and 71 for women.

Conclusion

The hate crimes gays complain about are infrequent and seldom involve more than name-calling or snide remarks. The FBI reported 431 hate crimes against homosexuals for the U.S. in all of 1991. Only one was "confirmed" for Washington, D.C.  yet D.C. gay activists claimed 397 incidents! When pressed, they admitted that at least 366 of these "crimes" consisted of "verbal harassment." (23)

In line with traditional psychiatric opinion, violence goes hand-in- hand with the gay lifestyle. Almost all the exposure by homosexuals to violence and disease is encountered in the gay subculture. Most of the murderers in the lifespan study whose sexual orientation could be determined were also homosexual. While violence toward homosexuals is deplorable, most violence involving gays is self-induced (and the gay subculture may export more violence than it absorbs from without).

Copyright 1993, Family Research Institute, Inc.

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

This educational pamphlet has been produced by Family Research Institute, Inc., Dr. Paul Cameron, Chairman. A complete report is available for a donation of $25 in the U.S., $40 foreign, postage included. Other pamphlets in the series include:

What Causes Homosexual Desire? Child Molestation and Homosexuality Medical Consequences of What Homosexuals Do Violence and Homosexuality Born WHAT Way? The Psychology of Homosexuality Same Sex marriage: Til Death Do Us Part?

Suggested donation for pamphlets: 11 for $5, 25 for $10, 50 for $19, 100 for $35, 350 for $100, 1,000 for $250, postpaid. Remit to:

Family Research Institute PO Box 62640 Colorado Springs, CO 80962 Phone: (303) 681-3113 The Family Research Report newsletter is $25/year ($40 foreign)

Copyright, 1999, Family Research Institute, Inc.

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

Back to top of this page

Back to the Family Research Institute Web Site

-- The (fact@fan.attic), June 14, 2000.

attic:

I consider the source on these articles, and Paul Cameron speaking for the Religious Right just doesn't cut it with me.

I respect your opinions on homosexuals. You have a right to believe anything you want. I only object when you project those opinions as fact and offer "evidence" from parties with an obvious bias.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), June 14, 2000.

Anita, when we hear something that is disagreeable to us the messenger will always be biased. Although I would hardly consider myself an upstanding member of the religious right this report should be taken seriously by anyone that believes in thorough research founded in documented sources and verifiable facts. You seem to have enough intelligence not to let the messenger cloud the validity of the message. Besides, if this report had been created by the Rand Corporation, the Federal Government, the ACLU, the Catholic Church, or any one of hundreds of possibilities you would still find fault with the results. Just as I would, and do, scoff at anything that comes out of homosexual rights organizations. In reality, it is nigh to impossible to find a totally neutral source of information on ANY subject.

While it is true that this report mirrors my opinions, I still offer it up as first class research that should be taken seriously until disproved or debunked. There are thousands of vile and vicious groups and sites that give a REAL negative slant on the gay community and they are too repugnant for me. Now, if you can move past your feelings about Paul Cameron and the RR, I would be interested in your input regarding the FACTS presented by The Family Research Institute.

Maria, you neednt concern yourself with accepting my perceived narrow-minded point of view. You should concentrate on acquiring your own point of view, if possible.

-- The (fact@fan.attic), June 14, 2000.

Attic:

The problem IS that the Family Research folks GET their stuff from Cameron. You didn't take the time to click on ANY of the sublinks, eh? The awful truth is that the majority of this propaganda [finally spelling that one right] is put out by Cameron. It seems HE was raped as a child by a man, and, although he CLAIMS it never affected him, he's been on a crusade ever since.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), June 14, 2000.

The awful truth is that it IS the truth. Your dislike of the author will not alter the facts. Deal with the facts not with the person. Show me where the presented information is flawed and back your statements up with documented proof, not your personal slant on the politically correct flavor of the day. You have no problem insisting that others bring proven data to the table so I have no problem asking you to do likewise. I will not let this discourse deteriorate into mudslinging so lets stay on the path of real data not emotional wanderings.

-- The (fact@fan.attic), June 14, 2000.

fanatic:

I find several problems here. First, most studies are performed to "find" whatever whoever paid for the study wants to find. ALL studies should be viewed in this light. Just tell me who paid for it, and I'll tell you what they found *without* even having to read the study.

