|
|
tim
|
 |
Really getting into it |
Location: UK, West of London in Ber...
Registered: February 2002
Messages: 842
|
|
|
Let's start with the address of the bigot:
Please help me overwhelm this "gentleman" with email.
Sen. Phil Gingrey (R-Marietta)
302-A Legislative Office Building
Atlanta , Ga. 30334
404-463-8055
e-mail: JPGMD@mindspring.com
This man needs to receive well worded arguments about why Paedophilia and Homosexuality are not related items. Of course some homosexuals are paedophiles. So are some heterosexual people. And paedophilia is not confined tothe abuse of boys, but is a universal power trip resulting in the physical and emotional damage to kids for the benefit of the abuser. The paedophile does not "Love children" as the label says, but gets his (or HER) jollies by the power trip and the fear.
The following people are supportive, and should be copied in the email. Their track record is in the support of all kids:
Rep. Karla Drenner kdrenner@legis.state.ga.us
Rep. Georganna Sinkfield gsinkfie@legis.state.ga.us
And now to the artcile itself. Please DO act. And yes, I know some of you wil simply unsubscribe from the mailng list. That is not the action I meant
by Jennifer J. Smith
Southern Voice
Speaking in front of the full Georgia Senate Monday, Sen. Phil Gingrey (R-Marietta) argued his currently stalled Fairness to Scouting Act is about "protecting our children from sexual abuse by adult leaders, who because of their deviant behavior . prey on innocent youth" and said homosexuality leads to "a lifetime of physical and emotional turmoil and personal disaster."
Gingrey's legislation, strongly opposed by gay rights advocates, could come up for a House vote as quickly as this week, according to Rep. Karla Drenner (D-Avondale Estates), Georgia's only openly gay state legislator.
Citing the current sexual abuse scandal in the Catholic Church, Gingrey paralleled his call for a House vote on the Boy Scouts measure to protecting Catholic altar boys from "the frequency of child molestations by pedophile homosexual priests on young boys."
Gingrey's bill, better known as the Defense of Scouting Act, passed the Senate on Feb. 7, and was sent to the House where it was assigned to the Children & Youth Committee, chaired by Rep. Georganna Sinkfield (D-Atlanta).
Sinkfield has refused to call up the bill for a vote, according to Gingrey.
"For God's sake, and the sake of the children . Madam Chairman . I beg you to do the right thing and protect our children," Gingrey said.
Sinkfield did not respond to interview requests by press time.
After the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the Boys Scouts' right to ban gays, some activists called on public schools and other government entities to sever ties with the Scouts. But such efforts gathered little steam in Georgia, leading some gay activists to call Gingrey's bill a gratuitous "slap in the face" to gay citizens.
The bill would forbid schools and other government entities from denying meeting space to youth organizations, and would duplicate federal legislation passed in 2001.
Gingrey never specifically stated in his speech how allowing the Boy Scouts to meet in public schools would prevent sexual abuse like the cases in the Catholic Church.
But at the end of his five minute speech, Gingrey said that while he is "no homophobic or gay basher," he believes "that homosexuality is not an alternate lifestyle to be depicted as such to unsuspecting youths, but rather one that leads in many cases to a lifetime of physical and emotional turmoil and personal disaster."
"He literally made me sick," Drenner said, noting that she had complained about Gingrey's remarks to both the Speaker of the House and Senate leadership.
"He was calling me and every other gay or lesbian a pedophile," she said. "That shouldn't be allowed on the floor of the Georgia General Assembly, and he certainly shouldn't be allowed to lie about what the bill does."
Saralyn Chesnut, a board member for gay rights lobby Georgia Equality, called the speech "unbelievable" and urged gay voters "to remember how this senator truly feels about us during the next election."
"Even if it were true that [the bill] would protect anyone from sexual abuse -- which it of course doesn't -- it certainly doesn't protect those that are actually being discriminated against every day in our state: gay and lesbian youth," she said.
But Gingrey defended the comments, including his characterization of homosexuality as leading to "physical and emotional turmoil and personal disaster," in an extensive phone interview from the Senate floor on Tuesday.
"I certainly don't know how anyone could disagree with that with AIDS and premature suffering and the death of the young men and sometimes even women," Gingrey said.
"Often times gay and lesbian youth . their lifestyle, whether it's inherited or chosen or whatever . it's certainly one that's very painful," he said.
Gingrey also said he believes the Catholic priests accused of molesting children are "all definitely gay," and that gays are "more likely to molest children than heterosexuals."
He did, however, acknowledge that his Scouting bill wouldn't really have an impact on the issue. The bill "doesn't really have anything to do with preventing child abuse, I was just making a parallel with that," he said.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
tim
|
|
Really getting into it |
Location: UK, West of London in Ber...
Registered: February 2002
Messages: 842
|
|
|
Sen. Phil Gingrey
Dear Senator,
I read statements about your attitude to homosexuals and paedophiles today and was deeply disturbed by it. Let me make something perfectly clear: I do not accept nor condone paedophilia in any way. I do accept homosexuality as an unalterable fact in so many people's lives and as something which befalls them from birth in the same manner that heterosexuality does.
That a person is homosexual does not mean that he or she will molest a child with any greater probability that they would were they to be heterosexual. Child molestation is practised by people who are sexually inadequate, not those whose orientation is for a particular gender.
Many people choose to lump together those who have the mixed fortune to be homosexual and those who abuse children because the former makes a soft target. You appear to be among that "many people" by the reports of your address. That is a pity because you are also an educated man.
