The horrors of political correctness
A homosexual foster couple were left free to sexually abuse vulnerable boys in their care because social workers feared being accused of discrimination if they investigated complaints, an inquiry concluded yesterday.
Craig Faunch and Ian Wathey were one of the first homosexual couples in the country to be officially approved as foster parents. They looked after 18 children in only 15 months. With no previous convictions, they came across as respectable men who simply wanted to help boys with a variety of problems. In reality, they were paedophiles, who repeatedly abused the children in their care.
Even when the mother of two of the children reported her suspicions to the council, officials accepted the men’s explanations and did nothing. Instead of banning children from staying with Faunch and Wathey, they sent youngsters with more serious problems to them. Between them, the couple abused four boys aged between eight and 14.
In a scathing report published yesterday, Wakefield Metropolitan District Council was condemned for treating the men as “trophy carers”. The children’s charity Kidscape said those in charge of overseeing the safety of children in the care of Faunch and Wathey had allowed political correctness to override common sense.
The report, following an independent review of the case, said: “One manager described the couple as ‘trophy carers’ which led to ’slack arrangements’ over placement.
“Another said that by virtue of their sexuality they had a ‘badge’ which made things less questionable.
“The sexual orientation of the men was a significant cause of people not ‘thinking the unthinkable’.
“It was clear that a number of staff were afraid of being thought homophobic.
“The fear of being discriminatory led them to fail to discriminate between the appropriate and the abusive.”
If ever there were a damning indictment of the perils of political correctness, there it is.
More, if you can stomach it:
Wathey, 42, was jailed for five years in June last year after being convicted of four counts of sexual activity with a child and one offence of causing a child to watch sexual activity.
Faunch, 33, received a six-year jail sentence after he was found guilty of five charges of engaging in sexual activity with a child and two of taking indecent photographs of a child.
The couple, who lived together in Pontefract, West Yorkshire, were approved as foster carers by the council in August 2003.
Their victims included a 14-year-old boy with Asperger’s syndrome, a form of autism,who had a mental age of seven and was forced by Wathey to watch gay pornography.
Another youngster with a “very troubled background” was only in their care for a few weeks before being abused by Faunch.
But social workers had been aware of “inappropriate” behaviour long before then.
Just eight months after they started as professional foster carers a mother of eight-year-old twins, who couldn’t cope with raising them on her own, voiced concerns about them with social services.
While visiting the twins, the 34-yearold single mother was shown a picture taken by Faunch showing one of the boys going to the lavatory during a visit to Butlin’s holiday camp in Skegness and discovered a similar snap had been taken of the other twin.
A social worker took the photograph and promised a full investigation.
But the court heard that not only did social services staff lose the photo, they decided against contacting police after accepting Faunch’s explanation that he was trying to embarrass the boys into shutting the lavatory door.
Police later discovered that, days after the photos were taken, Faunch recorded an indecent video of the twins taking a shower. They began abusing the boys three months later.
Hat tip: CultureWire.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
- Marginalized Action Dinosaur » A homosexual foster couple were left free to sexually abuse vulnerable boys in their care because social workers feared being accused of discrimination.
- PC abuse « Bookworm Room
- O Insurgente » Blog Archive » Os malefícios do politicamente correcto
- The City Square
- Political Correctness - Gay Lobby Make Children Pay the Price | Political Vindication
- Weekly roundup « 4Simpsons Blog - Eternity Matters
- Political correctness steals innocence of children « Crush Liberalism
- Political correctness gone awry « The Ramblings of Mathaytace Christou
- Tel-Chai Nation
- 7ab303933e0b452279f9
- Hot Air » Blog Archive » Foster son taken from Christian couple because they object to homosexuality
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: Political Correctness
Right Pundits
» Joe Lieberman: Fort Hood Shooter Is ‘Home-Grown Terrorist’Legal Insurrection
» Bruni de la Motte for Health Care CzarRiehl World View
» Obama: No Military Death Shall Go UnexploitedLegal Insurrection
» In The End: No Public Option, No Abortions, No Pelosi, No ReidThe Other McCain
» Paralysis by analysisThe Powers That Be
» Obama: ‘Don’t Jump to Conclusions’ About Ft. Hood; Immediately Jumps to ConclusionsLegal Insurrection
» NY Times Names Names
Where did this happen, when did this happen, and what is being done to these sub-humans?
England, I would guess – I don’t know of any other “West Yorkshire”’s and it looks like they got 5 and 6 years respectively.
Anyone know what that translates to in British Parole Reality Time?
