Looking for the stats on “homosexuality & pedophilia”

[Freddy]

All of you can remain in your ignorance. I know better and I also know not to trust teen bopper music as a norm for human sexuality.

Setting you all to mute.

Mmm. Fingers in ear response. It might surprise you that until very recently the age of consent in the Vatican City was…wait for it…12.

“Vatican State has its own criminal system based on the former Italian criminal code (called “Zanardelli Code”, issued in 1889). Art 331 (1) of this code provides that the age of consent is set at 12 years old, but according to Art. 331 (2) when there is a relationship of dependence (like teacher/student/ etc.) the age of consent is 15 years.” Email from the Italian embassy to The Atlantic (I didn’t link the page as the title might be taken as derogatory).

 

[Rau]

The mental gymnastics required to argue that a group of men who overwhelmingly abuse boys has no correlation to sexual orientation astonishes me.

I think that’s clear. The inclination / preparedness to abuse should not be put down to “homosexuality” (without some other evidence basis), but the choice of male victims would indeed seem to be a function of the orientation of the abuser - at least where we are considering teenage victims.

 

[Freddy]

All of you can remain in your ignorance. I know better and I also know not to trust teen bopper music as a norm for human sexuality.

Setting you all to mute.

And in the fifties, the average age of women getting married was only a few months past their teenage years.

Median Age at First Marriage, 1890–2010

The following table shows the median age of men and women when they were first married in the United States from 1890 to 2010. The median age for a man's first marriage was 28.2 years in 2010, up from 26.1 in 1990. The median age for a woman's first marriage was 26.1 years in 2010, up from 23.9...

www.infoplease.com

 

[felsguy]

I’ve wrestled with trying to comprehend the facts and the myths of this abhorrent issue of clerical abuse since first hearing about it and am not much closer to an understanding than when I first started, the John Jay College study, countless articles, and similar threads not withstanding. However I find it hard to believe that boys/young men aged 14-18 chose to enter and undergo the rigors of 8-12 years of seminary life for the express purpose of gaining enhanced access to children whom they could then abuse once ordained.

 

[Jbrady]

the age of consent in the Vatican City was…wait for it…12.

While he was Pope, Alexander VI married off his 12-year-old daughter Lucrezia to a twenty-six-year-old. It was her third engagement, and the first of three marriages.

 

[Freddy]

Freddy:

the age of consent in the Vatican City was…wait for it…12.

While he was Pope, Alexander VI married off his 12-year-old daughter Lucrezia to a twenty-six-year-old. It was her third engagement, and the first of three marriages.

The pope had a daughter? Times they’ve changed…

 

[Freddy]

Horton:

The most common sexual abuser of children is a married heterosexual white man.

Lmao. Way to fudge the numbers.

If you go off of rates of abuse, not just raw numbers, African Americans and Hispanics surpass white men as childhood sexual abusers, with African Americans it is by far.

The trick is that there is no such thing as a “homosexual” or a “heterosexual”. There are some people who are sodomites and there are others who are not sodomites. Sodomy is an action, not a state of being. And all sodomites are perverts.

Before someone brings up their friend who is “gay” but celibate, they should know that a sodomite is what a sodomite does. Their friend suffers from some mental issues, just like many other people. The mentally ill deserve care and compassion.

Sodomy is a crime against humanity, against nature, and against God. It is a vicious, violent assault upon one’s self and others. Of course sodomites are universally abusers of children, because it is all one and the same thing: violent sexual perversion. Saying that a sodomite isn’t more likely to abuse children is saying that violent sexual abusers are not more likely to commit acts of violent sexual abuse.

Way to go, Jimmy. Racism and the denigration of gay people in one post.

Just so we’re all clear on your terminology, say my neice was in a loving relationship with another woman but she wasn’t a (ahem) sodomite, then what term would you use to describe her?

And I’d like you to imagine that we’re standing at a bar face to face when you give your answer…

 

[Jbrady]

The pope had a daughter ? Times they’ve changed…

He had about ten illegitimate kids when he became Pope. His first act as Pope was to legitimize four of them. He wasn’t the only Pope to have illegitimate children, and some were or had been legally married and had legitimate children. But yes, times have changed.

 

[Freddy]

Freddy:

The pope had a daughter ? Times they’ve changed…

But yes, times have changed.

And they still are. But some people (no names) seem to want to live in the past. You know, when the term sodomites was still in use.

 

[LilyM]

Well we know that sexuality is somewhat fluid, given that one of the biggest contributors to child sexual abuse is access and priests have traditionally had more access to boys than girls. I mean it’s not like heterosexual men can’t have sex with other men, if that was true the situational homosexuality wouldn’t be an observable phenomenon.

You may have heard of the expression “gay for pay”? Meaning there are male sex workers who identify as heterosexual who nonetheless will engage in gay sex with paying clients.

Or the expression “prison wife”? Meaning heterosexual men who are incarcerated may, for the duration of their incarceration, form sexual relationships with other male inmates, for example for protection.