Be biased by all means against those who abuse children. Attack such weird organisations as NAMBLA which your country's First Amendment appears to give shelter to by all means. But do not attack people who do not abuse and do not wish to abuse and do not have any predilection to abuse children.
From England the issue of whether to have homosexuals in the scout movement or not seems pretty feeble as a cause. Remove those who abuse by all means. Homosexual and heterosexual alike, remove them. Carry out screenings for likelihood to abuse when recruiting professional staff to protect children yes. But know that the great majority of homosexual men and women have no interest in children. Their dreams, hopes and aspirations are the same as those of heterosexuals the world over; to create a stable and loving relationship and to grow old together in a happy and loving environment. And yes, some of them wish to adopt children and make fine parents, albeit of the same gender.
Would I be concerned if my son were taught by homosexuals? Not at all. I know for sure that he is. So was I. And neither of us have ever been approached for sexual favours by any adult.
In my youth I taught sailing to youngsters. The British Naval Officer who ran the institution which was part of the Sea Cadet Corps in the UK acknowledged that paedophiles existed. He was very clear about his attitude. "I do not care," he said, "about your sexual habits and practices in private. What I will not tolerate is ANY sexual activity with any person who comes here to be taught, be that heterosexual or homosexual". This was in the 1970s when homosexuality was just becoming acknowledged. HIS attitude is far healthier that any of the flag waving and drum beating against homosexuals in the scout movement I have ever seen. It was true protection of both staff and children.
Understand, Senator, that child abuse is a major personality defect of ALL shades of sexual orientation. It is about power, about pain and about self gratification. It has nothing to do with being heterosexual or homosexual. Your attitude shows bigotry through ignorance. You do not gain the respect of the world by showing it. "Si tacuises, philosophus mansises"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
trevor
|
|
Really getting into it |
Registered: November 2002
Messages: 732
|
|
|
I don't want to detract from your worthy cause, Tim, so let me address that first. I think everyone here agrees with you in that homosexuality does not equal pedophilia in any way and the gentleman is showing his ignorance and probably bigotry.
I'll take a pass on the Scouting issue at this point since there are several other issues with Scouting and the bill which are irrelevant to the above and below. Maybe later.
Also, as a side note: I see plenty of errors, some minor, some major, in the press. I've been interviewed several times by various newspapers (the too-large b&w of me as a youth in Irregulars came from a clipping) and was always shocked at the misinformation presented, to the point of my own embarrasement in the latter, which had me saying things which were outright falsehoods and which I did not say. So, I guess I advice people to take articles with a grain of salt and perhaps research more than one source before reacting too strongly.
Tim, I must challenge your definition of pedophile. I did a quick check with an on-line dictionary and found "An adult who is sexually attracted to a child or children." In contrast, your definition sounds more like a rapist - "power and pain".
As you may know, by the dictionary definition I must consider myself a pedophile, as does Comicality on his own web page, and at least a few others here would qualify IMHO. Now I consider this irreconcilable with your definition since most of us (here) are NOT interested in power over another or causing pain.
I guess this is important to me because I want it to be made crystal clear that myself and many others who admit attraction to children or young adults would never cause anyone pain for our own gratification. As a result, we will likely never have our fantasies realized, fortunately.
I'm jumping topics again, but I want to thank David for "drawing the line" at age 14. Yes, this is yet another arbitrary age, but I think a absolute minimum needs to be set to protect the majority, who cannot understand all the ramifications required for informed consent(especially if their hormones and/or emotional needs are doing the talking.) This would be consistent with fixed ages for drinking, driving, entering into legal agreements, etc.
Okay, sorry, I did not intend this to be a "Beat Up Tim" post - sorry if I came across that way. You have my admiration and respect for all your good deeds, buddy!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
tim
|
|
Really getting into it |
Location: UK, West of London in Ber...
Registered: February 2002
Messages: 842
|
|
|
I have a challenge with the difference, too, between the "people's definition and the dictionary definition. A true paedophile is a LOVER of children. Nowhere in the word is SEX implied. And "Children" means the biological juvenile form (pre puberty). "The People" have defined a paedophile as one who has sexual relations with a perosn legally a minor.
Now, looking at the dictionary definition, nothing is wring at all. Many decent, had working peoplel LOVE children in th epurest sense. The pharse "I just love kids" comes freely from the mouth of a true paedophile and may be said with honour.
BUT
The people and media's definition will always hold sway.
So, let us look at my apparent definition tawards rape and pain. The great majority of adult child sexual attention is unwelcome, is forced on the child and is forced on the child by means of physical power, intellectual power, bullying, blackmail or professed love (If you love me you will do this with me).
Pure geometry also shows that physical pain will ensue from a sexual liaison which involves penetration of the child by a grown adult male. This is as much the case with anal penetration as the penetration of an immature vagina.
Thus I come back to my thesis of power and pain. The vast majority of adult/child sexual liaisons cause physical pain. In addition the vast majority of even non penetrative adult/child sexual liaisons cause emotional pain. That there are exceptions to these will also be true. Exceptions always exist. BUT, and we are so far away from the point about this senator now as to bewilder me, BUT we all know intellectually, emotionally and morally, let alone legally, that adult child sexual liaison is wrong. We also realise that the adult is using the child as a piece of meat, and we have a gut feeling that the titillation from the act itself is, in part, the fear and submisison it produces.
All these things are why we, as civilised people, may all have twinges of desire, but do not allow the physical expression fo that desire.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
tim
|
|
Really getting into it |
Location: UK, West of London in Ber...
Registered: February 2002
Messages: 842
|
|
|
Please can we act?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
|
] 
A Place of Safety
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
Definition of pedophile 
This research may be of interest 