Got it…Nevermind
Of course, the last thing a foster child needs is anything resembling a normal home environment. That makes sense.
Case in point of how America is falling apart. Its such a sad day that we live in. I am speechless.
Assuming that British prisoners treat child molesters the same way our crooks do, I think we could wager a guess…
I believe the term is “getting a good Rodgering”… Correct me, oh Brits, if I got that wrong…
Yup, If nothing else the Brit spelling of “paedophile” jumps out at you. But the storylink has it in the UK Daily Mail, so that’s another tip-off.
Also we don’t have too many home grown “Ians” in the states, lol.
Let me quote from the “Geraldo Rivera school of rebuttals”:
There – now none of the liberal pukes have anything more to add.
That said – isn’t there a more culturally ‘normal’ setting to place young boys with psychological issues?
How is taking a pair of twins from a single-mother home and putting them into a gay household beneficial to them?
Same with an autistic child?
But remember, political correctness is the sum and summit of all that’s good and noble in the world.
Failure to be anything but totally politically correct at all times means you’re a bigot, a homophobe, racist, sexist, an Islamophobe, etc.
When you have no parameters of morality and an over-warped sense of political correctness, it is amazing how far you will twist yourself to either ignore or explain away such disgusting behavior.
Don’t get me wrong, I don’t believe all homosexuals are disgusting – these individuals are.
But, as we see in America, disagreeing with something like homosexuality – no matter how civil your disagreement and arguments are – will mean you are an intolerant, heartless thug and groups will lobby for special laws to prosecute you, punishment for your thoughts, etc.
And that’s where my problem with political correctness lies.
I really don’t think homosexual couples should be allowed to adopt in the first place.. but how do I express that view without being labeled a homophobic bigot?
Yes, these horrible men are from England. They will be out of jail very soon no doubt….
Only if there are enough people willing to take them in.
Since often times single people have a hard time fostering, I can see why they would allows gay couples.
And lets be 100% honest here. We don’t care they these two guys were gay. that doesn’t make a difference here, except in the “We didn’t investigate because we could get accused of discrimination” angle…
The political correctness gone wrong is that they wouldn’t investigate, not that a gay couple were foster parents.
Its the “race-card” thing all over again.
Like letting the fox guard the chicken coop yet again. When are we as a society going to learn?
Let me personally assure anyone who reads this that so far as every single person who has access to your child; you must always think the unthinkable.
To do less and trust anyone blindly isn’t properly providing a safe environment for your children.
We hear about this horrible crime so much that its easy to be jaded, just imagine the digital rape of your own child when you think of someone else’s molest.
That political correctness was involved just makes harming a child that many times worse than an already unspeakable crime against helpless, terrified, innocents.
Also – what’s with the 18 children in 15 months? How do they go through that many kids and NOT throw up a red flag?
I don’t know anything about foster parenting, but it seems like a lot of children to go through your home in such a short time.
Sausage – I understand your point on that. I don’t think homosexual couples should be allowed to adopt either, but it has nothing to do with a disdain for a homosexual lifestyle.
I have homosexual & lesbian friends. It is my belief, however, that nature intended children to come from the union of a male & female couple. That being said – the “natural” environment for raising of those children would be that male / female pairing.
It has been so for thousands of years, and it is also the overwhelming norm in societies around the world.
And check out their really weak sentences: 5 years and 6 years for multiple cases of abuse?
I sat on a jury here in Texas and we gave a first time offender 25 years for aggravated sexual assault of a 3 year old girl. And only because we had to compromise among 12 people…
This is the most damning example of political correctness I’ve seen in a long time.
but don’t worry, this is just homophobia from a bunch of racists ACCORDING to the MSM, so nothing to see here.
Who was the holdout against “Hung by the neck until dead”?
Another story along these lines:
http://wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=29026
I tend to agree with you on this, but even so much as thinking this is considered an outrageous violation of civil rights by certain groups.
A converstation I had with a former classmate made me question if a same-sex environment is best for children: her partner had a son from a previous relationship…with a woman. The father of this boy is unknown and unmentioned, and the boy is confused that he has four mothers – the classmate and her partner, as well as the partner’s ex and ex’s new partner. The boy doesn’t know what’s going on, who his father is, this was acknowledged by said classmate, and it made me sad.
And while I understand this child was the biological offspring of one of the partners, it makes me wonder if placing children in homes with same-sex couples is a good idea.
But as you said, how do I express those concerns and my religious beliefs without being labeled a bigot?
