lovemeorhateme
Well-known member
Nineveh said:Wow beanie-adult...
It's nice to know you found the thread, now maybe you can do your own speaking instead of having a teenage boy do it for you
If Your Mother Is a Homosexual...
- Thread starter Jefferson
- Start date
- Status
lovemeorhateme
Well-known member
Nineveh said:If you aren't up to speed, by all means, please re read this thread
Ok. I just have
I'm still trying to work out who was supposedly speaking for beanie... unless it was greywolf.
Greywolf
New member
As you know, I PM'd beanieboy to try to gather some opinions on the situation with San Diego's Pride Parade. Below is my PM, and, with his permission, beanieboy's reply:
Addressing beanieboy's reply:
1. As far as the legality of the two volunteers working at the Parade, the only possible issue I could find was this:
This is, as far as I can tell, the basis of James Hartline's (the person who discovered that the two sex offenders were registered to work at the parade) claim that their participation there is illegal. I disagree with his conclusion because:
I. They were not in an "unaccompanied" setting.
II. They were not in a situation which would have granted them "supervisory or disciplinary power" over minors.
2. Warren Derichsweiler was convicted of "lewd or lascivious acts with child under 14 years w/force", and Daniel Rieger was convicted of "oral copulation with person under 16 years".
Source: http://www.meganslaw.ca.gov
3. I agree that it would be unwise to leave your child at any large public event.
4. I agree with beanieboy on this.
5. Informative, but not relevant to our conversation, so I won't comment further.
6. This brought up an interesting fact that I had not yet looked into. The reason that the San Diego Pride Board did not kick the two out of the event is because:
However, in response to pressure from various people and organizations, such as Deputy Mayor Toni Atkins, state Senator Christine Kehoe, the San Diego County Police Chief’s and Sheriff's Association, and numerous other sponsors, the two sex offenders resigned.
Source: http://www.connexion.org/newsstory.cfm?id=3036&returnurl=news.cfm
Greywolf said:
beanieboy said:There are about 800 volunteers to work at Gay Pride.
There are people that sign people in for the parade.
There are people that take food/drink tickets.
There are people who register/sign in people at booths.
There are people who deal with trash.
There are people that work the Beer Garden.
There are people that make sure that the AV equipment is working on 5 stages.
So, what I think happened was that 2 sex offenders happened to sign up for something, like sign ins, and were photographed. Later, after some dirt digging, someone found the photo, then sugested that the Pride Committee approves of sex offenders being at a Pride event that will involve children.
My response?
1. Sex offenders can be around children. They can go to a mall, a movie, an amusement park, etc. They CANNOT be alone with children, like a careworker, or teacher. So, were any children in danger? Not in my opinion - unless some dopey heterosexual couple was planning to drop their kids off at a Gay Pride Event, and ask some random volunteer to watch their kids.
2. It is unclear what the sex offense is. Was it having sex in public (ie, a park), or having sex with a minor (such as the 24 yr. old female teacher and 14 yr. old boy, which many heterosexual men approved of)? Was it rape? Was it exposing himself? I don't know what the offense was.
3. There is a kid's tent at Gay Pride. You make stupid pictures with glue and macaroni. WITH your kids. Again, anyone dumb enough to leave their kids alone in a big event like that is asking for your kids to be kidnapped.
4. There seems to be an implication that homosexuals have more of a tendency to molest children than heterosexuals, while the truth is that pedophiles like the age - the gender is secondary. There are married men who identify as heterosexual that molest boys. What we are talking about is sexual appropriateness. I don't think that an adult having sex with a child is right, and is harmful to the kid, whether it's a man having sex with a little boy or little girl. Most gays feel this way.
5. The Pride Parade and events still happened - they just didn't get the endorsement of the city. The title "Christians stop Gay Pride in San Diego" isn't truthful. They stopped the city from proclaiming it Gay Week or whatever. The parade went on anyway, as did the even ts in the park, which is how they originated - as marches demanding Civil Rights (not being fired for being gay, not being denied housing, etc. )
6. How do I feel about the whole incident?
a - it was unfortunate that 2 volunteers pictured were a cause of such a controversy. They resigned as soon as they found out what was going on.
b - This is an indication of Christians trying to impose their beliefs on others. I don't try to stop people from going to church, so I would like it if people wouldn't stop Gay Pride celebrations, just because they go against their religious beliefs. If you don't believe in homosexuality, don't go to the Pride Parade. But to try to stop it at any opportunity is akin to finding ways to close Temples and Mosques, because they don't believe in Jesus, which is against their religion, closing bars and liquor stores, etc.
c- the story is untrue. The two men in question resigned. Christians didn't stop anything.
d- Child molestation messes a kid up - a lot. Gays have nieces and nephews, and fear for them as well. We aren't the evil, predatory villians that people want you to believe - the same ones that think we are limp wristed lispers that are weak.
e- as usual, the facts weren't all clear. Explain how the person was a sex offender. If he was caught having sex at 2am in a park, I hardly think that is cause for an alarm that your kids aren't safe. But if it was for child molestation, as sad as it is, your kids are going to be as safe at the event as they would if you took them to Wal-Mart.
