The politically incorrect thread

[spit_acid]

No one is blaming God.

On the contrary, most people are blaming the posters here who act as if they are God's disciples. They're the ones who are spreading hatred while using the Bible as a shield to deflect any accountability they should be forced to own up to.

If a non-Christian said that homosexuality is immoral and wrong and it should be looked down upon because the majority of society disagrees with it, he would be slammed left and right because he's a bigot. But when the Christofascists say it, it's perfectly fine because it is a part of their religious beliefs, and we have to accept it.

What's ironic about this situation, of course, is that the tolerant people in our society must respect the intolerant people who keep holding our society back. What a crazy world we live in these days.

Absolutely. Abso-frocking-lutely. (figuring out ways not to get bleeped out on here still) It's so aggrivating.

 

[Gilpesh]

I've said it once, I'll say it again, Religion and Politics should never mix. Explosive combo.

Is this thread still about 'politically incorrect'? The lines have been blurred with "God" talk.

Don't worry. I'm trying to keep it about that by using as many 'idiots' and 'invisible mans in the sky' to try and keep it as un-PC as possible.

 

[The Senator]

I see this thread still...has...life.

God wants it to stay open

 

[DBella]

I've nothing against moviefan's beliefs or his faith but I think that discussions related to God/Higher Power already has its own thread. If you guys want to discuss his stand on issues related to his belief system, I'd appreciate it if you take to the Higher Power/God thread as it's taking up most of the discussions here. Thank you.

Question for all of you:
What is your personal definition of 'politically correct'? How do you think it differs from the general definition of 'politically correct'? What do you think is the importance of 'political correctness'?

 

[Moviefan2k4]

Are you really such a f**king bigot you don't understand how stupid and idiotic that one statement you made sounds?

You only consider me a bigot (and likewise my statements idiotic) because unlike many, I refuse to budge on many moral issues, this one included. In all honesty, I'm not going to start thinking homosexuality is appropriate or "no big deal" just because its accepted by society. It hasn't been accepted by God, and therefore it's still wrong.

You had pre-marital sex with someone, are you still with them?

No, but that was her choice, not mine. I wanted to marry her; she didn't. We broke up because I did everything I could to earn her trust, and she refused to give it. That put a severe strain on our relationship, and in the end she walked out.

Does every god fearing christian always and forever stay with one partner for all time?

People often have this stereotypical view of Christians as hateful, legalistic, prejudiced people hiding behind a Bible. Those kinds of people rarely have any real faith (or if they do, they let fear and anger have more control). As cliche' as it sounds, "Christians are people, too"...and many forget that.

What's the divorce rate? 50%?

More often than not, divorce is usually the result of either the husband or wife not taking the marriage seriously enough to begin with; they walk away the moment something bad happens. every situation is different, but generally the people who stay married are those who adhere to the committment they made, even when they don't feel like it. There's only two valid reasons for marriage (infidelity and abuse), but many choose divorce simply because, in the end, its easier than dealing with their current dilemma.

I've yet to meet a heterosexual who didn't wind up switching partners every few years... you included.

I didn't "switch"; I've been single for over 2 years, by deliberate choice. I don't want to begin another relationship until I'm able to support my future bride (financially, emotionally, and otherwise).

Again, sorry to be so politically incorrect again. Oh wait, that's the point of the thread... to hate on people.

I'd appreciate if you'd refrain from apologies when it's clear you don't mean them; and as for this thread, its original purpose was to discuss the many forms of political correctness. I started speaking of the moral and spiritual implications of that, and the haters messed it up.

 

[The Senator]

Is it worse to be a homosexual agnostic who never engaged in premarital sex, or to be a faithful heterosexual Christian who did engage in premarital sex?

I just want to know which person I should consider "better."

 

[Gilpesh]

I'd appreciate if you'd refrain from apologies when it's clear you don't mean them

I'd appreciate if you'd refrain from belittling a people because a fictional book told you to. But you won't, so I won't. Deal.

Oh, and don't just say you're disagreeing with their choice... it wasn't a choice. They were born that way. Again. Deal.



Sorry for being blunt. I'm rather tired of trying to come up with logic to go against your magic man and crazy book about some guy living to 900 years old and putting all the animals in the world on to a boat.