#10 – How do you state your feelings that homosexual couples should not be able to adopt? Just say it.
If speaking the truth results in being labeled homophobic, so be it.
I fail to see how societies since recorded history were so stupid and we in the 20th/21st century got so enlightened. Homosexuality is a deviant form of sexual activity and even the most primitive of cultures found it so.
It was perverse in the days of Sodom and Gomorrah and is just as perverse now.
The only difference between other sexual sins and homosexuality is the former practitioner’s try and hide their sin. Homosexual’s have gone public with theirs and demanded that everyone approve of it and deem it “natural”.
Homophobe? Fear of Homos? I think the term is wrong. It should be more like homodisgust.
Sucks how women, minorities, and those with “alternate lifestyles” get a nice shield of protection. Liberals love to throw charges of sexism, racism, and other “biases” around so they can continue to propagate the lie that we live in a prejudiced country. Sure, we have our gangs and the KKK and all that, but the majority of America doesn’t make stupid assumptions. But, hey, just as long as anyone who accuses a women, minority, of homosexual of a crime can have a charge slapped right back in their face, no one’s gonna believe that.
(Homosexuals actually don’t fall neatly into the group of women and minorities, of course, because women and minorities can’t be called “immoral” in general while all homosexuals can. After that, though, the similarities resume; gays are still people made in the image and likeness of God, you know. Love the sinner, hate the sin.)
So Sad, but my guess is there are plenty more just like these two only we don’t know about them yet.
Question is will we ever know? Probably not.
I think reaonable people will understand and unreasonable people will be, well, unreasonable.
If a person critiques starting from what’s best for children that works best. Unfortunately some people start from “they’re sinners, terrible people, pervs” or the like.
But I think most folks have the common sense to ponder when male sex partners want a house full of boys.
I really don’t think homosexual couples should be allowed to adopt in the first place. If that offends you, sorry.
I really don’t think couples with criminal records for sexually abusing children should be allowed to adopt in the first place. I sure am not worried what NAMBLA thinks of that statement.
I am not PC, proud of it and will wear the label!
Homosexuality is focused on youth. The connection between homosexuality and molestation is substantial with studies showing that a homosexual is 5 times more likely to molest a child than a heterosexual. (The homosexuals like to say that more children are molested by heterosexuals than homosexuals but they conveniently leave out the fact that only 1 in 50 men are homosexual.)
By the way, the average homosexual male has, on average, over 500 different sexual partners during their lifetime. The media, of course, tries to find the supposedly monogamous homosexual couples and disregards that fact that homosexual monogamy is really a myth in that it operates much more like heterosexual swingers than real monogamous heterosexual couples.
The real truth of homosexuality is quite ugly and destructive – yet you will never hear this from the press. One of the reasons to keep your kids out of public schools is that homosexuality is treated on a par with heterosexuality. The big politically correct lie of homosexuality as normal rather than perverse is pushed in K-12 public education.
Funny how if a homosexual wants to adopt or become a foster parent – we shouldn’t have a second thought about it, lest we be labeled homophobes and bigots.
Yet if a SUSPECTED homosexual GOP politician were to have a young male page, those same people would cry out, ” Oh, we have to protect these young men! He’s a predator! “
jrlingreenbay
with my apologies to J. K. Rowling … new best seller …
Larry Craig and the Chamberpot of Secrets …
If it were that simple, it’d be great. If we were given opportunity to have an honest, open, rigorous debate on the issue, perhaps it wouldn’t be so difficult to say something like that.
But it’s not.
Go to Townhall and check out the columns by Mike Adams titled “Of Mice and Mormons”, specifically the comments. The columns center around a MFT grad student who, as a member of the LDS church, morally objected to homosexuality. Some of the commenters were hysterical in their insistence that even the most reasoned objection meant you were harboring a secret desire to see homosexuals beaten and jailed.
When the marriage amendment passed in Wisconsin by a healthy majority, those who opposed it basically said the approximately 60% of Wisconsinites who voted in favor of it were bigoted, and that they intended to fight to overturn our legal votes.
You can’t. There is no evidence saying that children raised by a homosexual couple are any better or worse off than children raised by a heterosexual couple. The absence of evidence leaves what? Intolerance for a different lifestyle.
I take a hard line on this, but surely you can appreciate the pragmatic angle. There are a lot more kids in foster care than there are families willing to take them in. A stable environment is cleary better than hopping from foster home to foster home. Homosexual couples, many of whom (for obvious reasons) depend on adoption to raise a family, fill in a huge gap here. Not allowing them to adopt children greatly hurts the child and the couple. That’s shameful.