Second, some topics of study, *especially* social topics, lend themselves to VERY strong feelings on the part of both the studiers and their readers. This has two results -- very slanted studies, and very slanted selection of which studies are presented.

You need to honestly ask yourself one question: IF you were to read studies performed by those with whom you disagree (and who naturally "found" the opposite to be "true"), could you change your mind? If you could not, then citing studies is propaganda as Anita says. After all, if slanted studies won't convince you that your dogma might be faulty, why should slanted studies convince us either?

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), June 14, 2000.

Flint, I have already acknowledged the basic tenet of your response. The bigger question is where do we find the truth? If we are to accept your reasoning than pure truth is not available by conventional means. No report or study, however documented, can escape the stigma of spin journalism. This certainly restricts ones ability to mount a good defense for ones position, does it not? In the end, does it really make any difference regarding this discussion? I am adamantly opposed to the homosexual lifestyle and absolutely nothing will convince me that the gay community should be accepted into mainstream society or excepted from the label of moral degenerates. I have always had a live and let live attitude but that was before the homosexual community decided they were not only to be considered normal but in addition special and deserving of exemptions from historical and religious guidelines.

Change is good, Change is bad, and Change is evil. Who shall decide?

-- The (fact@fan.attic), June 14, 2000.

[Flint, I have already acknowledged the basic tenet of your response. The bigger question is where do we find the truth? If we are to accept your reasoning than pure truth is not available by conventional means.]

Correct, but we aren't looking for "pure truth", a fool's errand in such cases. Instead, we do our best to approximate the reality, triangulating in on it from as many different directions as possible. Accordingly, if we are to be *honest* we are very careful NOT to start with our conclusions (typically in the form of strong prejudices) and seek only ammunition to support these presuppositions. That's the road to propaganda if you know you're doing it, and the lock on a closed mind of you don't.

[No report or study, however documented, can escape the stigma of spin journalism. This certainly restricts ones ability to mount a good defense for ones position, does it not?]

Not necessarily. To a limited but important degree spin can be filtered out. Methodologies can be examined. Assumptions can be identified. Conflicting observations can be rectified, and reality can thus be characterized fairly well. When many people are doing many different things, we can recognize that we're dealing with statistical distributions and begin to derive them. It's not easy, but it's only impossible for those who are "adamently opposed" and whom "nothing can convince".

[Change is good, Change is bad, and Change is evil. Who shall decide?]

Why, each of us, every day, and all of us free to change our minds, make exceptions, or shut down our thought processes as we see fit. I don't have a horse in this race, but I can see that you have only one, and you've declared it the winner by definition. Fine for you, but please don't ask me to operate that way. I consider it cheating.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), June 14, 2000.

"sounds like "hawk" or netghost, at it again.

-- the doomer perverts are still at it (sigh@*bigger.sigh*), June 12, 2000."

KISS MY ASS, you fucking little gutless faggot. I did not post this thread, and you better get your fact straight before you start accusing people.

This is the first time I've even LOOKED at this thread. It doesn't interest me at all, the only reason I checked it was because I noticed all you perverts are responding to it and ignoring all the other threads.

Since YOU were one of the first 5 people to respond to it, I'd say it is very likely that YOU are one of the sick PERVERTS!! ASSHOLE!!!

-- Hawk (flyin@hi.again), June 14, 2000.

Flint, you are a clever word meister but you speak mostly of concepts and there is little or no substance to your abstract suggestions. Are you aware that to a limited but important degree raindrops can be avoided? Fools are running our world so dont be too harsh on them. I certainly do not consider myself a winner in this debate, as we are all losers in the whole of the situation. Actually I have not asked you or anyone else to operate in any way, just expressed my own personal opinion on the subject of homosexuality. For someone with a declared neutral position on the subject I find your latent interest in my views to be rather curious. However, I do like your style.

-- The (fact@fan.attic), June 14, 2000.

fanatic:

While I'm neutral on the topic, I'm hardly neutral on the *process* by which people come to conclusions and defend those conclusions. Using what I've seen of your general approach, you could "argue" that day is actually night, by restricting yourself to reports of such things as volcanic eruptions, severe thunderstorms, solar eclipses and the like.

