Study finds disproportionate abuse by 'gays'

page: 1
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 06:57 PM
link   
www.worldnetdaily.com...

This is for those that did not believe me when I stated that pedophiles have a higher incidence of homosexuals than the rest of the population. if it is genetic like y'all claim then why would it not be 3% also.

It is aberrant behavior, the more perverted the more the thrill.

Lets see if this makes those of that persuasion randier than Michael Jackson at a pinewood derby race.




posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 07:12 PM
link   
I'm confused by what exactly, you are laughing at....

Aaaaaaanway, What is the percentage of heterosexuals abuse of foster children, last I read, it was high.....why would someone do such a study? "Looking" for something? Personally, I find the way you present the whole post rather odd, as if you are pleased with yourself over something....though I can't fathom what.



posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 07:32 PM
link   
I am pleased to finally back up what many of you liberals thought was just my opinion. Answer the question. If gay is genetic then why the higher percentage than the general population. Let me guess your reply. Homosexuals are more likely to care about foster children?

For those that can not count, if 35% are homosexual then that to me would infer that 65% are heterosexual. Other deviants like the zoophiles would be adopting at the humane society (poor little kitty
).



posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 08:36 PM
link   
'Idiotic' being in quotes much like 'gay' is in the article.

This headline is a LIE.

Study finds disproportionate abuse by 'gays'


No it didn't. It found 34% of sexual molestations of foster children were same-sex.

That's not even remotely the same thing or related in any way.


According to a DCFS spokeswoman, the agency does not track the sexual orientation of prospective foster or adoptive parents.


All the study* (assuming there was a study) found was 34% of sexual abuse cases were same sex. That is not the same as "homosexual" as contributing idiot and new age psychobabblist cult leader Dr. Paul Cameron, chairman of the Colorado-based Family Research Institute says in his "analysis" of the DCFS findings.

This turdblossom thinks SpongeBob is gay though, so no suprises here.

As most real psychologists will tell you, abuse (like rape) can have many contributing factors, with sexual orientation having little or nothing to do with it. When it comes to the abuse of children, even less so as many predators and abusers consider the gender of children as interchangable or even neutral (thus the specific attraction of pedophillia).

I wonder if Cameron considers the soldiers at Abu Gharib homosexuals? There were cases of same sex sexual abuse...must be gay, huh?


Are the people that read wolrdnetdaily so 'dumb' (more quotes) as to not know propaganda when they read it?

Why isn't the good 'doctor' concerned about the majority of abuse being of different sex? Does the same causal relationship apply? Heterosexuality leads to sexual abuse? What an idiot.

Straight women can do evil things to little girls, and straight men can to boys. That's same sex sexual abuse, but it doesn't mean the abuser is homosexual anymore than the soldiers at Abu Gharib.

*The "study" ---


The Leader acquired information from DCFS through the Freedom of Information Act indicating most sexual abuse of children was by foster fathers, but that foster mothers were responsible for over three-fourths of physical abuse.

The study found 966 foster parents violated their charges. Of those who engaged in both physical and sexual abuse, eight of the 15 abused children of their own sex.


This is what Cameron analyzed? A hand full of records from Illinois and I had to waste my time on this? :shk:

Sometimes I really hate you people.



posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 08:46 PM
link   
Dr. Paul Cameron is probably the last person whose work anyone should be using. In the past, Dr. Cameron has proposed tatooing aids patients, and supports the mass extermination of all homosexuals (Straight from the mouth of C. Everett Coop).

He was fired from the University of Nebraska in 1980, and then resigned from the American Psychological Association in 1983, before getting kicked out for unethical breaches of research conduct. He's known for conducting research by giving questionaires to people outside of VD clinics, picking out the homosexuals, and then skewering the results.

He's the Michael Medved of the psychological community.

Furthermore, as someone who lives in the great state of Wisconsin, Reagan should learn something from his more tolerant, more liberal neighbors. He seems to be rejoicing in the fact that ANY children were raped and molested, which goes to show a real disturbing side of his personality. Indeed, it's quite revealing that he'd be so willing to exploit their pain and their loss of innocence to score cheap heat and useless political points with people that neither like him, nor respect him.