It is that urge that seems to be the problem….
My problem is not with the sexual orientation of the individuals … it is the lack of proper vetting and oversight by the authorites that are responsible for the children placed into the foster parenting situations … they are supposed to be the ones looking out for these kids welfare … and that means investigating any reports of any level of impropriety … whether it is sexual, verbal or physical abuse …
Well, they are. What does it matter to you if Gary and Steve get married to each other? It affects your life how?
If you must insist that homosexuality is sinful, fine. It’s a personal belief that can’t be argued with. But it’s not like we go around denying anyone who has had pre-marital sex marriage rights. Why the intense double-standard against homosexuality?
DesertLover, you are 100% right. Anyone who doesn’t report suspicious behavior because they’re afraid of being labeled bigots are doing themselves and others a huge disservice. That goes for the whole John Doe thing that this site pushes and it goes for suspected child abusers. Better safe than sorry.
Nonsense. That was the exact same rhetoric we heard during the Catholic Church scandal; the church heirarchy, and the administrators were all at fault, yet don’t ever blame the homosexual urges that were the ultimate result for fear of being branded a bigot.
Because, Rusty:
Our upbringing, and that of the majority of societies, has taught us that ‘Marriage’ is historically and traditionally a bond between a man and a woman.
Our own culture has accepted this for over 200 years, and the western culture has for many, many more than that.
Now, suddenly, we are asked to accept this new definition of ‘Marriage’ put forth by a minority of people so that they can get the same ‘rights’ as heterosexuals.
But when offered a status such as ‘domestic partnerships’ or the like, they say NO! we want Marriage – even though the other ‘titles’ would grant them the same rights.
Many of us against Gay-marriage are not against domestic partnerships. I would consider that a step in the homosexual’s direction – why the push to get us to go all the way over to the other side of the issue? Where’s THEIR compromise with the majority of society?
I think you captured the hypocritical liberal gay-bashing shtick quite well there, jrl. It’s the same kind of odd tolerance that requires them to attack homosexuals who otherwise espouse a conservative value. e.g. the attacks on Matt Sanchez for being pro-victory on Iraq are all based on his sex life. It boggles.
I’m going to come right out here and say…
I don’t have a problem with homosexual couples adopting.
Don’t like it. Tough. I’m not sorry if you are offended.
On the other hand, I have a HUGE problem with pedophiles being within 1000 yards of children.
Don’t like it. Tough. I’m not sorry if you are offended.
I will never, ever understand why people think that just because you are gay that you are a pedophile. I don’t care what your sexual orientation or religous preferance is. Sexually abusing children is WRONG. Whether you are a homosexual from England or an illegal alien in California… the answer is the same… you are a monster and deserve to be put down.
Rusty:
There’s a vast difference between a heterosexual couple that has pre-marital sex and a homosexual couple.
The major reason for the vote was to give the people a voice in their democracy before some black-robed activist took matters into his/her own hands. I am not a fan of judicial fiat.
Second, we are not bigots for defending what has been – for centuries – the cultural, religious, and societal norm. As someone said above: I think it’s wrong. If that offends you, so be it.
Third, I wouldn’t have a problem if I knew that this issue would remain out of the classroom and not pose a threat to freedoms of thought, speech, and religion.
But it is clear that tolerance is no longer enough. You. Must. Approve. or be punished for failure to do so.
Actually – no, I’m not offended. I have no problem with your belief. You have your right to it.
THAT is the major difference I see between conservatives and liberals.
Conservatives will disagree with you, but respect your decision to believe what you do.
Liberals, however, will disagree with you and call you disparaging names and label you negatively for believing as you do.
Actually, if the important hard line were taken these boys and many others would not be abused and perhaps scarred for life.
The saying goes “If you lie down with dogs, you wake up with fleas.” But nobody, especially the innocent, should be forced to lie down with dogs as a sacrifice on the Altar Of Political Correctness.
I’ve known plenty of deeply f’d up heterosexual couples that I are in the process of raising equally f’d up children. In contrast I think the one homosexual couple I know would make fine parents, should they decide to.
We routinely ignore nature’s intentions to suit our own purposes, parenting shouldn’t be any different.
I really don’t think that’s the standard we want to use for what we think is right. Spend two minutes considering some of the other things that are the overwhelming norm and you’ll see what I mean.
