Re: To Ron
Submitted by Ron on 2003-02-19 16:39:43, Wednesday
In reply to Re: To Ron submitted by Huckleberry on 2003-02-19 03:41:54, Wednesday
|
Huck: I've taken the time to read your thoughts on defining Boylove which included your conscientious objection to NAMBLA and it's agenda to legitimize pedophilia, or as you rightly stated "to legitimize sex with kids." As you probably know, I've posted some extremely contentious thoughts on the subject of "boylove" and its nature and intent. I surfed into this forum in a rage, expressing some extremely hostile feelings toward this forum, including the now notorious wish that you all "ROT IN HELL YOU FILTHY CREEPS." I regret having said this and now that I've chilled enough to listen to posters who assure me that this is indeed a Christian support group and not a front for groups like NAMBLA and its radical social agenda, I'm willing to consider points taken by all. Perhaps part of my initial hostility erupted from the fact that hundreds of boys over decades have been the victims of sexual abuse by homosexual pederasts in the priesthood. Not that I made any direct link with CBLF and these sex crimes by priests or with the Church, but the linking of "Christian" to "Boylove" [a term which I understood to mean men with a sexual attraction to boys] seemed to me all the more outrageous in the wake of these tragedies. I've unfortunately grown quite cynical toward organized religion in general, but it seems I have a lot of company these days. Although I'm a skeptic on all matters of religion and the supernatural and a hardened cynic, I'm incapable of ignoring things which I know to be wrong and keeping quiet about these things. I can't just go about my own business, content that as long as the malls are well stocked, the ball games are on TV and there's plenty of food and beer in the fridge all's well with the world. To be trendy and fashionable and always conscious of what is and is not "Politically Correct" to think and say. That's not me. To be one of those who'd rather lose a limb than state a Politically Incorrect thought--that's not me for certain. To say in my heart what I believe to be the truth. That's me. Let's all face it facts, "Boylove" is in reality homosexual pedophilia. When we begin to mask the true meaning of things in euphemisms designed to alter and soften their meaning in our own minds or in that of public, we're not only trying to fool ourseleves we're attempting to engage the public in acceptance of another special interest while putting at risk in this case as in so many others, the welfare of children. Fifty some odd years ago, before the push by certain special interests often with the aid and sympathy of the mass news and entertainment media for more "understanding" and "nonjudgemental" acceptence of behaviour which was once considered deviant and inexcusable we didn't have the problems in the scope and magnitude we have today {and this goes a long way in explaining the double standard in the media when it comes to reporting such things as sex crimes}. In today's climate of "understanding" of others "situation," we have, for instance, the case of the Ohio college couple who killed their newborn baby and trashed it in the dumpster of a cheap motel. The couple received hundreds of phone calls and letters of sympathy and "understanding." After all, it's "understandable" why they panicked! Isn't it? The court ended up giving then each a 3 year sentence. This is pure insanity! At the time of the Jeffrey Curley murder, NAMBLA was sending out a pamphlet to all its members entitled RAPE AND ESCAPE. The Ohio Court of Appeals ruled back in the late 90s, in a rape case in which the perpertrator was another NAMBLA follower, that their literature showed "preperation and purpose" in encouraging the luring of boys for the purpose of rape. To conspire to have sex with children is a crime. Therefore, NAMBLA is a criminal organization not a "child rights" advocacy group. I commend you and others in this forum who have the courage to speak openly and honestly about your feelings on the subject and nature of "Boylove" and what does and does not constitute love for a child. --Ron |
Follow ups: