Shorteyes Play the Long Game

[roo_ster]

HERE’S WHY THE PROGRESSIVE LEFT KEEPS STICKING UP FOR PEDOPHILES
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/09/21/heres-why-the-progressive-left-keeps-sticking-up-for-pedophiles/

    I’m a pedophile, but not a monster
    http://www.salon.com/2015/09/21/im_a_pedophile_but_not_a_monster/

Today, Salon gave a platform to a self-confessed pedophile to explain his urges in sympathetic terms. “I’m a Pedophile, But Not A Monster” reads the headline. It’s a long, self-pitying screed that ends with a call to be “understanding and supportive” of adults who crave sexual intimacy with children.

Forgive me if I’m not first to start the standing ovation. In fact I’m pretty sure most people will find the existence on Salon’s website of this post both shocking and distasteful.

The timing of Nickerson’s post, barely a week after multiple high-profile progressives rallied around progressive activist Sarah Nyberg, couldn’t be more suspect. Over the past two weeks, an alarming number of left-leaning commentators have rallied around the self-confessed transsexual pedophile and progressive activist who defended white nationalism.

In other words, progressives who got fired up about whether green and purple was a “rapey” colour scheme were suddenly fine with discussion of incestuous pedophilia from a 22-year-old in a chat room full of teenagers. It has been a somewhat grotesque spectacle to watch.

But these two incidents are merely just the latest in a disturbing trend of pedophilia activism on the Left, which has gone out on a limb time and time again to normalise child abuse. From the 1970s to the present day, organised pedophilia has been a recurring problem for the supposedly progressive movement...

Pedophilia itself is of course not confined to one side of the political spectrum. But defending it does seem to be. Pro-pedophile activism continues to surface on the Left in a way that it simply doesn’t on the Right. Salon is one of the worst offenders: the left-wing website runs sympathetic features on pedophilia with alarming regularity...

For decades, moral relativism has underpinned radical left-wing thought...

Just as Allen West warned, the gay rights movement is being used as a template. First comes the argument that pedophiles are just “born that way,” absolving them of any moral responsibility for their desires. Then comes the argument that pedophiles are just normal people, like the rest of us, but somehow impoverished or victimised by their own condition.

Inevitably, our society’s current ostracisation of pedophiles will be portrayed as an injustice: an oppression from which pedophiles must be liberated, or for which they deserve our sympathy. And woe to the oppressors! Quietly, in progressive columns and academies around the world, progressives are losing their footing and sliding down that slippery slope. Publications like Salon are abetting the turpitude...

Yep, we are 10 years +/- from medicalization/decriminalization where to raise your voice against pederasts is considered bigotry by all the Right and the Good.

Hell, it is even seeping into establishment conservative/GOP circles:

On Salon’s Much-Maligned Pedophilia Piece
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/424373/salons-much-maligned-pedophilia-piece-charles-c-w-cooke

I see no evidence whatsoever that Salon is endorsing or excusing child abuse, or that it is making the case that pedophilia is an “ingrained identity” and that its sufferers should therefore be free to act as they wish...

I am not a practicing Christian, but, as far as I can recall from my instruction as a child, the author is taking precisely the approach that Christians are supposed to take when they find themselves tempted toward sin.

Lots of good comments to that hogwash, but the best looks to be this one:

1. Organize
2. Humanize
3. Legalize
4. Legitimize
5. Litigate
6. Repeat

Stage Two doesn't seem too unreasonable, does it? How many bloody times do we have to get rope-a-doped by the same shtick before we recognize that it's part of a much larger campaign which has been going on for generations, now?

Priests, pastors, and psychiatrists receive special training to lovingly and thoughtfully help people with terrible issues like this one who need help. Privately. There's absolutely NO reason for anybody to work through this problem publicly. There's absolutely no reason to challenge the one hysterical taboo the American people have which is fully justified.

And can we impose a permanent moratorium on atheists needling Christians on how their faith is supposed to be expressed? It's not like we go around telling atheists how they're supposed to tip their fedoras and embed cheese crumbs in their neckbeards.

[De Selby]

So the one line version of this is that accepting gays leads to pedophilia?

It's ridiculous on its face.

[Ron]

So the one line version of this is that accepting gays leads to pedophilia?

It's ridiculous on its face.

It will probably lead to widespread acceptance of pederasty first.

A lowering of the age of consent seems unlikely now but it would be consistent with the direction our culture is heading.

Adolescents are already incredibly sexualized in our culture. While adolescents are sexualized in other cultures also those cultures usually confine it to some type of family structure.

The west sexualizes those going through and barely out of puberty all in the name of freedom and sex.

Once several generations of teenagers are thoroughly debouched I hate to see what perversions will be spawned that will be considered as acceptable.   

Or maybe the youngest and tenderest will only be available without consequence to those in the halls of power.

[De Selby]

Maybe if we adopted more traditional morals, like say in Iran or Saudi Arabia, this horrible future where young people are having sex wouldn't happen.

[Scout26]

How about if we just kept our Judeo-Christian beliefs rather going all reductio ad absurdum to a religion that was founded by a pederast.*   But you know, hey Moral Relativism and all.

When you have a legitimate argument that the Left ARE NOT using the same tactics/techniques that worked for Gay Marriage and Forced Approval of Their Lifestyle that they are using to begin the Forced Approval of Pederasts, then get back to us.




*- IIRC, Islam was founded by Mohammed who married Aisha bint Abu Bakr when she was six or seven years old when betrothed to Muhammad.  Traditional sources state that she stayed in her parents' home until the age of nine when the marriage was consummated with Muhammad, then 53, in Medina, with the single exception of al-Tabari, who records that she was ten.

[De Selby]

How about if we just kept our Judeo-Christian beliefs rather going all reductio ad absurdum to a religion that was founded by a pederast.*   But you know, hey Moral Relativism and all.

When you have a legitimate argument that the Left ARE NOT using the same tactics/techniques that worked for Gay Marriage and Forced Approval of Their Lifestyle that they are using to begin the Forced Approval of Pederasts, then get back to us.




*- IIRC, Islam was founded by Mohammed who married Aisha bint Abu Bakr when she was six or seven years old when betrothed to Muhammad.  Traditional sources state that she stayed in her parents' home until the age of nine when the marriage was consummated with Muhammad, then 53, in Medina, with the single exception of al-Tabari, who records that she was ten.

That wasn't a reductio - those societies actually teach the morals being promoted here about sex.  Like, say, Englamd, they didn't have age of consent laws in pre medieval times, and slowly evolved to have them. 

I may be wrong, but marrying young and virgin seems to part of the traditional judeo Christian ethic.  I suppose having a mysteriously unmarried (like modern Catholic priests) founder leaves it more up to debate than for der Muslims, but I think the point about gays stands - tying acceptance of gay people to pederasty is just beyond, and irreducibly absurd by itself.

[roo_ster]

Who shall we believe?  DeSelby or our lying eyes?

[Perd Hapley]

So the one line version of this is that accepting gays leads to pedophilia?

Well, I wouldn't have believed that for women to start wearing pants fifty years ago would lead to "Caitlyn" Jenner.

[brimic]

Maybe if we adopted more traditional morals, like say in Iran or Saudi Arabia, this horrible future where young people are having sex wouldn't happen.

Except for the boys who get buggered by adult males...

[MechAg94]

Maybe if we adopted more traditional morals, like say in Iran or Saudi Arabia, this horrible future where young people are having sex wouldn't happen.

Interesting that you follow the predicted path of argument. 

[Ron]

...but I think the point about gays stands - tying acceptance of gay people to pederasty is just beyond, and irreducibly absurd by itself.

The man/boy fascination is a strong component of historical and current gay culture.

To deny it either shows a willful ignorance or a will to deceive.

Regarding age of consent and young females I'm just speculating that as our culture celebrates the sexuality of teen girls more and more I see the bar being lowered regarding what is considered acceptable.