 

[The Senator]

I'd appreciate if you'd refrain from apologies when it's clear you don't mean them; and as for this thread, its original purpose was to discuss the many forms of political correctness. I started speaking of the moral and spiritual implications of that, and the haters messed it up.

Yes, because it is politically correct to say that many activists are pedophiles. It is also politically correct to criticize people for being gay, to say that employers should be able to fire homosexuals simply because they are gay, to compare legalizing gay child adoption to legalizing pedophilia, and so on and so forth.

As for your little stance on morality... yeah, no deal, bud. You are the one who brought God into this mess, you are the one who has hidden your intolerance behind the Bible while calling it "morality." You are the one who speaks in absolutes and says that God's law is the only law, it is the only moral code for society to follow, and that homosexuals should be looked down upon because the majority of people and the Bible are against that behavior.

Yet, you are dead silent on the issue of whether slavery was merited, considering the Bible condones slavery and the majority of Western society believed that slavery was totally acceptable... interesting, considering that is a mirror image of your argument about homosexuals. And please, don't give me the whole "they can't change their race" argument; considering the fundamental reason why these folks were turned into slaves had more to do with their lack of belief in YOUR God than the color of their skin. Just like how many homosexuals don't believe in what your God apparently said about us...

Please, I beg you, stop hiding behind the Bible. Stop throwing the Bible and God into every single discussion on this forum; it was old eight months ago, it is rotting and fermenting now.

 

[bullets]

I believe that gay people were born that way. I couldn't just decide to be gay tommorow , it wouldn't happen.


The Bible is good and it helps peole through life but that doesn't mean it should be forced onto people. A responsible christian can suggest religion but christianity is a choice and you can't force it on anyone. If you warned them or whatever and they still don't listen to you it's time to move on.

 

[Moviefan2k4]

The Bible is good and it helps peole through life but that doesn't mean it should be forced onto people.

I'm not intentionally forcing anything onto anyone. I simply answer the questions others pose to the best of my ability; I don't promise they'll like the results, though. In my opinion, political correctness is just a waste of time. Speaking the truth will help to reveal who a person's real friends are, for "a real friend sticks closer than a brother".

A responsible Christian can suggest religion

Religion is a man-made system of rules with no reason or context, built through manipulation and fear. Anyone who sincerely studies the Bible without an ulterior motive will realize it has nothing to do with that. It's about unconditional love, perfect justice, and God's mercy given to those who don't deserve it.

...but Christianity is a choice...

Agreed.

If you warned them or whatever and they still don't listen to you it's time to move on.

I stick around in case anyone has sincere questions, which I then do my best to answer. The majority of the conflict is due to haters looking for it.

 

[Gilpesh]

It's about unconditional love,

With loads of conditions.

perfect justice,

Unless you are a slave... or a gay... or don't believe.

and God's mercy given to those who don't deserve it.

Yeah, people like you.

 

[Moviefan2k4]

With loads of conditions.

The conditions don't change the fact God loves us all equally. He is the ultimate Father, and sometimes that requires "tough love" to keep people on the right track. He still loves us, even when we behave foolishly or destructively...but He will not tolerate rebellion forever. God's love is eternal; His patience is not.

Unless you are a slave... or a gay... or don't believe.

Perfect justice is built on a solid foundation of right and wrong, with no room for selfish excuses or cop-outs. God's stance on various moral matters is set, and its His desire that all come to repentance. But He won't force us, and so for those who persistently rebel, punishment is given.

Yeah, people like you.

No human being on the face of the planet deserves God's mercy, because all have sinned in some way. That fact alone makes us worthy of His wrath, but because of His love for us, He offers us the chance to confess and repent.

 

[The Senator]

Religion is a man-made system of rules with no reason or context, built through manipulation and fear.

You mean like Christianity? Considering the Bible was written by man, and many of the laws within that text are designed to manipulate man into doing what God says, or else they will spend eternity burning in hell. It seems like Christianity is built on a foundation of manipulation and built upwards by fear, if you want my honest opinion. There is nothing better than to make the most weak-minded people in this world fall in line than to tell them "if you do ___, you'll go to heaven; if you _____ instead of _____, you'll go to hell."

There is no freedom in Christianity, in order to be a Christian you MUST believe in God and that he sent his word down to man in the form of the Bible, and that he sent his only son to earth to die for the sins which HE created himself... not to mention, you MUST believe the word of an incredibly inconsistent book, regardless of whether or not you believe it is true. Otherwise, you will burn for it.