It seems sexuality in men is ffluid and the motivations moee complex than we previpusly suspected.

For starters it would be a perfect.alibi -and one that has been used by abusers of.boys - ‘oh no, I couldn’t possibly have done it, I am.a happily married heterosexual man’.

 

[do_justly_love_mercy]

Do not equate normal sexual relations with sodomy. They have nothing to do with one another. There is no such thing as a “heterosexual”.

Has never been proven, and of course it could not be proven, because all sodomy is abuse. All sodomy is violence.

Also, the vast majority of sodomites were preyed upon by older men in their teens. Despite fifty years of sodomite propaganda, everyone still knows the truth: sodomites are not born, they are created. Created by sexual abuse.

Please refrain from posting these uncharitable falsehoods in a public forum. Why do you insist upon using outdated and offensive terminology? You are making claims about the causes of homosexuality that have no basis in science. I am myself a woman who experiences attraction toward women as well as men. I was never sexually abused as a child, neither by a man nor by a woman. How do you explain that? Do you have a view on lesbian and bisexual women? During the years when I was away from the Church I had several relationships with women. These relationships were not abusive.

The mentally ill deserve care and compassion.

People who are gay and bisexual are not mentally ill.

Sodomy is a crime against humanity

Do you really believe this? Crimes against humanity are what the Nazis did. It is grossly offensive to everyone to suggest that a true atrocity such as the Holocaust can be described in the same language in which you would describe sexual relations between people of the same sex.

sodomites are universally abusers of children

That is a lie, a horrible lie.

I do not know where you are coming from. Your views on this issue are extreme and have nothing to do with Catholicism. I think you should read over what you said and think long and hard about yourself. Your profile doesn’t mention whether you are actually a Catholic or a Christian of any kind. If you are a Catholic, I think your comments are an embarrassment to the Church.

Oh, it seems you tried to blame the Gilroy Garlic Festival shooting on the gays too: Angry young men continue to be America’s greatest threat - #3

 

[Rau]

say my neice was in a loving relationship with another woman but she wasn’t a (ahem) sodomite, then what term would you use to describe her?

Close friends?

 

[Rau]

You may have heard of the expression “gay for pay”? Meaning there are male sex workers who identify as heterosexual who nonetheless will engage in gay sex with paying clients.

Or the expression “prison wife”? Meaning heterosexual men who are incarcerated may, for the duration of their incarceration, form sexual relationships with other male inmates, for example for protection.

It seems sexuality in men is ffluid and the motivations moee complex than we previpusly suspected.

Do these example support the notion of “fluid sexuality”, or the notion that people will act contrary to preference when circumstances make the upside outweigh the downside?

 

[LilyM]

LilyM:

You may have heard of the expression “gay for pay”? Meaning there are male sex workers who identify as heterosexual who nonetheless will engage in gay sex with paying clients.

Or the expression “prison wife”? Meaning heterosexual men who are incarcerated may, for the duration of their incarceration, form sexual relationships with other male inmates, for example for protection.

It seems sexuality in men is ffluid and the motivations moee complex than we previpusly suspected.

Do these example support the notion of “fluid sexuality”, or the notion that people will act contrary to preference when circumstances make the upside outweigh the downside?

Well, it supports the idea that people will go AGAINST their own self-identified sexual preference for the sake of considerations such as money or protection.

Given that abuse is, so we are often told, about power, is it impossible that someone will sexually abuse a person of a non-preferred gender simply because they value the power it gives them.over the victim?

 

[Freddy]

Edit: I’m not interested in your niece’s dating life and I would have nothing to say about her at all.

So we’re in that hypothetical bar having a chat and all of a sudden your rhetoric is dialled down to the point of refusing to engage. Yet you had plenty to say about gay people before.

Actually, it was only about males, not gay people in general. Seems your problem is with male homosexuality. Which seems par for the course for a lot of people in disussions such as this. People who denigrate gays only seem to focus on the guys.

 

[Freddy]

Freddy:

say my neice was in a loving relationship with another woman but she wasn’t a (ahem) sodomite, then what term would you use to describe her?

Close friends?

Wife would be more accurate.

 

[ImQuiet]

Can we lock this thread already.

 

[do_justly_love_mercy]

@JimmyTolder I don’t know what you think qualifies you to be an expert on same-sex relationships. I am guessing that you have never been in a same-sex relationship and that you probably don’t have many gay or bisexual friends.

I can assure you that I did not choose to be bisexual to gain attention. It’s not something I would tend to talk about very much. I have only mentioned it here because of your attitude.

I also don’t know where you get the idea that lesbians don’t have a lot of sex or that gay men are having sex all the time. These sound like assumptions based on your prejudices and ignorance.

As for your bizarre comments on homosexuality and capital punishment, I don’t even know where to begin. Your ideas are completely out of step with the Church and wider society.

I honestly think that you have some issues that you need to deal with. Your posting history reveals something of an obsession with this topic, and that’s only including the posts that haven’t been deleted by the moderator because they are so grossly offensive.