Herein lies the hypocracy of your post, although I am sure it is unintended:
The same people that are molesting adolescent boys and are called “pedophiles” by you and everyone else are the ones in many places, most notably the UK, that are pushing for age of consent to be lowered to 13. So here is the question: If they are considered pedophiles today have sex with a 14 year old boy and, as you state, “deserve to be put down”, does that make you a anti-homosexual bigot if they are successful in lowering this age of consent? What if they try to move it to 10? What about 8? Are we then all bigots because we are offended by homosexual men having “consensual relations” with 8 year old boys?
The way to handle the labels that go with believing homosexuality is wrong is to just ignore them. I don’t care what anyone calls me or thinks of me because of my beliefs on this issue. I’ve had sixty-four years to fine tune my belief system, and accepting homosexuality as “normal” ain’t gonna happen, names or no names.
Should they have a kid, a person would make millions selling quarter dollar tickets for a peek into the delivery room, James.
Many try and refrain from referring to homosexuality when referring to pedophilia as if they are two distinct acts.
Pedophilia in all its forms is disgusting and immoral. However, the vast majority of these reports are of a man abusing a male child – especially within the Catholic church when it was exposed.
Just because the victim is a child, does not diminish the fact that it is a homosexual act perpetrated by a homosexual.
James:
I don’t disagree that there are some pretty incompetent and abusive heterosexual couples, but I still believe children thrive best in a home with both mother and father when mother and father are stable – something that speaks more to our cultures failings in encouraging stable marriages and discouraging quicky marriages (and the subsequent divorces).
Just because we “go against nature” all the time doesn’t make it right or moral.
And while there have been failings in historical practices some are not – a society based on the stable nuclear family should be one historical practice we hold on to.
James -
I, by no means, intended to purify all heterosexual couples as poster-children for parenting. Far from it.
I also, do not doubt, that there are homosexual couples who probably would make fine parents.
The point I was trying to make is that society, in general, accepts that ‘parents’ means a husband ( man ) and a wife ( woman ) or at least a man and a woman if unmarried.
That is the majority. That is the norm. Understanding the nature of children and how they interact – is it not logical to assume that a child who has gay ‘parents’ is more likely to have a more difficult time adjusting to their peer’s society? Do we not open them to negative words and emotions from their peers because of their home environment which is not what society has deemed ‘normal’ for so long?
Now, you may say that those who would cause such pain to those children are bigoted children themselves – but children are children. They may see something different from them and speak out because of that difference.
It took how many years for other civil rights to be accepted. I actually believe that one day, the way society is progressing, that gays WILL be able to marry, in some places anyway, and have more acceptance.
What I disagree with is the tactics used by the gay/lesbian groups which want to force the majority of Americans to accept their demands while they refuse to move towards the center of the issue at all – only seeing those of us on the other side of the aisle as bigots and homophobes, not simply as people with strongly held moral views which we were brought up to believe.
Finally, I don’t know what you’d be referring to when asking me to spend two minutes looking at society’s other ‘norms’….maybe you can clarify.
talk about your alternative lifestyle…what say ye lawyers?…if allowed to marry could they testify against each other?…
You’re either misunderstanding or misrepresenting what it is that a pedophile finds attractive. It’s not gender, it’s age. If your formulation was correct then such a person would prefer an adult male to an underage female, and that simply isn’t the case.
A similar dynamic is involved in prison rape. It is not primarily a sexual act, it’s a violent one.
Tens of thousands of rapes and assaults are committed in America every year, the overwhelming majority of them by heterosexual males. No one in their right mind suggests that we take a guilty-until-proven-innocent view of all men though. It is likewise inappropriate to draw conclusions about homosexuals based on the actions of two sick f**ks.
And just by the way, if someone were to use your logic to tar all of Christianity just because the Catholic church aided, abetted and knowingly concealed such abuse I suspect you’d get into a bit of an uproar over it. Justifiably so. Let’s apply the same standard to others.
I can’t believe my eyes.
I am supposed to believe two men who marry and adopt a male child are equal to a man and woman who adopt a male child? Which couple would be more prone to want to have sex with the male child? Be honest. The two men already have a propensity for the male gender.
Put that aside. You take you male child to a daycare with nothing but male homosexual caregivers. You want to tell me you will not worry? Take that same male child to a daycare (like most) that are run by women and you will be more comfortable.
Anybody who thinks otherwise is not being honest.
I, having raised 4 girls, know about what was best for them and I protected them from people I knew would try and sway them or harm them. I was never PC about it and they were never molested. That is saying a bunch since the odds were against me and them!
If homosexuality had been the norm since the begining of time we probably wouldn’t be here today because homosexual sex can not produce offspring.