In conclusion, if Reagan is any way typical of his religion (And knowing the Wisconsin Lutherans, he is not), he is doing more harm than good in the minds of the layman.



posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 08:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Reaganwasourgreatest
I am pleased to finally back up what many of you liberals thought was just my opinion.


So all this is what you are finally pleased about...a nut case



posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 09:30 PM
link   
brimstone735

You may indeed be right about this guy. Funny how you also describe Kinsey perfectly!

As for me being pleased about child molestation, now you are stretching what is written. Personally I think pedophiles should be executed or physically castrated, either way problem solved.

Tolerance, You hit that right on. I am not tolerant of aberrant or evil behavior.

No I do not think that gays should be killed as you declare that the author has. He may. I do not. i think they should all be lined up..................................................and brought to my church so we can lay hands on them and heal them from their sinful ways. Yes, Jesus can heal them.

When you show me a gay male dog that does not want to mate with a h female dog in heat, then I will agree that homosexuality is normal



posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 09:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Reaganwasourgreatest


When you show me a gay male dog that does not want to mate with a h female dog in heat, then I will agree that homosexuality is normal


Erased...
not gonna do it too easy



[edit on 3/2/2005 by LadyV]



posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 10:28 PM
link   
Well since I know a few wont follow the link, I think it raises a point that Reaganman was asked to link to and by these results, it is much higher than he originally claimed.

Good Find imho.


Study finds disproportionate abuse by 'gays' 34% of sexual molestations of foster children were same-sex

A six-year study of sexual abuse committed by foster parents in Illinois found a highly disproportionate percentage of the cases were homosexual in nature.

About one-third were same-sex while estimates are that no more than 3 percent of people in the general population say they engage in homosexual acts.

An article in the March issue of the peer-reviewed publication Psychological Reports presented data analyzed by Dr. Paul Cameron, chairman of the Colorado-based Family Research Institute.

Cameron believes it's likely the Illinois figures reflect the situation among the nation's estimated half-million foster children.

"What's shocking, is that 34 percent of the molestations were homosexual," Cameron told the Illinois Leader.



posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 10:31 PM
link   
Oh boy....the prince of purity is in the house! Hi Ed......this guys is nothing short of an idiot!

Not you Ed ...the guy from the article....



posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 10:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by brimstone735In conclusion, if Reagan is any way typical of his religion (And knowing the Wisconsin Lutherans, he is not), he is doing more harm than good in the minds of the layman.


I would highly doubt you do, that is one Church that openly calls homosexuality what it is "SIN" and they are not one bit bashful about it either.

Are you sure you do not have them confused with the ELCA? I mean they have lesbian pastors even.....



Originally posted by LadyV
Oh boy....the prince of purity is in the house! Hi Ed......this guys is nothing short of an idiot!

Not you Ed ...the guy from the article....



He could be but the data if confirmed would be quite telling, and to be honest, I was shocked at the females being more likely to physically abuse, that one really got me....

[edit on 2-3-2005 by edsinger]



posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 10:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by edsinger
"What's shocking, is that 34 percent of the molestations were homosexual," Cameron told the Illinois Leader.


There's no connection established Ed. And crazy Cameron commenting on it that way doesn't make it so.

For example, a straight God fearing Christian women that sticks jalepeno peppers in a girls vagina for whatever sick reason she does to "punish" her (a sexual abuse) does not answer unrelated surveys as being "homosexual" or engaging in homosexaul acts. Why? Because she's not a homosexual.

Neither would the Abu Gharib prison guards answer that they were nor are they, though they committed abusive acts of a sexual nature on members of the same sex daily.

Abuse (even sexual abuse) does not necessarily mean have sex and certainly doesn't mean the abuse is necessarily done for sexual gratification or is in any way linked to homosexuality.

Sorry to break it to you and ReageanWOG and Cameron and WorldNetDaily but this is crap.

And as per whatever your U2U request was RWOG, huh?

You don't think there's such a thing as healthy homosexuality at all, so re-explaining the nuances of difference between sexual abuse of a non-orientation nature, and pedophillia and homosexuality and heterosexuality to you really seems like an excercise in futility.

And your article is still crap.



posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 11:13 PM
link   
Reaganwasourgreatest,

The article is touchy in its language, and rightly so -- "homosexual in nature" and "homosexual acts" are all catch phrases to indicate sexual relations between those of the same sex. That being said, we need to define what a homosexual is: Is a homosexual is what a homosexual does (i.e. a homosexual is one who has sexual relations with the same sex), or is a homosexual is what a homosexual thinks (i.e. a homosexual is one who has a sexual mental attraction to the same sex)?