As Z has implied, things like peer review exist for a reason. The entire y2k experience, for me, lay in watching people jump to unjustified conclusions and spend their time distorting their perception of reality to fit those conclusions. If you make a quick visit to EZboard, you'll find that reality's unambiguous refutation of their expections has made no noticeable alteration in their positions. Even when the situation is clear cut, empirical observation still need not apply. In cases like yours, which are anything but clear, intellectual honesty and integrity are all the more critical.

When a great deal of observation, carefully performed, suggests that your opinion falls well short of accuracy (and it does), digging in your heels and declaring your mind impervious to modification hardly does you justice. In your determination to build a stronger case than the actuality permits, you preclude any accurate understanding. You have substituted strong feelings for even rudimentary objectivity. Almost invariably, this both leads to, and perpetuates, error. I grant that it does make you feel better.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), June 14, 2000.

Flint,

I agree with you (and Z) that peer review exists for a reason, actually a GOOD reason. BUT, peer review in the hard sciences and peer review in the social sciences are two different things.

If someone proves the boiling point of water, it's hard to argue with even by a reviewer that disagrees with you (although one can still dink a paper for some reason or another). OTOH in the social sciences, it's easier to find fault with studies one disagrees with and approve of studies one likes, as the "truth" is more subtle and complicated. The bias to some degree is probably unintentional, but I don't doubt that it's there (look at gun control studies for example).

Anyway, where I'm going with this is that there probably aren't as many studies out there that go against the popular belief, as they don't get published until they stop offending the reviewers. You will still get "extremists" publishing things contrary to popular belief as they have their own funding to do so. Of course, their work is discredited as it comes from an extremist, and not a peer reviewed journal ;-).

Subscribing to the Journal of American Chemtrails,

Frank

-- Someone (ChimingIn@twocents.cam), June 15, 2000.

Frank, Ive come into this thread a few times but I like the way that you, Flint, and The are debating with a calm classy approach which I have trouble adapting to. This is an emotional issue and not one to be decided by some scientific review or a group of so-called experts. Both sides can slap up good data that will be rejected at once as heresy and BS. I would like to ask those of you with strong religious faith how you stand on the subject of homosexuality? Is it OK for us to re-write the scriptures? Has God somehow changed his mind? Or would you just rather not talk about it?

-- Ra (tion@l.1), June 15, 2000.

jeez hawky you just totally gave away that it WAS you who started this thread.

In the future you shouldn't "protest so loudly".

LOL!

-- laughing at perv's like horseshit hawky (he@just.can't.control.himself.around.those.litte.boys), June 15, 2000.

Ra,

On homosexuality, IMO (who else's) the *inclination* towards homosexuality may be "natural" for someone, in any event the *practice* of homosexuality is a sin.

Frank

-- Someone (ChimingIn@twocents.cam), June 15, 2000.

Homosexuality, pedophilia, and many other minorities may have studies in favor of them, but the reality is that even if the amount is comparable (enough to make them seem equal) and the methodologies sound, the real outcome to the issue will be determined by those in that are the majority. Many political heads, powerful elites, and respected scholars fulfill the common precept on a particular issue. Therefore the result is the minorities lose and majority usually have full power.

The purpose of government is to check public tyranny and the purpose of the public is to check government tyranny. To be truely objective information must be allowed to circulate and (of course with respect to science) methodologies should be sound to search for truth. But such separation of the world is not possible, mistakes will be made with both parties and each will fight until the other is no longer a threat. To reach truth people must see things independently of their own precepts for a moment (as separate islands of truth).

Only after the energy of opposition is resolved will the two parties come to a consensus. It will not be anytime soon. But, perhaps the truth of whether these minorities should be changed or that they may do what they ask for is not within are reach just yet. Perhaps, a hundred years from now we will look upon these very qualms and dispare. But, for now, the fire of the present will make no immediate decision.

It is interesting to note though, that with the convienances of todays technology, that sex is more readily within our grasp, that medicine can expand our carnal desires, that our media has connected inextinguishable instict to materialism, we are now asking questions we never had the time, science, or technology for. History has told us of the sacred passages of birth and death (being probably the most reliable indicator of the importance of civilization). One day such an issue will be resolved.