How do you not see that as manipulation and fear? I do not believe the Bible because I find it to be THE most inconsistent book ever written [and I've read a lot of bad, inconsistent books, from Ethan Frome to every Harry Potter book]. I have studied physics, biology, chemistry-- I am no expert in those fields, but I have a basic understanding of how it works-- and the Bible refutes so many truths I don't know whether to laugh hysterically or cry myself into a stupor.

Why? Because if I don't believe something I consider to be a poorly articulated, physically inaccurate portrayal of the universe, I am going to burn in hell.

Isn't that ironic? God gave us all his word, yet he couldn't do so in a way which was crystal clear. Because nothing is crystal clear like saying that slavery is ay-okay, then sending in Moses to free the slaves because slavery is bad, then saying that slavery is ay-okay once again in the New Testament. And that's only one teeny tiny example-- don't you see that? Don't you see how hard it is for someone to believe that?

But no-- no, I MUST believe it, if I want to live a fulfilling life. I am manipulated into believing something I CAN'T believe, for fear that I will spend eternity burning in hell with every other sinner and non-believer.

Christianity is one of the most manipulative religions out there, but then again, you appear to be easily manipulated. I guess I'll let that slide.

I stick around in case anyone has sincere questions, which I then do my best to answer. The majority of the conflict is due to haters looking for it.

Oh, man-- that one was great.

People who disagree with you are now "haters."

Yeah, I've got news for you, bud: I don't hate you. I don't hate your faith. You have a fundamental right to believe whatever it is you want to believe, to whatever extent that you want to believe it. Regardless of whether I consider it to be incredibly flawed, manipulative, and fear inducing.

No-- what separates me from you is that I do not FORCE my beliefs on anyone. You'll notice that my religious beliefs have never once come up in conversation here? Yet I could have easily applied them to the argument. What I and other posters HATE is the fact that you constantly keep inserting your faith into every single argument.

Morality wasn't a central argument in this thread; you made it one. And when people asked you to expand upon it, you brought out God and every Biblical element you could to fuel the fire. Again, no one dislikes you because you are a Christian; we dislike you because you thump the Bible at every chance you get.

But trust me, there is no HATE. Heck, I'm pretty sure you don't HATE me because I'm a homosexual. Of course, your views are ignorant of the issues which exist outside of your Christian worldview, not to mention incredibly intolerant [and I can say this truthfully, because you yourself have claimed to be against tolerance].

I just wish you would put down the Bible for once and tell us all what YOU think, because something tells me your views go much deeper than what the Bible tells you.

So please, show us all the real Moviefan. Show us Moviefan as a man, and not Moviefan as a biblical parrot.

 

[Gilpesh]

The conditions don't change the fact God loves us all equally. He is the ultimate Father, and sometimes that requires "tough love" to keep people on the right track. He still loves us, even when we behave foolishly or destructively...but He will not tolerate rebellion forever. God's love is eternal; His patience is not.

Then he isn't just or perfect. That means he is fallible just like us.

Perfect justice is built on a solid foundation of right and wrong, with no room for selfish excuses or cop-outs. God's stance on various moral matters is set, and its His desire that all come to repentance. But He won't force us, and so for those who persistently rebel, punishment is given.

Because people chose to be born brown, homosexual, or not believing in an invisible man in the sky?

No human being on the face of the planet deserves God's mercy, because all have sinned in some way. That fact alone makes us worthy of His wrath, but because of His love for us, He offers us the chance to confess and repent.

You still did wrong. Just confessing and repenting doesn't bring someone back from the dead or change the fact that you got down with a lady before you were supposed to.

Perfect justice would punish those people also. And here's where you go off on how "blah balhblahblha blhsalhbal;khblajsfnasldjk repenting makes it better aoisdaosidfjfasilfnhasdfioghaegp"

 

[Gilpesh]

Ethan Frome

Thank god...


I'm not alone. I thought that book sucked ass and had no idea why I had to read it in school.

 

[Moviefan2k4]

People who disagree with you are now "haters."

No, I just use that term to describe those who resort to insults and personal attacks every time I say something they don't like.

No-- what separates me from you is that I do not FORCE my beliefs on anyone.