It's actually a very philosophical thought when you apply it to all like instances. Moreover, we could distinguish:

Is a homosexual pedophile inherently different from a homosexual nonpedophile (i.e. does age really matter that much to them, or do they just like the power)?

Interestingly, previous studies indicate that many male pedophiles that abuse young boysconsider themself heterosexual. I think this raises an interesting question with regards to sexuality.

Rant,

You spend a lot of text assaulting the individual and not his findings. For all I know, Mr. Cameron could have been grand wizard of the KKK, but his findings would still be valid. If you're willing to point out why this specific study should be doubted, then I'd be willing to entertain those points. Apparently Cameron didn't even do the study, but was just commenting on it.



posted on Mar, 3 2005 @ 02:57 AM
link   
Rant do you actually buy the # you sell or are you just a marketer?
Same sex sexual abuse is not proof of homosexulity?

How the hell do you figure? If some sick bastard gets his jollies from molesting a little boy he sure as hell aint straight. So maybe he's bi-sexual, he aint straight, if he was he'd be molesting little girls.

Dear god man have you completely abandoned logic?



posted on Mar, 3 2005 @ 05:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by mwm1331
Same sex sexual abuse is not proof of homosexulity?


No, because if you knew anything about sex crimes, pedophilia and hebephilia in particular, you would know that it's control thing, not a sex thing. It's a compulsive behavior created by a cycle of childhood sex abuse. Often times, they'll be married, and they'll have their own kids. Often times, it's about readily available victims, rather than a specific gender. The actual number of homosexual perpetrators, which varies from study to study, hovers around 5%. Pedophiles very rarely feel attracted to adults of ANY gender, only defenseless children.

A childhood trauma stunts their emotional growth. They grow physically beyond that age, but not mentally. This is about a confusion of indentity and personal self, rather than sexual orinetation. When they look at themselves in the mirror, they see a child staring back at them. And, that's how they relate to the world. And through those eyes, that's how they channel their need for sexual gratification, and their dominant and submissive compulsion.

It's about control and learned behavior. This is really a question of nature vs. nurture. But, you can't have an effective dialog about this, or even a reasoned discussion, because I don't think that you believe that homosexuality is genetic. So, you're immediatly starting off on shakey ground with completely unsound logic.

And that's inherently dangerous, because you misunderstand, and thus cannot properly prepare for, the most dangerous thing that our children might face in their lives. Because of this unsound logic, and easy intolerance, more children are actually put at risk, because their parents aren't looking for the right guy. They're unaware of the real threat living next door, driving the school bus, working at the video arcade. The family man. The model community member.

It's really a shame.



posted on Mar, 3 2005 @ 05:24 AM
link   
I dont believe that homosexulity is gentic so I'm not using logic?
Sure bob


Homosexuality isnt genetic. If it were it would have already bred itself out, as it can not under any circumstance be supportive of gentc survival. Homosexuals dont breed.

But hey believe whatever you want.



posted on Mar, 3 2005 @ 07:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by radardog
Apparently Cameron didn't even do the study, but was just commenting on it.


Right. He commented making the same errors you just re-pointed out he did. I doubt his "analysis." That's what the article is reporting. It's a hand in fist WorldNetDaily "reporting" of Cameron's secondary conclusions. The article spends all it's text on Cameron, hardly any on the "study" and like most unsubstantiated WorldNetDaily...no links!

I posted what the "study" was presumably according to the article. Some group got some files of abuse cases from Illinois. But you can read the "article" the same as me. If it breeds "confidence" in you (despite your own acknowledgement of the problems with these conclusions) then by all means.

But by your own post you already understand Cameron's conclusions are wrong. So one more time... here's the "study" source as per WND.


The Leader acquired information from DCFS through the Freedom of Information Act indicating most sexual abuse of children was by foster fathers, but that foster mothers were responsible for over three-fourths of physical abuse.

The study found 966 foster parents violated their charges. Of those who engaged in both physical and sexual abuse, eight of the 15 abused children of their own sex.