-- blah blah (anonymous@4Reasons.com), July 08, 2001.

IT IS A TRAGEDY THAT A LOT MORE CHILDREN WILL HAVE TO SUFFER THE RAPE AND MURDER OF CHILD PREDATORS SINCE MOST PEOPLE CHOOSE TO HAVE THEIR HEAD STUCK UP THEIR REAR ON THESE ISSUES. THE CHILDREN DESPERATELY NEED ADULT PROTECTION BUT THESE IDIOTS REFUSE TO LOOK AT THE FACTS CAUSE THE TRUTH IS TOO FRIGHTENING FOR THEM TO ACCEPT. I FEEL LIKE I'M WATCHING A HORROR MOVIE, YELLING OUT TO THE VICTIM, "WATCH OUT BEHIND YOU" BUT MY HEART-FELT WARNING IS FALLING UPON DEAF AND DUMB EARS. I CAN'T JUST WALK AWAY THOUGH AND CONVINCE MYSELF IT'S "ONLY A MOVIE" BECAUSE CHILD PREDATORS ARE A CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER AND THESE SILENT, IGNORANT AND APATHETIC PEDOPHILE BUDDIES ARE PUTTING MY CHILD IN DANGER, AS WELL AS THEIR OWN.

"Silence, Ignorance and Apathy are the child predators greatest allies" - Dr. Nancy Faulkner

THIS IS THE WHOLE PROBLEM. IN THIS WAR AGAINST CHILD VICTIMIZATION, YOU ARE EITHER WITH US OR YOU ARE WITH THE CHILD PREDATOR, WHETHER YOU REALIZE IT OR NOT.

GOOD PARENTS Support "JORDAN'S ONE STRIKE LAW" against child predators for the safety and protection of kids from convicted rapists & killers

HTTP://WWW.SAVETHECHILDREN.DYNS.NET IT'S PRIVATE, QUICK & EASY

-- Kelly Greene (SavetheChildren@edsplace.d2g.com), November 01, 2002.

I happen to be a homosexual and I will not change even with all the baggage that comes with it because other people think they have to play God with everyone's life. It is my right as a human being, whether others like it or not, to live my life the way I want, and I will continue to do so happily. America is full of rhetoric. Land of the free? Land of misinformation. The information provided by the "Family Research Institute" (which is a farce since Americans kick out their kids at a certain age, put their elderly in nursing homes, and joke of the holidays as a pain in the ass because they have to visit family) is misguided, biased, inaccurate. I have read many erratic journals that shouldn't have been published but yet they are. An article in a journal doesn't mean that published information or data amassed by a "scholar" is representative of the truth. For instance, Commissioner Henry Anslinger in the 1940's and 1950's declared that marijuana caused insanity, an opinion based on nothing (there was only one study conducted at that time and the subjects were canines and the experiment did not even use the primary active ingredient of marijuana), which led to a flurry of marijuana-based insanity defenses which was letting off so many murderers. Commissioner finally had to put a stop to it and later on during the Boggs act of 1951 he had to finally retract his unfounded opinion and that marijuana did not cause insanity (The History of the Non-Medical Use of Drugs in the United States by Charles Whitebread, Professor of Law, USC Law School). I don't believe anything I read and everyone should be critical of any information that's posted as the "truth". I have been doing research on Andrei Chikatilo for my forensics degree, and I don't know where you've done your research, but your use of him as a homosexual is completely inaccurate. Did you just happen to click on an anti-gay internet site for a resource that you can use as your arsenal? Read "Crime Classification Manual" by Douglas, Burgess, Burgess, Ressle, "The Killer Department" by Robert Cullen, or "Comrade Chikatilo" by Mikhail Krivich. These references are much more reliable. Your use of Chikatilo in your anti-gay rhetoric is laughable. It curtails your credibility. If you're going to use examples to defame gays, use a real homosexual.

-- jessica (fthouston@yahoo.com), November 04, 2002.

I happen to be not a homosexual cause it's nasty.

-- Not a homo (123@abc.com), March 04, 2003.