Man, once you get me going...
Namaste
Addressing beanieboy's reply:
1. As far as the legality of the two volunteers working at the Parade, the only possible issue I could find was this:
Source: http://www.traditionalvalues.org/modules.php?sid=2350
This is, as far as I can tell, the basis of James Hartline's (the person who discovered that the two sex offenders were registered to work at the parade) claim that their participation there is illegal. I disagree with his conclusion because:
I. They were not in an "unaccompanied" setting.
II. They were not in a situation which would have granted them "supervisory or disciplinary power" over minors.
2. Warren Derichsweiler was convicted of "lewd or lascivious acts with child under 14 years w/force", and Daniel Rieger was convicted of "oral copulation with person under 16 years".
Source: http://www.meganslaw.ca.gov
3. I agree that it would be unwise to leave your child at any large public event.
4. I agree with beanieboy on this.
5. Informative, but not relevant to our conversation, so I won't comment further.
6. This brought up an interesting fact that I had not yet looked into. The reason that the San Diego Pride Board did not kick the two out of the event is because:
Source: http://www.10news.com/news/4773115/detail.html?rss=sand&psp=news
However, in response to pressure from various people and organizations, such as Deputy Mayor Toni Atkins, state Senator Christine Kehoe, the San Diego County Police Chief’s and Sheriff's Association, and numerous other sponsors, the two sex offenders resigned.
Source: http://www.connexion.org/newsstory.cfm?id=3036&returnurl=news.cfm
Greywolf
New member
Nineveh said:
Yep. But don't worry, I enjoy research.
Nineveh said:
Well, it wasn't really that bad until it got to the part about the Radical Faeries. That's what triggered the nut job comment. (I assume you've read the page you linked, so you know what I'm talking about.)
Nineveh said:
I agree that this happened.
Nineveh said:
What I believe that you are wrong about is your view that the happenings with the San Diego Pride Parade this year somehow indicate that homosexuals generally support child molestation or NAMBLA.
From what I've read (including the page about Harry Hay you linked to) what support of NAMBLA there has been amongst homosexuals has largely been a matter of solidarity. NAMBLA said they were homosexuals, so homosexuals let them join in in their protests. Strength in numbers and all that jazz.
I'm not denying that there are homosexuals who share NAMBLA's views, like Harry Hay. But just as with heterosexual pedophiles, I believe that these individuals constitute a minority of homosexuals.
Nineveh said:
See my previous post.
Also, I'm still trying to hunt down a complete copy of the "Spirit of Stonewall" proclamation that the page you linked referenced. Ever seen the whole thing anywhere?
Greywolf
New member
Rimi said:
Did you read the quote from the San Diego Pride Board? They didn't do anything about it because they didn't think that there was any danger.
Rimi said:
I'm not speaking for them. LMOHM has been participating in this thread, firechyld doesn't have internet access during the winter, and beanieboy told me why he doesn't want to participate in this thread.
Nineveh
Merely Christian
Greywolf said:
What you seem to miss Greywolf is their reaction when they found out. Did you bother to read this link? It appears even now bean and you are offering yet more justification for two child rapists being involved with a "pride" event. Take a step back and think about this a sec.
Do you realize this is the first time in 10 years homo week was voted down? Maybe you can't really tell why, perhaps you feel it's because of bigotted hatred or something.
And showing solidarity with child rapers makes it all better? Or are you really going to try to convince me all these people don't really know what child moletation is? Rather it's fitting sodomites would find solidarity with other sexual perverts.
No, but then I'm not interested in tracking down everything on sodomites, why are you?
Your point has been dismantled by the words and actions of the leaders in this years SD pride parade.
Nineveh
Merely Christian
Greywolf said:
Guess what? Almost half of the AIDS victims didn't "see any danger" either. Perhaps that 2% of the population needs to take their "no danger in sexual perversion glasses" off.
Yes you are, and it's pathetic you are walking lock step in justifying thier behavior. Especially where child rape is concerned.
Greywolf said:
So, if they THINK there's no danger, then hanging around child molesters is fine? Moron.
Also, I noted that Buttboi said that if a child did get molested it would be the parents' fault. That's like blaming a raped woman for wearing a skirt -- works for muslim scum.
You are speaking for them and defending them, like other homos here. Homos aren't eager to participate in this thread because they'd then have to look at what made them homo and some just can't handle it. They don't want to have to admit they support and affirm child molesters . . . well, some do, but most want to keep it off the table.
Nineveh
Merely Christian
Rimi said:
I wonder if beanie-adult would dare imply a homo wasn't a good parent. After all it was the homos themselves who didn't see a problem with child rapists being part of the event to begin with, "[Pride Board] didn't do anything about it because they didn't think that there was any danger."
This is one more very very good reason for normal folks to stay clear of "pride" in homism.
Yep, lmohm and beanie-adult have seemed to disappear on ya Greywolf. Looks like they are going to leave the defense of their own beliefs and the actions of homo leaders all up to you.