I think it's generous to consider an outside undertaking like obtaining DCFS records a "study" but okay, fine. It's a study. It determined what it determined. Most sexual abuse came from foster fathers, but most physical abuse overall came from foster mothers. And among those engaging in both physical and sexual abuse, about half were of the same sex.

Since I already pointed out the DCFS agency does not track the sexual orientation of prospective foster or adoptive parents IN MY FIRST POST along with the spurious nature of the "study" then I think you can comfortably "doubt" at this point radardog...

All that's left are people like Cameron, ReaganWOG, EdSinger and now MWM1331, convinced (apparently) the soldiers at Abu Gharib are gay.

Or the woman in my prior example of abusing a little girl must be a "lesbian."

And MWM, I am using logic here as Brimstone just did as well.

Proof of abuse is not proof of homosexuality, even if the abuse is "sexual" and between members of the same sex. They could be homosexual, but that's not shown here, and unless they are specifically pedophilles seeking pleasure from children that happen to be of the same gender....they're all just sick puppies, with no bearing from sexual orientation.


homosexual

noun {C}

a person who is sexually attracted to people of the same sex and not to people of the opposite sex


Interesting. A person attracted to the same sex. Doesn't say a damn thing about hates members of the same sex younger than him or her and gets his or her "jollies" off abuse of a sexual nature, does it?

Really look at Brimstone's explanation of pedophillia again, and further consider the implications you're trying to make here about abuse.

If a man drags a woman off the street into an alley, invades her genitallia with a knife, urinates on her with his own "sexual organ" then sets her on fire...is that proof of heterosexuality? And further proof that a heterosexual orientation leads to rape and abuse? Or just proof he's a sick SOB? I say the latter, as I believe such a thing as healthy heterosexuality exists.

Or does your "logic" only work on same sex abuse? Specifically men one would presume since it's a given you exuse demented women hurting their female charges. Have ya seen the news and what people do to kids? Much less what adults do to each other?

People rape and sodomize each other for all kinds of sick reasons that aren't remotely homosexual OR HETEROSEXUAL in nature.

And here's what no gay bashing propagandist really gets. Even if all the abusers were gay (which all clearly aren't), healthy homosexuality still exists! Sucks for your agenda, but it does. But without accepting that, you couldn't possibly get past your own fallacies so I don't expect any illumination here.



posted on Mar, 3 2005 @ 09:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by brimstone735

Originally posted by mwm1331
Same sex sexual abuse is not proof of homosexulity?


No, because if you knew anything about sex crimes, pedophilia and hebephilia in particular, you would know that it's control thing, not a sex thing.



Exactly! But what can you expect.....most people still think that rape is a sex crime too.....it's not, it's about control and a hatred of woman, it is to humiliate, while it is the "sex act"....it is being done for none sexual reasons....but try to make some people understand that....



posted on Mar, 3 2005 @ 11:54 AM
link   
Ladyv,

I have to disagree with respect to rape. If rape is just about power, then there are many alternatives to rape to exhibit that fetish. I think rape is about power and sex, interlocked in such a way that makes the experience even more exciting for the assaulter. Moreover, I don't really think pedophiles are that into over powering their victims; many pedophiles claim to actually love their victims, or to be geniuenly attracted to the younger body figures.

Finally, we can't forget the few folks that do these sex crimes merely because they are sexually frustrated and these victims are the easiest ones around them to release their frustrations.



posted on Mar, 3 2005 @ 05:41 PM
link   
Wow, so many emotions here. Rant are you a liberal? (That question is strictly rhetorical)

First, it is my opinion that homosexuality is a choice as is bisexuality. What do I base that on you may ask? Get ready to grind your teeth. It is common knowledge that people incarcerated have developed homosexual relationships. Please do not make me prove that. I have better things to comment on. After release from prison they return to heterosexual relationships. I am generalizing of course so save your typing.

Now I will differ to history. It was common practice in ancient Greece to marry, have children, and have sex preferably with young prepubescent boys. Homosexuality is a choice is my contention otherwise the genes would be bred out as one shining bright light mentioned earlier.

Now to radardog, I do not agree with you all the time but you are very challenging. Keep me honest Dog!

LadyV, It is not appropriate for southern gentlemen to insult women. Obviously to me any logical reply would be insulting to you.

Please continue




[edit on 3-3-2005 by Reaganwasourgreatest]





top topics
 
0
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join