When have I ever directly forced my faith on anyone? I've stated what Scripture has to say on many different matters, and I've mentioned a few of my personal experiences. But I don't recall every saying anything like "turn or burn". I grew up in that environment myself, and it took a lot of years to get out of it. I recognize blunt truth isn't always a pretty subject, but I won't lie about this stuff just to make someone feel better.

What I and other posters HATE is the fact that you constantly keep inserting your faith into every single argument.

Ever since I turned back to Christ, I've slowly been gaining a better understand of how real His love truly is. I can't just silence that because it makes some uncomfortable.

...you yourself have claimed to be against tolerance.

What I said was I was against the current trends of complete unnaccountability to anyone for anything. That kind of thing isn't tolerance; it's foolishness.

I just wish you would put down the Bible for once and tell us all what YOU think, because something tells me your views go much deeper than what the Bible tells you.

My views are greatly influenced by my faith in God. I freely admit I don't know everything about Him, but I still choose to believe what He says, even when I don't understand it. There's things about Scripture that confuse me to no end, but that just means I'm still learning.

So please, show us all the real Moviefan. Show us Moviefan as a man, and not Moviefan as a biblical parrot.

I am no one's parrot. God doesn't force me to tell others about Him; I do so by my own choice, because I'm convinced He is real, and His Word is true. You and a few others seem to want me to completely separate myself from my faith; I can't, and if I could, I'm not sure I'd want to. If that makes me a social outcast in the eyes of some, then so be it. I won't be held responsible for people getting offended, when I haven't done anything to deliberately cause it.

 

[Moviefan2k4]

Then he isn't just or perfect. That means he is fallible just like us.

Since when does limited patience inherently equal a character flaw?

You still did wrong. Just confessing and repenting doesn't bring someone back from the dead or change the fact that you got down with a lady before you were supposed to.

God swore to all mankind that if anyone truly repented for their sins, and placed their faith in Christ for salvation, He'd wipe away their sins, never to be remembered against them in His judgment. we all deserve punishment for various things, but for those who turn from sin, God will forgive and cleanse them of it.

Perfect justice would punish those people also. And here's where you go off on how "repenting makes it better"...

Jesus already took my punishment, which is why my faith in Him through repentance satisfies perfect justice. He suffered, so I wouldn't have to.

 

[Gilpesh]

Since when does limited patience inherently equal a character flaw?

A perfect god would have patience forever for his creation. But isn't being impatience a character flaw in and of itself? So that means one flaw so far... and god has a temper when you disagree with his crazy rules... another... and he seems to be a bit over dramatic... another.

Not perfect in the slightest.

God swore to all mankind that if anyone truly repented for their sins, and placed their faith in Christ for salvation, He'd wipe away their sins, never to be remembered against them in His judgment. we all deserve punishment for various things, but for those who turn from sin, God will forgive and cleanse them of it.

Bulls**t.

Your crazy fictional book is getting crazier when a mysterious invisible man can wave a magic wand and you are forever pardoned even if you kill... just because you're 'sowry'.

Jesus already took my punishment, which is why my faith in Him through repentance satisfies perfect justice. He suffered, so I wouldn't have to.

Bulls**t.

If perfect justice is perfect, you would punish the one who committed the crime... not let him walk away saying 'whew' and wiping his brow.

And a preemptive whatever to some argument about jesus sacrificing himself just to cover your ass.

complete unnaccountability to anyone for anything.

The guy you're accountable to doesn't exist. How lucky for you.

 

[Shedhut]

@moviefan:

thx again for addressing my post.

with my collected experiences and views on people and the "world" I have a hard time believing that the emerging of religions on this planet have been caused by a "higher power" rather than the eager of several intellectual men to give their people answers on their questions and inner fears by creating a higher moral code, a ruleset that they were sure - based on empiric assumtions - many would find in themselves and embrace in order to be guided in a world they couldn't understand.
God and Devil as metaphors for the positive versus the negative moral influences on our minds which have to be filtrated correctly in order to accept oneself and others.
I wouldn't even assume, according to my theory, that the "creators of god" had in mind to control people. "God" was probably originated for more noble reasons in a philosophical way.
In the following centuries the concept unfortunately was perverted repeatedly; fight wars in the name of god, get rid of minorities in the name of god, pedophilia in the name of god...you name the next.
So to me personally the religious concepts have failed ever since to be as morally correct as some people pretend them to be.

 

[Majic Walrus]

No, I just use that term to describe those who resort to insults and personal attacks every time I say something they don't like.