Nineveh - is it good parenting to drop your 5 year old at the Mall of aAmerica at 7am with 20 bucks, and say that you will be back to pick them up after work at 5pm? That's what I'm saying.
You are making a false accusation.
There are sex offenders in your city.
You have a Wal-Mart in your city.
Sex offenders can legally go to Wal-Mart, because they aren't alone with children.
Do you
a) refuse to let your kids go to Wal-Mart, because a customer might be a sex offender or
b) go to Wal-Mart with your kids because you support child rape?
The answer is:
You probably go to Wal-Mart with your kids, and let them go to the toy aisle on their own (depending on their age), because you know that you can't be around your children 24/7. As a child, I was taught to never get in a car with someone I didn't know, someone who claimed to be a friend of my parents, etc. Children are taught if someeone tries to take you away, to do NO GO TELL, ie, say No! as loud as possible, run away, and tell someone.
But aside from this, you can't keep your children safe unless you tether them.
I don't support the sex offenders providing day care service.
But setting up and tearing down the event?
Where is the danger in that?
You don't want them to be around children even when they aren't alone.
How do you suppose they would shop for groceries?
Where would they work?
How would they walk to the corner to mail something, if it is possible they might see a child?
How would they go to a ball game - they might see children there.
It's being alone with children that is the issue, and unless some 5 year old is going to enjoy setting up tents and risers, there will be no children around while they are volunteering.
Do I support them being able to molest children? Absolutely not. But they are going to be out in public, whether we like it or not.
You are making a false accusation.
There are sex offenders in your city.
You have a Wal-Mart in your city.
Sex offenders can legally go to Wal-Mart, because they aren't alone with children.
Do you
a) refuse to let your kids go to Wal-Mart, because a customer might be a sex offender or
b) go to Wal-Mart with your kids because you support child rape?
The answer is:
You probably go to Wal-Mart with your kids, and let them go to the toy aisle on their own (depending on their age), because you know that you can't be around your children 24/7. As a child, I was taught to never get in a car with someone I didn't know, someone who claimed to be a friend of my parents, etc. Children are taught if someeone tries to take you away, to do NO GO TELL, ie, say No! as loud as possible, run away, and tell someone.
But aside from this, you can't keep your children safe unless you tether them.
I don't support the sex offenders providing day care service.
But setting up and tearing down the event?
Where is the danger in that?
You don't want them to be around children even when they aren't alone.
How do you suppose they would shop for groceries?
Where would they work?
How would they walk to the corner to mail something, if it is possible they might see a child?
How would they go to a ball game - they might see children there.
It's being alone with children that is the issue, and unless some 5 year old is going to enjoy setting up tents and risers, there will be no children around while they are volunteering.
Do I support them being able to molest children? Absolutely not. But they are going to be out in public, whether we like it or not.
Nineveh
Merely Christian
So nice of you to come speak for yourself beanie-adult.
Do you think it's good parenting to have your kids around a child rapists?
How about this:
I wouldn't let kids around people who saw nothing wrong with child rape. "[Pride Board] didn't do anything about it because they didn't think that there was any danger."
I can keep my daughter safer by not letting her around people who don't think there is anything wrong with child rapists. "[Pride Board] didn't do anything about it because they didn't think that there was any danger."
It's leaders in your deathstyle with the attitude there isn't anything wrong at all. That's why homo week was voted down for the first time in 10 years.
beanie-adult, do you have any problems with child rapisits themselves at all? Why are you finding justifications for homos who would even want child rapists associated with a homo event?
Child rapists shouldn't be alive. That solves the problem.
After this great big long diatribe, you have done nothing but justify child rapists being accepted in association with a "pride" event. Tell me, if some poor little kid who was forced into an adoption by a homo fell victim to one of these child rapists, who's fault would it be?
beanieboy said:
Do you think it's good parenting to have your kids around a child rapists?
How about this:
I wouldn't let kids around people who saw nothing wrong with child rape. "[Pride Board] didn't do anything about it because they didn't think that there was any danger."
I can keep my daughter safer by not letting her around people who don't think there is anything wrong with child rapists. "[Pride Board] didn't do anything about it because they didn't think that there was any danger."
It's leaders in your deathstyle with the attitude there isn't anything wrong at all. That's why homo week was voted down for the first time in 10 years.
beanie-adult, do you have any problems with child rapisits themselves at all? Why are you finding justifications for homos who would even want child rapists associated with a homo event?
Child rapists shouldn't be alive. That solves the problem.
After this great big long diatribe, you have done nothing but justify child rapists being accepted in association with a "pride" event. Tell me, if some poor little kid who was forced into an adoption by a homo fell victim to one of these child rapists, who's fault would it be?
lovemeorhateme
Well-known member
Rimi said:
Rimi, I agree with you on the treatment of pedophiles. In fact, I couldn't agree more (the only alternative punishment is to chop their bits off.)
My question is this, and I am only asking out of curiosity. Do you advocate the death penalty for homosexuality? And if so, why so?
lovemeorhateme
Well-known member
beanieboy said:
Unfortunatly, I know of some people who do.
- Status