Maybe the natural process is still the best process after all.
As for child abuse, any pervert who molests a child should be put away for a very long time. The damage done to these children is irreversible and many of those abused grow up to be abusers themselves. This is an entirely separate issue from homsexuality adoption and they should not be confused with double talk.
englishqueen01 said:
“society based on the stable nuclear family should be one historical practice we hold on to.”
By that you mean a family of based on a man and a woman bearing and raising children. And you’re right. When people think about it for even a second, it’s not just a matter of societal parctice. Without it, there would be no society beyond one existing generation.
If they want to adopt have em get a dang puppy.
You’re gray-headed, I assume, Soapbox?
How much time did the social worker get? These children are as much their responsibility as the Foster parents. Who cars about loosing your job, when this crap is going on?
James – I, for one, following your line of conversation, am not against gay adoption because of the possibility of sexually predatory behavior.
I believe that a male-female, traditional home is more suitable and more culturally beneficial to the child.
These are two different tracks.
Certainly there are both hetero and homosexual predators and child molesters.
However, in this instance, it was a case of a homosexual child predator assaulting male children. I am rather doubtful that these two homosexuals would have done the same with female children.
What we are stepping away from in all of these arguments is the real basis behind this story which is that the system which was supposed to protect these young boys failed because of the fear of reprisals brought forth by those liberal forces which proclaim that any negative connotations towards a homosexual are bigoted and discriminatory.
Because of their proclivity towards litigation and protestation of ANY question of their behavior, officials, in this instance, did not act on suspicions for fear of being labled as being discriminatory.
In other words – they were more concerned with protecting themselves than protecting the children.
THAT is what this is all about – and all of this gay-marriage / gay-rights jabber is just a distraction.
Please don’t make the mistake of confusing pedophilia and homosexuality. Male on male abuse does not equal homosexuality. The attacker is just as likely to have a wife and kids as he is to have a husband. Usually the pedophile is trying to establish trust with a child and that’s much easier for a man to accomplish with a boy than with a girl. Which isn’t to say that there aren’t a good number of men abusing young girls. Does that mean heterosexual urges are also a cause of pedophilia? Of course not. That’s crazy. Homosexuality deserves the same standard as heterosexuality.
Without judicial fiat we’d still have segregation and Jim Crow laws. The Judiciary is meant to protect the rights of the people. The 14th Amendment and Supreme Court precedent (Loving v. VA) are pretty clear that one such right is the right to marry. “Judicial fiat” is the fastest way for someone to obtain their deserved human and civil rights.
How odd is it that this morning I was thinking those same words, but in a different context? I was recalling the account of an airline employee who remembered encountering one of the 9/11 terrorists – perhaps Atta himself – and later recalled the “red flag” characteristics he’d seen: the one-way ticket, no checked bags, the hate-filled glare.
Everything about the man fairly shouted “Terrorist!” – yet in the end, the airline employee let his politically correct indoctrination override his common sense, and the rest is tragic history.
If Islamism is a foreign death-cult aimed at destroying us, in some ways political correctness is its domestic twin in the form of a suicide cult: it’s the political equivalent of HIV, destroying the host’s ability to defend itself from opportunistic infections until they eventually destroy the host.
“Alternative lifestyle?” Try Bizarro World.
Very but young enough to get carded – LOL I did yesterday (bought O’Doules) in case someone cares.
ajmontana is hot om my heals. His baby just turned 13!
From Rusty: “There is no evidence saying that children raised by a homosexual couple are any better or worse off than children raised by a heterosexual couple. The absence of evidence leaves what? Intolerance for a different lifestyle.”
_______________________________
Here is another example of the politically correct misinformation being passed around by the homosexual community that has become general knowledge. There have been studies of foster care in the United States, and these studies have shown that homosexual foster care is much more likely to lead to abuse than heterosexual foster care. Much like the global warming crowd, the homosexual advocacy crowd hides or distorts any opposing information.
What is interesting is that when these studies of homosexual foster care abuse are made public, the social service organizations in the US make much the same type of statements attributed to the UK social service agencies noted above.
You should be ashamed of yourself. You have four girls. Does that mean you sexually abused them? After all, heterosexual men have a propensity for the female gender. That’s your reasoning, right?
Why, Rusty?
yea, why Rusty?
Rusty – are you aware that many African Americans are heartily offended when the gay-rights movement is equated to the Civil Rights movement?
Because they aren’t the same thing.
From Rusty: “Please don’t make the mistake of confusing pedophilia and homosexuality. Male on male abuse does not equal homosexuality. The attacker is just as likely to have a wife and kids as he is to have a husband.”