When have I ever directly forced my faith on anyone? I've stated what Scripture has to say on many different matters, and I've mentioned a few of my personal experiences. But I don't recall every saying anything like "turn or burn". I grew up in that environment myself, and it took a lot of years to get out of it. I recognize blunt truth isn't always a pretty subject, but I won't lie about this stuff just to make someone feel better.

Ever since I turned back to Christ, I've slowly been gaining a better understand of how real His love truly is. I can't just silence that because it makes some uncomfortable.

We are more perceptive then you think. When you say that all non-Saved people go to hell we know what you're saying. You're saying that we are going to hell.

What I said was I was against the current trends of complete unnaccountability to anyone for anything. That kind of thing isn't tolerance; it's foolishness.

My views are greatly influenced by my faith in God. I freely admit I don't know everything about Him, but I still choose to believe what He says, even when I don't understand it. There's things about Scripture that confuse me to no end, but that just means I'm still learning.

I am no one's parrot. God doesn't force me to tell others about Him; I do so by my own choice, because I'm convinced He is real, and His Word is true. You and a few others seem to want me to completely separate myself from my faith; I can't, and if I could, I'm not sure I'd want to. If that makes me a social outcast in the eyes of some, then so be it. I won't be held responsible for people getting offended, when I haven't done anything to deliberately cause it.

No offense but these two statements conflict. You willfully choose to believe what God says without any understanding and still preach it to the masses.

You know you hear what he says and don't really understand what he says and then you repeat it.

Parrots hear what their owners say and don't really understand what their owner means but they still repeat it.

See the connection?

 

[Whirlysplat]

Taken from somewhere else

In August, 2003, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed a lawsuit against the state of Kansas over the state's criminal sodomy law involving children. The ACLU is defending Matthew Limon, a homosexual who committed sodomy against a 14-year-old boy in 2000. At the time of his crime, Simon was 18 years old. The ACLU is claiming that Limon's conviction is unconstitutionally discriminatory because the penalties for sodomy with a minor are different than for heterosexual sex with a minor.

Kansas Attorney General Phill KIine says the fairness of Limon's sentence should be a state legislative issue, not a constitutional one. According to Kline, "If the ACLU wins in the thrust of their arguments, it means the state has no right to say that it is illegal for an adult to have sex with a 13-year-old child." Kline also fears that an ACLU victory will make it difficult for the state to enforce laws against polygamy, incest, bestiality, and other sexual perversions.

The effort to abolish "age of consent" laws has been a long-time goal of homosexual activists. The 1972 Gay Rights Platform, for example, called for the abolition of all laws prohibiting sex with children. The platform demands: "Repeal of all laws governing the age of sexual consent."

In September, 1995, three homosexual activists published an essay entitled, "The State Of Gay Liberation" in Guide, a homosexual publication. The essay was authored by North American Man Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) co-founder David Thorstad, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Professor Richard D. Mohr, and San Francisco journalist Bruce Mirken.

Thorstad, of course, is a life-long pederast and homosexual activist who clearly describes the important linkage between homosexuality and pedophilia. In a speech given before a homosexual group in Mexico in 1998, Thorstad said: "Pederasty is the main form that male homosexuality has acquired throughout Western civilization-and not only in the West! Pederasty is inseparable from the high points of Western culture-ancient Greece and the Renaissance." (David Thorstad, "Pederasty And Homosexuality," NAMBLA web site)

wtf

 

[BlackLantern]

No one can rightfully say that 100 percent of gay people are born gay or that 100 percent of gay people choose to be gay...it's presumptious....I believe in a higher power, that we are all here for some reason...but a truly spiritual person wouldn't damn someone for believing differently....Muslims, Christians, Buddhists, etc all have their belief system and whos to say any one of them is right...

 

[The Senator]

Taken from somewhere else

In August, 2003, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed a lawsuit against the state of Kansas over the state's criminal sodomy law involving children. The ACLU is defending Matthew Limon, a homosexual who committed sodomy against a 14-year-old boy in 2000. At the time of his crime, Simon was 18 years old. The ACLU is claiming that Limon's conviction is unconstitutionally discriminatory because the penalties for sodomy with a minor are different than for heterosexual sex with a minor.

