America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

My reference to it being "creepy child molesty" is because I think there's something kind of creepy and molesty about it. I am sure the kids are great. But as I said before, I have an immediate suspicion of anyone over 16 who wants to spend weekends with children. Even if they are parents, I think that's suspect and they immediately get a red flag. Maybe it's innocent. but an older scout (my understanding is there are high school aged scouts helping out) that wants to spend time wiht chidren is suspect to me. and any one parent that "over volunteers" would be suspect. It just seems like more a risk than it would be worth.

As for d, I can say it with as much certainty as anyone could about an alternate reality. Remember, based on the studies I've read, my hypothetical kid has a higher chance of being raped by a guy that believes they are straight. That means I'd be more negligent to let them go on a hiking trip with a "straight" guy and his kid. Now, I'm the first to say stats can be manipulated. And I'll even say the studies haven't been conclusive yet. But there are some interesting studies out there, and if I could get my hands on the full text I'd post them for you.

Seriously... think about it this way:
Dude is attracted to children. That means he ISN'T attracted to men. Why would he go out and identify himself as "gay" then? He doesn't want to be in a relationship with an adult male. If he can't be in a relationship with the type of person he wants to be in a relationship with (small boys) then wouldn't he simply either be single, or be in a "hetero" relationship? Why add the additional attention and trouble to his life by trying to make a gay relationship work? Hell, in a straight marriage at least he wouldn't be bothered for sex all the time. It just seems unlikely to me.

That's because you've got your butt-plug set to vibrate when a new message comes in. Admit it.

Really? By the 4th/5th grade you were "disgusted" by saying "under god?" Interesting. You've had a lot of years now perfecting your ability to involve yourself in controversy (and stir the pot). I guess there's nothing wrong with that to some degree. I suppose, as a child, it would be a bit conflicting to grow up with parents at such opposite ends of the scale to the belief of God (a god). Mom dragging you to church and dad bah-humbugging the whole idea of it. It is what it is...I guess things could have been worse. I wonder what would be taught about the world in the 4th/5th grade that would create doubt (about God) in a kid.

Gotta admit you can certainly chatterbox multitask.

So basically your full of hot air trying to impose your way of thinking on us who do have kids and telling us we are wrong. Right?

And why should I listen to a windbag that has no personal interest in this matter?

Answer is simple I shouldn't, and I won't.

And thus I return to my favorite saying once again.

You talk like a parrot, says what he knows, doesn't know what he says.


Thank you for just proving my point.

...
Not having a kid, or particularly caring about kids, doesn't mean I'm not intelligent/observant enough to know if you're wrong...

In fact, your posts on this thread suggest you're not even sure what the topic is.

Is that all sodomy or just gay sodomy?

I mean, if Tailgater and I are Eiffel Towering a girl at least one of us is sodomizing her...

And where do you stand if she's a tranny? I mean, technically we're both sodomizing her then... but she dressed like a girl... is that legit?

I was interested in natural history from a young age. My mother frequently took me to the Science Center for all the kids demonstrations. By the time catechism classes started, there was enough discrepancies in what they tried to teach and what I already knew about the world that I spent most of every wednesday evening in the hallway for asking too many questions.

You are allowed to be as cautious as you want around your children. I have under no circumstances said you can't be.

Let me give you an example. If you decided that blacks were more likely to commit violent crimes, and because of that decided that you did not want your child to be around blacks. I wouldn't stop you. I might try to convince you otherwise, but it's your life. Additionally, if you took your kid out of the BSA because they allowed black troop leaders, I wouldn't force you to rejoin. Hell, if you put your kid in a camping program that banned blacks, I couldn't stop you. I also couldn't stop the camping program. I might call it bigoted. But I wouldn't stop it. It's all within your right, so don't tell me I'm trying to force you to do something.

All I'm doing is trying to change minds regarding stereotypes, based off of information that suggests your stereotypes are incorrect. If you take anything from what I'm saying is that you should keep an eye on the married straight parents as well, because they're just as likely to screw up your kids as the ones you're currently paranoid about. That's actually trying to help you protect your kids.

The false information is the belief that a "gay" identified parent has any more interest in molesting a male child than a "straight" identified parent (or non parent, I don't know what boyscout staff are hanging around there).

It's the same as saying "I believe that people who wear blue are more likely to molest boys than people who wear red, therefore I'm going to keep my kid away from any situation where they spend the night with people wearing blue"... It's well within a parent's right to do this, and if a parent actually believes this, I wouldn't criticize them for acting on it. But I will try to point out to them that the information they're using to base their actions on is perhaps not helping them out, and is distracting them from their primary goal, which is keeping their kid safe. Does that make sense?

You already did. Your creepy pic with the mustache clinched it.

Don't ignore the information that doesn't fit your preconceived notions.

I also said that I'd be uncomfortable with a "straight" dude who went on a girl scout sleep over.

It's the specific situation.

I'd be equally nervous if it were a straight dude who was known to be a swinger.

Sometimes the only "comfortable" situation is the societal norm, even if you can find stats to prove it doesn't matter.

Victor hitched his wagon to the latest cause celebre and now this thread has 175 posts!

I'm guessing nobody has changed their minds but, you will. They will wear you down.

You know, HD, if it keeps 'em off the streets and out of trouble, I say post away!

Having said that, you'll never convince me that the pedophile males who molest boys are not gay.

They might not be...but I bet they'd hold a p e n i s until a rubby player shows up!

It was all good till Elmo showed up...there went the neighborhood!

Jerry Sandusky...is that you?

Ah frenchie... always adding to the conversation. What can I say, I'm drawn to the poor decision making inherent in a discussion like this. Like a moth to a flaming frenchman.

What Frenchie just said, Victor. You won the culture war. It's not polite to gloat. We're just venting frustration.

ARRIBA con gay rights, gun control, free rubbers, abortion, hate crime legislation, quotas, open borders, taxes, unemployment, increased bureaucracy, foreign intervention & rebuilding, dead economy, and most importantly replacement of the erstwhile commercial Christmas with the true celebration of Kwanzaa.

that's why I made the "flaming frenchman" comment. I wanted you to feel included.

I heard they straightened their act out.
They got queer friers now.

Friers or Friars?

friars shave bald spots
friers brave oil spots

both can be queer

I thought it was the liberal-left that were outraged that there couldn't be gays around boys. Glass half-empty...

Actually, we're not having that discussion.
We may have, at some point. And my position has always been that a private organization can do whatever they want (I believe there are some issues with public access the BSA enjoys but that's part of a different discussion). The BSA made a change for whatever reason they chose to make the change.

So, we now are at the discussion we're having.