Gay Priests or not?
- Thread starter bcp
- Start date
MMDad
Lem Putt
They are pedarists, not pedophiles.bcp said:
Men who go after boys do not fit in as being "gay" because they aren't really being homosexual. They are not having sex with someone like them, an adult male.
They are sick bastages who deserve to die painful deaths.
While I think that homosexual sex is disgusting, it is victimless, and therefore should not be punished by man.
bcp
In My Opinion
I think he is saying that two consenting homosexuals having a sexual encounter while a gross and filthy thing, is not harming anyone other than the two of them. Therefore, as mere mortals we should not condem them for their crimes against nature, but we should take satisfaction in knowing that God will judge them according to their sins.
Excellent point!
bcp
In My Opinion
I have to disagree with you here.MMDad said:
If (and there is no way in hell) I were to decide to molest a child, I can honestly say that there would be no chance that I would decide that giving a young boy a knobber would be the way to go.
Males do not interest me.
I think that if someone has sex, rape or otherwise with someone of their own sex, they are gay.
if the priest was not gay, he would go after the little girls.
and again, I think I have to disagree.MMDad said:
I feel that with your comment you are giving them too much understanding by asking for such a easy death.
Im sure we can think of ways to torture them for years and years and years before they finally pass away in some sort of hideous manner.
Tonio
Asperger's Poster Child
I don't know if pedophiles have orientations or not. I'm not sure it's even relevant. Whether a pedophile favors boys or girls, he or she is still a sick monster. The orientation probably doesn't made a damn bit of difference to the victims.
Regarding adult homosexuality, I don't believe it's wrong. I think it's unusual but not disgusting.
Regarding adult homosexuality, I don't believe it's wrong. I think it's unusual but not disgusting.
I think lesbians have the right idea, whereas gay guys you have to wonder WTF are THOSE idiots thinking?Tonio said:
kingofbeers8
New Member
What do you mean lesbians have the right Idea? Dont get me wrong...I am all for gay marriage as long as both of the women are HOT!!! lol
I guess this is as good as a place to pose a thought as any... I'll use post 4 and 6 as my loose guidelines for defining predator v. victimless behavior.
Now, there has been so much co-mingling between adult males and teenage females, that laws have been put in place to protect the young women until they are old enough, mentally and physically, to make better choices. Still, it isn't uncommon for say, a 20 year-old male to have the hots for a 16 year-old girl, or even a 15 year-old, especially the way they look. And, given our laws, 18-21 on the males' end is roughly the same guideline, is it not?
And, there are all sorts of laws about allowing your daughter to marry at certain ages (14, for example) with parental consent, and folks would, believe it or not, look at the circumstances and try to support sending this young gal off with say, a 19 year-old or older.
However... Given that homosexuality has been in existence as long as man (whether you support it or not, and I'm not opening that discussion up here), I have often thought that the same "objectivity" would not be given here (yes, I know, cause of all the given arguments)...
But, if your son was a homosexual and at 14 or 15, he was becoming interested in an 18 year-old (which I would think they would have more common bonds with what goes AGAINST them than heterosexuals), the 18 year-old would probably start to be labeled a predator.
I had seen a show and thought that the idea would be a good discussion point...
Now, there has been so much co-mingling between adult males and teenage females, that laws have been put in place to protect the young women until they are old enough, mentally and physically, to make better choices. Still, it isn't uncommon for say, a 20 year-old male to have the hots for a 16 year-old girl, or even a 15 year-old, especially the way they look. And, given our laws, 18-21 on the males' end is roughly the same guideline, is it not?
And, there are all sorts of laws about allowing your daughter to marry at certain ages (14, for example) with parental consent, and folks would, believe it or not, look at the circumstances and try to support sending this young gal off with say, a 19 year-old or older.
However... Given that homosexuality has been in existence as long as man (whether you support it or not, and I'm not opening that discussion up here), I have often thought that the same "objectivity" would not be given here (yes, I know, cause of all the given arguments)...
But, if your son was a homosexual and at 14 or 15, he was becoming interested in an 18 year-old (which I would think they would have more common bonds with what goes AGAINST them than heterosexuals), the 18 year-old would probably start to be labeled a predator.
I had seen a show and thought that the idea would be a good discussion point...
bcp
In My Opinion
Im 47 and I have caught myself looking at 17 year old girls thinking that they were just about too cute to be let out without supervision.virgovictoria said:
Males can not admit that they find a young girl attractive without being labled a pervert. Women on the other hand can comment on how cute young boys are and no evil thoughts are generated because of it.
But back to the gay thing, I honestly can say that I have never looked at a young man/boy and thought that he was too cute to be let out alone.
I used my experience to suggest that anyone that has relations, consentual or not, with someone of their own sex, is gay.
Like I said before, I would never do it, but if I did decide to ruin someones entire life and at the same time destroy my marriage, my job, my chance of seeing my daughter grow up by having sex with a young person, I can with certainty tell you all that my target would not be putting on their pants in the same fashion that I do.
Regardless, child molesters need to be caught and hung out to dry.
or, maybe they should just be turned over to the parents of the molested child for justice in what ever fashion those parents see fit.
bcp said:
Fred Hoeck
New Member
The title refered to "GaY' priests. Now, a Vatican directive was issued in 1961 prohibiting anyone with homosexual tendendanices from being advanced to the Priesthood. If anyone wants to see the damage caused by the homosexual priests, one need only read the book "Good Bye, Good Men" by Micheal Rose. Good, holy men are being driven out of the Seminaries because they will not submit to the homosexual advances of their superiors. How many good priests have we lost because of this?
When the pedophile scandal became public, it should be noted that many of the victims were post-pubecent boys, therefore it was really a homosexual relation. And we all know the cost we have paid and continue to pay for this scandal.
When the pedophile scandal became public, it should be noted that many of the victims were post-pubecent boys, therefore it was really a homosexual relation. And we all know the cost we have paid and continue to pay for this scandal.
Tonio
Asperger's Poster Child
I agree with you in part. I think the media deceived many parents by calling this a pedophilia scandal, which made it sound like the victims were very young children of both genders. Maybe I'm biased because my own children are very young, but if the victim is post-pubescent, then I think the crime should be called statutory rape.Fred Hoeck said:
And all rape is heinous and foul, regardless of the gender or age of the victim, regardless of the sexual orientation of the perpetrator. As Camily noted, rape is about power. I think it would be ridiculous to claim that all gays long to rape teenage boys, or that all straight men long to rape teenage girls.