Kansas Attorney General Phill KIine says the fairness of Limon's sentence should be a state legislative issue, not a constitutional one. According to Kline, "If the ACLU wins in the thrust of their arguments, it means the state has no right to say that it is illegal for an adult to have sex with a 13-year-old child." Kline also fears that an ACLU victory will make it difficult for the state to enforce laws against polygamy, incest, bestiality, and other sexual perversions.

The effort to abolish "age of consent" laws has been a long-time goal of homosexual activists. The 1972 Gay Rights Platform, for example, called for the abolition of all laws prohibiting sex with children. The platform demands: "Repeal of all laws governing the age of sexual consent."

In September, 1995, three homosexual activists published an essay entitled, "The State Of Gay Liberation" in Guide, a homosexual publication. The essay was authored by North American Man Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) co-founder David Thorstad, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Professor Richard D. Mohr, and San Francisco journalist Bruce Mirken.

Thorstad, of course, is a life-long pederast and homosexual activist who clearly describes the important linkage between homosexuality and pedophilia. In a speech given before a homosexual group in Mexico in 1998, Thorstad said: "Pederasty is the main form that male homosexuality has acquired throughout Western civilization-and not only in the West! Pederasty is inseparable from the high points of Western culture-ancient Greece and the Renaissance." (David Thorstad, "Pederasty And Homosexuality," NAMBLA web site)

wtf

First of all, you need to provide an actual source from where you got this.

Second, some gay rights activists do not support passing laws which would allow homosexuals to have sex with children. Those laws language which would repeal age of CONSENT laws [key word: consent, which means that those who are having sex are agreeing to have sex with one another].

Of course, heterosexuals have been pushing for similar legislation but you don't seem to be reporting on that, are you? Yeah, it's the big, bad homosexuals who want to have sex with underaged children; never mind the drones of heterosexual men who rape and molest young girls on a regular basis.

Additionally, NAMBLA is not considered an affiliate with the GLBT community.

 

[Moviefan2k4]

We are more perceptive then you think. When you say that all non-Saved people go to hell we know what you're saying. You're saying that we are going to hell.

That's God standard, not mine...and believe me, there are days when I honestly wish there was more than one way to God, but there isn't. God only offered one payment for sin, and acceptance of that is done on an individual basis. If you think God enjoys people being sent to hell, you're mistaken. He gets absolutely no joy or pleasure out of it...but as much as He loves us, perfect justice must be served.

No offense but these two statements conflict. You willfully choose to believe what God says without any understanding and still preach it to the masses.

I never said I din't have any understanding; I said I don't know everything about Him. There's a difference.

 

[Yerzrinot]

Taken from somewhere else

In August, 2003, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) filed a lawsuit against the state of Kansas over the state's criminal sodomy law involving children. The ACLU is defending Matthew Limon, a homosexual who committed sodomy against a 14-year-old boy in 2000. At the time of his crime, Simon was 18 years old. The ACLU is claiming that Limon's conviction is unconstitutionally discriminatory because the penalties for sodomy with a minor are different than for heterosexual sex with a minor.

Kansas Attorney General Phill KIine says the fairness of Limon's sentence should be a state legislative issue, not a constitutional one. According to Kline, "If the ACLU wins in the thrust of their arguments, it means the state has no right to say that it is illegal for an adult to have sex with a 13-year-old child." Kline also fears that an ACLU victory will make it difficult for the state to enforce laws against polygamy, incest, bestiality, and other sexual perversions.

The effort to abolish "age of consent" laws has been a long-time goal of homosexual activists. The 1972 Gay Rights Platform, for example, called for the abolition of all laws prohibiting sex with children. The platform demands: "Repeal of all laws governing the age of sexual consent."

In September, 1995, three homosexual activists published an essay entitled, "The State Of Gay Liberation" in Guide, a homosexual publication. The essay was authored by North American Man Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) co-founder David Thorstad, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Professor Richard D. Mohr, and San Francisco journalist Bruce Mirken.

Thorstad, of course, is a life-long pederast and homosexual activist who clearly describes the important linkage between homosexuality and pedophilia. In a speech given before a homosexual group in Mexico in 1998, Thorstad said: "Pederasty is the main form that male homosexuality has acquired throughout Western civilization-and not only in the West! Pederasty is inseparable from the high points of Western culture-ancient Greece and the Renaissance." (David Thorstad, "Pederasty And Homosexuality," NAMBLA web site)

wtf

Until you provide the source I'm calling Bull****.