The main hitch in my speculation is oddly enough feminism. The feminists have come out and denied the agency of young women and are erecting all kinds of road blocks for young women trying to fully explore their inner slut. Feminism has taken on the role of the Puritans  

[Scout26]

That wasn't a reductio - those societies actually teach the morals being promoted here about sex.  Like, say, Englamd, they didn't have age of consent laws in pre medieval times, and slowly evolved to have them. 

I may be wrong, but marrying young and virgin seems to part of the traditional judeo Christian ethic.  I suppose having a mysteriously unmarried (like modern Catholic priests) founder leaves it more up to debate than for der Muslims, but I think the point about gays stands - tying acceptance of gay people to pederasty is just beyond, and irreducibly absurd by itself.

Yes, back, as you pointed out, in the medieval era, when life expectancy was roughly 30.  So to marry at 14 or 15 would have been "Middle Aged".   And you point out that age of consent laws have evolved IN WESTERN CULTURE over time.  The same is not true for ISLAMIC CULTURE were men still marry pre-pubescent girls and bugger very young boys, in addition to condoning bestiality.  The two cultures are clearly not equal.  Western Culture is one of protecting its young and nurturing into adulthood.   Islamic Culture is the one were the young are to be used, abused and sacrificed to it's own needs.

The point of the article however, is not a comparison or various cultures, but how the pederasts will and are following the gay marriage playbook to gain acceptance for their depravity.  That would appear to be the topic on the table and up for discussion and debate, if you care to join in counselor, rather then go off on tangents. 

However, if you wish to debate Western Judaeo-Christian culture vs Middle Eastern Islamic culture, feel free to start a new thread on the topic.

[brimic]

  Western Culture is one of protecting its young and nurturing into adulthood.   Islamic Culture is the one were the young are to be used, abused and sacrificed to it's own needs.

http://www.anonymousconservative.com/blog/the-theory/rk-selection-theory/

[De Selby]

Yes, back, as you pointed out, in the medieval era, when life expectancy was roughly 30.  So to marry at 14 or 15 would have been "Middle Aged".   And you point out that age of consent laws have evolved IN WESTERN CULTURE over time.  The same is not true for ISLAMIC CULTURE were men still marry pre-pubescent girls and bugger very young boys, in addition to condoning bestiality.  The two cultures are clearly not equal.  Western Culture is one of protecting its young and nurturing into adulthood.   Islamic Culture is the one were the young are to be used, abused and sacrificed to it's own needs.

The point of the article however, is not a comparison or various cultures, but how the pederasts will and are following the gay marriage playbook to gain acceptance for their depravity.  That would appear to be the topic on the table and up for discussion and debate, if you care to join in counselor, rather then go off on tangents. 

However, if you wish to debate Western Judaeo-Christian culture vs Middle Eastern Islamic culture, feel free to start a new thread on the topic.

Do you have a shred of evidence that buggery is more common in Iran and Saudi Arabia than the U.S.?  You do realise that's a death penalty offence (and the penalty is routinely carried out) in both those places, right?

The comparison was appropriate to the thread - this is about lamenting how having gays in public causes child abuse.  I'm pointing out that old timey sexual morals don't necessarily amount to anything good.

[lupinus]

Do you have a shred of evidence that buggery is more common in Iran and Saudi Arabia than the U.S.?  You do realise that's a death penalty offence (and the penalty is routinely carried out) in both those places, right?

The comparison was appropriate to the thread - this is about lamenting how having gays in public causes child abuse.  I'm pointing out that old timey sexual morals don't necessarily amount to anything good.

I've oft wondered if you are delusional.

I'm starting to not wonder.


Sent from my iPhone. Freaking autocorrect.

[brimic]

Lolz.., put the words 'saudi child rape' into google and see what you get.
example: http://www.dcclothesline.com/2015/01/04/saudi-arabias-top-religious-leader-okays-pedophilia/

[Scout26]

The comparison was appropriate to the thread - this is about lamenting how having gays in public causes child abuse.  I'm pointing out that old timey sexual morals don't necessarily amount to anything good.

Comparing  Islamic sexual mores with Judaeo-Christian sexual mores is apples to potatoes.