———————–
Again a politically correct statement unsupported by the facts. The homosexual culture is dominated by an interest in youth. The homosexual is 5 times more likely to molest a young boy than is his heterosexual counterpart. A fairly recent Canadian study of over 120,000 people revealed that homosexuals are not represented in the over 50 crowd and they Canadian folks who did the study don’t know why that is that case. (However, the average homosexual lives something like 20 year less than his average heterosexual counterpart – drugs, suicide, violence and diseases (many of an unusual nature) are probably the cause of the lack of study data for the over 50 homosexual crowd).
I find this unpersuasive. Simply being alive opens one up to negative words and emotions from one’s peers. The list of things children will tease other children about is endless.
On this we agree. It is a fact that our society has had one definition of marriage for, well, forever. And we have built a wide range of legal and economic systems built on that definition. There are compelling reasons not to upend our entire society overnight without regard to the consequences.
What I take issue with is the idea, espoused by many on this board, that it’s anyone else’s business what two (or more) consenting adults do behind closed doors, or that being homosexual is de facto evidence of some moral failing.
No dolt. I have natural relations with my wife not my husband. Man loves wife has children and teaches them to do same. I am very proud of that! Now you are confusing pedophilia and incest with natural relations. Shame on you!
This is revolting.
Sexual predators.
Not even human enough to be gay.
Perpetrating sexual violence on the young- much like what happens in prison, except these jackals are walking around breathing free air.
I am a vigilante at heart when it comes to this type of criminal behavior.
You’re ranting, Rusty.
What’s being talked about here are the sexual choices of men who demand to be given “OPC”, Other People Children, where the damands are for male children specifically. Sets off warning bells in any rational person.
I think many of the commenters are failing to note the difference between homosexuals and pedophiles. I worked in a prison that had phase one of the sex offender treatment program. The majority of pedophiles were opposite sex offenders-heterosexuals, if you will. What I don’t know is the rate of occurrence in the heterosexual and homosexual communities.
The crime and the offense here is that officials were hesitant to investigate because homosexuals were involved. That is a huge breach of public faith and I hope they are sued. The individuals and not the government agency.
Do you realize that using your logic you (or your husband if you’re a woman) should be automatically suspected of wanting to have sex with your daughters based simply on gender and orientation?
I’m going to be leaving these boards for a few days. Because I’m just about to have a stroke.
HOW IN THE NAME OF GOD DID YOU GO FROM ME CONDEMNED PEDOPHILES TO ME BEING A HYPOCRITE BECAUSE I’M TRYING TO GET THE AGE OF CONSENT LOWERED.
Never in a million years would I agree to have the age of consent lowered. The only ones that would be trying to are PEDOPHILES.
How the heck did you even BEGIN to get that from what I said????
Between MM’s total obsession with Jerry Rivers. And the absolute STUPIDITY of some of the comments here.
I’m done.
See you when I can stop my blood pressure from rising just thinking about some of the total morons here.
I’m a hypocrite for despising pedophiles.
You are a sick puppy.
No kidding peep, not to mention their background, geez.
The mighty bear has awoken, eaten his Ewell Gibbons concoction, scratched his back on a nearby tree and spoken his peace.
I agree that these scum have no place on this earth.
That’s not true. The passing of civil rights legislation was, by definition, a legislative act.
James Felix
Addressed. Only someone wanting to argue a point would take it there.
Yup, you just can’t equate any given choice of sexual activies as being interchangable with what’s both normal and ideal.
I don’t care if a guy has a shoe fetish and keeps it to himself. If the guy asks for my approval or demands “equal treatment with heterosexuality” he’s gonna have a problem.
First, you hadn’t addressed it when I posted. Things are moving at a fast clip around here and there are usually five posts that go up in between when I start typing and when I hit “post”.
Second, and more importantly, you still haven’t addressed it. You sputtered in outrage, yes, but you said nothing to refute the validity of the point.
You said that based on someone’s preference for sex with an adult of a given gender it’s natural to assume they’d want to have sex with a child of that gender. Using your logic we must naturally suspect you, and every other heterosexual man, of wanting to bed his daughters.
Strange day indeed when I agree with anything Rusty posts, but his point here is sound.
James, note again: it’s about poeple who can only define themselves by their sexual choices and activities demanding that OTC – Other People’s Children – be handed over to them.
Wait. Huh? You said homosexual men shouldn’t be able to adopt boys since they have a propensity for that gender.
