Goangod it would be nice if you sourced your statistics. For all I know they could be coming from anti homosexual websites. Really, with all the name your source crap yourself and millers go on with in the Islam debates I thought you'd be up with the play.
Heres a nice little piece of information for you:
The rape of males is believed to be even more underreported than that of females. Male children are more likely to be assaulted by heterosexual men than by women or homosexual men. Very young males are most likely to be assaulted by family members or caretakers, young teenagers by authority figures, and young adult males by peers or older adults.
http://gocadvs.ky.gov/gisa.htm
(Hall, Rob. Rape in America. ABC-CLIO, Inc., 1995; 7-9, 74, 75.)
Rape is the most underreported violent crime on which national statistics are kept.
Rape victims overwhelmingly are female, and rapists overwhelmingly are male.
Rape victims are young; close to two-thirds of rape victims are under 18.
http://gocadvs.ky.gov/gisa.htm
(U.S. Department of Justice, Preventing Violence Against Women. Washington, D.C.; June 1995; 13-15.)
What is even more surprising to the average man is that, according to
several studies, most rapes of males are committed by men who are
heterosexual in their consensual sexual preference and self-identity; only
7 per cent of the rapists of men in the Groth-Burgess study were homosexual.
(Indeed, it has been reported that homosexual men are far less likely to
engage in rape than heterosexual men.) Half or more of these rapists choose
victims from both genders.
Heres a bit more, it was done in relation to sex offenders and pornography but gives some interesting stats none the less:
In total, 89 patients attending a sex offender's clinic were interviewed about their use of sexually explicit materials. Seventy-four percent admitted to having engaged in sexual acts with children and 26 percent had committed or attempted rape of an adult female. Of the child molesters, 23 percent had committed incest and 77 percent had molested children other than their relatives. Of the non-familial child molesters, 35 percent were homosexual molesters and 65 percent were heterosexual molesters.
http://canada.justice.gc.ca/en/ps/rs/rep/rr00-5.html
And more:
The most commonly reported perpetrators are fathers and stepfathers. Brothers, sisters, mothers, baby-sitters, and uncles, are also among the most common abusers.
Statistics only come from reporting, so we dont have accurate, objective numbers. But based on the reports we have, its believed that 1 in 3 girls is sexually abused, and a general consensus of 1 in 5 to 1 in 7 boys is sexually abused.
http://www.allaboutcounseling.com/sexual_abuse.htm#sa5
Theres plenty more stats. Now if we link all the dots (which can be a bit hard because the stats and info I've used is a bit out of order) we get quite an interesting picture. Alot of it conflicts what you have put up.
Males are more likely to be raped by heterosexual males than females or homosexuals. Add to that the majority of victims are females and the majority of offenders are males which would indicate that the males are heterosexuals especially since heterosexuals are more likely to commit rape than homosexuals. The victims are also likely to be young and underage. Now if we've got a whole lot of heterosexual males raping underage females and males wouldn't that also be clased as paedophile activity? Not only that. From a sex offenders clinic, 65 percent were heterosexuals.
Then we see that 1 in 3 girls are sexually abused compared to only 1 in 7 boys. The main offenders are fathers, stepfathers and brothers.
What can we conclude from all of that? Rapists are most likely to be male and heterosexual and their victims are quite likely to be family members. Going by that goangod you better be careful because your very likely to sexually abuse or rape a family member.
Homosexuals are overrepresented in child abuse cases. A tiny minority of the population is responsible for a third of its abuse claims. You can sugarcoat it all you like - the fact remains and the link remains.
Theres many links. I've already given you the link between heterosexuals and rape. By your logic we can conclude that heterosexuality is dangerous because there is a chance that some heterosexuals may commit rape.
Your belief is that marriage is between two people?
Your belief Salivor???
Well you know what, my belief and the belief of many others is that gay marriage shouldnt be legal. But, we are told, we have no right to impose our beliefs on others.
So simply because you 'believe' that marriage is between two people is irrelevant. Now, you tell me how on earth a government here can ban polygamy? How dare you impose your 'beliefs' on the poor, discriminated against polgyamists of our society? Go on - tell me. Once you have discarded the Judeo Christian definition of marriage to suit the needs of one group - you cannot deny others. The logic is simple - try and and keep up.
It absolutely amazes me, that you seek to dispense with all them moral injunctions that discriminate against homosexuality yet you use these very same moral injunctions to discriminate against polygamy and pedophilia. Your position, Salivor, is untenable.
Predictability is your main problem goangod. You know what polygamy is a ok by me I've decided. As many people can get married as they like. No paedophiles because sorry but that is illegal. Its not discrimination and I've explained that enough throughout this post. No bestiality either because we can't communicate well enough with animals for them to consent. I'm sure you've got many more groups goangod so please bore me shitless and lay them on me.
Ah.
So what you are saying that its ok to be attracted to the same sex at birth but not ok to be attracted to children? But how can you say that? Who are you to judge them? After all, we are told, there is no such thing as 'normal' sexuality.
Pedophiles are the target of so much abuse and discrimination in our society! I mean, who would want to be a pedophile? Its obvious then that they have no choice in the matter and should be free to express their sexuality. Being attracted to children is just another form of 'sexual orinetation' which this group should have the right to practice.
Unfortunately, your point that pedophilia does not involve homosexuality is undermined by the actions of homosexual groups trying to lower or dispense with the age of consent altogether, the prevalence of pedophiles and pedophile groups in the homosexual movement and the identification of most pedophiles as homosexuals.
Its ok to be attracted to children at birth. You can't change how you were born. Whats not ok to do is to act out on this attraction to children because this is when it becomes illegal and sexual abuse. Children don't have the maturity to consent to sex.
I really don't care what certain homosexual groups are promoting. I don't feel they represent the average homosexual who just wants to get on with their life. Quite the same way I feel that the Klu Klux Klan doesn't represent your average white male.
Great - we agree on something.
Ok, the reason I asked you this is as follows.
30 years ago, if you had told people that homosexuals would enjoy the protection of the law and be allowed to get married, you would be considered a nutball. Homosexuality was considered as deviant, as criminal and not something spoken about - except by a few left wing professors in academia who argued that homosexuality was normal.
Thus the homosexual movement begun.
Homosexuality 30 years ago is exactly where pedophilia is today.
So here's my next question Salivor, lets say, that in a certain amount of time, itmaybe 10 years, 20 years or 50 years, that pedophilia is legalised - that any person can have sex with a child if they consent - even if that child is 3 or 4 or 10.
Would you still be of the opinion that pedophilia is wrong? And why?
Race relations were also in about the same place 30 years ago. Now if I say interracial marriages and sexual relations is un-natural I'll be branded a racist yet its ok for you to come out and be openly homophobic.
Are you disappointed now that these days we look down on racists? What about womens rights? They've come along way. I suppose 100 years ago if you told people that women would be in some of the most powerful positions in the world and be totally independent they'd think you were a nutball.
The difference as I've said a million times is that homosexual relations is between consenting adults and paedophilia isn't. I will always have the opinion that paedophilia is wrong. Mad duck summed it up nicely that children of that age are not mature enough to make an educated decision. They can be easily manipulated and don't have the ability to decide whether they really want to consent to sex or not. So its not ok for an adult to have sex with a child that is underage even if that child consents.