Let's compare and contrast:

Last I checked Judaeo-Christian western culture has for most of it's history stood against homosexuality, bestiality, and pedophilia.  Let's see where Islam stands on those matters:

So in DeSelby's opinion refusing to bake a cake for a same sex couple is the same as this:   http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3172640/Thrown-roof-stoned-death-crime-gay-Two-men-subjected-ISIS-brutal-brand-justice-fanatics-latest-horrific-public-execution.html

Sheep and goats?  In the west they are jailed and punished, in the middle east....


And of course there's an entire thread on this subject:

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/21/world/asia/us-soldiers-told-to-ignore-afghan-allies-abuse-of-boys.html?_r=0

In West, we once again frog march perpetrators through court and into prisons.   Ask Chris about it, if you don't think we do.


So in general, it would appear that the West is incredibly tolerant of Homosexuals (even if a few folks don't want to bake the wedding cake or lease out their farm for a same sex marriage), while in Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia and just about everywhere in the Islamic world they are thrown off buildings and/or stoned to death.

We imprison those that practice bestiality and pedophilia and provide help to those people traumatized by pederasts, yet in the Islamic world, those practices are condoned, if not actively encouraged.


So yes DeSelby, you are absolutely right.  The Islamic world with their "more traditional morals" are EXACTLY like the US and Judaeo-Christian culture....[/SARCASM]

[De Selby]

Wait a second here scout - the point was that intolerance of homosexuals and traditional marriage don't make for a good society that protects children.  You're positing examples of extreme and barbaric punishments (and pedophilia, which is again not legal but happens just like here) - you seem to be proving my point.  Banning the gays doesn't have anything to do with protecting the children.  Of course the west is more tolerant of gays - that was the basis of my point.

The sex with goats meme is literally an Internet fraud on Muslims.  I'm sure there's a similar picture in Arabic accusing westerners of pimping their wives or some such - it's fraud.

[Scout26]

... the point was that intolerance of homosexuals and traditional marriage don't make for a good society that protects children.  

So what you are saying is that we've only have had child abuse and child sexual abuse laws for the past year or so?

You might want to go back and ask for a refund from your law school.

[MechAg94]

the point was that intolerance of homosexuals and traditional marriage don't make for a good society that protects children.

Which is a bad point anyway.  What we are arguing these days is not by any means tolerance/intollerance for homosexuals.  Tolerance is pretty much what was going on for a few hundred years in Christian cultures that didn't execute homosexuals.  The homosexual activists are going way beyond simple tolerance and demanding acceptance and approval.  If you want true "intolerance", that is what you find in fundementalist muslim countries. 

[De Selby]

So what you are saying is that we've only have had child abuse and child sexual abuse laws for the past year or so?

You might want to go back and ask for a refund from your law school.

I honestly don't see where I said that we have only had child abuse laws for the past year or so.  Like most other countries in the world, including the Middle eastern ones, we've had them for some time.

My point is that our increasingly relaxed attitude towards people's sex lives isn't tied to abusing children.  I don't believe efforts to associate being gay with child abuse are anything other than bare nekkid discrimination against gays.

[makattak]

I honestly don't see where I said that we have only had child abuse laws for the past year or so.  Like most other countries in the world, including the Middle eastern ones, we've had them for some time.

My point is that our increasingly relaxed attitude towards people's sex lives isn't tied to abusing children.  I don't believe efforts to associate being gay with child abuse are anything other than bare nekkid discrimination against gays.

Bravo, De Selby. You avoided the actual point of the original post AND were able to get people arguing on a completely different tact. It's always interesting watching you steer the conversations to the angle you'd prefer to be talking about rather than the point made by the poster.

You should be in politics.

[Scout26]

I honestly don't see where I said that we have only had child abuse laws for the past year or so.  

Right about here:

the point was that intolerance of homosexuals and traditional marriage don't make for a good society that protects children.

However, the point in the OP still stands.  The Pederasts took notes during the Gay Marriage fight and are now employing the same tactics to win acceptance and approval of their "lifestyle", injury and harm to children be damned.   If you disagree with that, then make your argument here.