Eliminate the incest out of the equation. Should a straight man be able to adopt a girl? Should a straight woman be able to adopt a boy? After all, they have propensities towards that gender, right? Think about how silly that is.
You’re operating under the incorrect assumption that all gay men are predators. And, yeah, that makes you a bigot. As someone else mentioned, men commit 99+% of all rapes. It doesn’t mean men shouldn’t be allowed to adopt or marry or have equal rights.
OTC = OPC, dang keyboard!
James, thanks!
This whole story gives me a bad taste,kinda makes you want to SPIT
And that, ladies and gentlemen, is why I live in Texas rather than my native NYC.
I know that emotions flare up – on both sides of this issue – but I’ll repeat my earlier thoughts:
These off-topic diversions into gay-marriage and heterosexual vs. homosexual pedophiles is completely detracting from the ever-fading point of this whole episode, which is:
A government agency, whose sole purpose is the oversight and protection of children, was essentially bullied and frightened into not performing their duties because of a ‘politically correct’ mindset perpetuated by a citizen minority which labels anyone who questions ANYTHING about their group as being discriminatory.
It is groups like these, whether they exist for gays and lesbians, blacks, hispanics, or any minority grouping, that vilify anyone who questions someone who shares their ethnicity or sexual preference, and they immediately label that person a racist, bigot or worse.
That is wrong – and by doing so, they neglect and close their eyes to the illegalities commited by these individuals, simply because of their minority status.
James,
Your argument would only have validity if homosexuality was on a par with heterosexuality and it isn’t. The percentage of homosexuals is significantly less than heterosexuals in every society that I’m familiar with.
On my Soapbox has a right to be upset with such an invalid point.
A better, more on-target, definiton would have been “those who define themselves by their sexual activities” as being problematic. So soapbox is correct in his critique.
Where do you get this? It is safe to say you are doing the assuming.
Since we are playing your game:
I believe that is your assumption. Facts? Links?
I am a bigot? Okay – I can live with that and so can my girls! You forgot intolerant as I loathe NAMBLA. Do not even get me going on cutting the elderly’s benefits while illegal immigrants get benefits because then I become hateful!
Thanks guys. Soap is NOT upset.
Y’know Soap, on this – actually the facts indicate “Child molestation and pedophilia occur far more commonly among homosexuals than among heterosexuals on a per capita basis”.
Pedophilia more common among ‘gays’
also -
“While no more than 2% of male adults are homosexual, some studies indicate that approximately 35% of pedophiles are homosexual”
The Problem of Pedophilia
Not very politically correct. But then again, truth often is not PC.
Seems the lot of you are willing to redily accept ..”fear of descrimination” as not only plausable but the reality. A cursory glance at foster care shows horrendous oversight and at best a lackadasical effort at protecting children. I have not the transcripts nor the witnesses in front of me but I would not be surprised if the explanination by the social workers were but a quick exit of responsibility and not the PC nightmare we all have to endure every waking moment. I would be very careful here. To assign this type of henious activity to any particular group by insinuation or pronouncement or to demand a level of scrutiny beyond normal measures for any foster parent, is at the very least bigoted and to some (including yours truly) hateful and ignorant. We are not talking about Illegal aliens and preventable crimes but members of our society who have every right to live normal productive lives including being a parent, foster or otherwise. So I would say…Put up or shut up. Want to determine what is morality right and wrong? Adopt the kids. Doing less makes you no better than them… Kossacks that is.
Purplepeep….
Both organization have no thoughts on homosexuality other than the study right? I reminded of the study by the British…The Lanset and the infamous 500,000 dead Iraqis from sanctions. Please do not insult our intelligence. Find me a study from someone who has no opinion and we can talk.
So groups who have a very high incidence of engaging in “henious activity” should be given carte blanche in order to avoid accusations of “profiling”?
Allll-righty then.
Sorry all but…..PS. To deny homosexuality is biological manifestation and to make an argument of “choice” is, again sorry, stupid. I don’t mean to demean any persons particular belief system but to look at 10 million people and say they chose this life is like saying there is no terrorist threat. They choose to live the life not who they are. No I am not gay…lol
That’s what’s called “shooting the messenger”, db. e.g. when a person is upset by the facts and obviously has no logical or substantive response with which to refute the facts, all the person has left is to attack those conveying the facts instead. (As opposed to attacking the facts themselves)
So, sorry, but your messenger-shooting bluff is just totally ineffective. I suppose it was at least worth a try though anyway.
With a reprobate mind, what do we expect from these two sick human men?