AFA says, "Many homosexual men like underage boys"

[Rick336]

Here's an article from the American Family Association's web site today (Oct. 3, 06 ) about Senator Foley and how he is typical of "many homosexual men" who like underage boys.

This is facism out in the open:

Bauer: Foley's Failures Reminder of a Fallen World

By Jody Brown and Chad Groening
October 3, 2006

(AgapePress) - Christians are being advised not to be so disgusted with the behavior of former Republican Congressman Mark Foley that they decide to stay home from the polls in November. In fact, Christian activist Gary Bauer says the scandal involving Foley is just further evidence that the pro-family agenda is needed desperately in America.

Several pro-family leaders are now saying it is clear why Mark Foley always refused to answer questions about his sexual orientation. Tony Perkins with Family Research Council says in light of Foley's now revealed e-mails and messages to teenage male pages who had worked in the Capitol, "... it appears clear that Foley is a homosexual with a particular attraction to underage boys." Adds Linda Harvey with Mission America, "... like many homosexual men, he likes young teen boys. We should pray for him that he gets a handle on this problem and refrains from harming any more kids." Since resigning his congressional seat on Friday, the former Florida lawmaker has admitted himself to an alcoholic rehabilitation center.

Gary Bauer, chairman of the pro-family group American Values, describes some of the instant messages transmitted by Foley as "obscene and disgusting" -- and says resignation was "the only appropriate response" for someone who has "abused the public trust." He notes, however, that similar indiscretions among Democratic lawmakers in the past brought different results.

"In contrast, former Democrat Congressman Gerry Studds of Massachusetts remained in the House after admitting to homosexual conduct with a teenage page, and won re-election numerous times," he points out. "[And] Representative Barney Frank [also of Massachusetts] was implicated in a homosexual prostitution scandal run out of his house and continues to be a leader in the Democrat Party today."

Still, Bauer comments, the recent revelations about Congressman Foley should remind people that sin is an equal opportunity employer. "Hopefully, no Christian voter is under the illusion that the Democratic Party is full of sinners and the Republican Party is full of saints," he says. "Both parties are full of sinners. Our faith teaches us that it's a fallen world."

But Bauer says when it comes to voting, the GOP platform supports the sanctity of life and traditional marriage, while liberal Democrats support same-sex "marriage" and abortion on demand. "Those differences remain the same," he points out, "and in view of that, I would hope that the obvious disgusting behavior by this one Republican congressman would not affect turnout on election day."

But the former presidential candidate suspects the timing of Foley's revelations may have had that intended effect. "There is some indication that perhaps left-wing groups and some Democrats knew about this," he explains. "We know that a newspaper in his district knew about it for a year; so I doubt if it was coincidental that it's come out five weeks before an election."

What is at work in this case, Bauer suggests, is "an attempt to discourage Christian conservative voters and to get some percentage of them to stay home so that the Left can retake the United States Senate and the United States House."

In fact, House Speaker Dennis Hastert -- who himself is taking some heat in the Foley scandal for not acting upon the party leadership's earlier knowledge of the e-mails -- is demanding the Department of Justice undertake a formal investigation of the matter. Hastert claims no knowledge of the sexually graphic instant messages before they were reported last week. In his letter to the DOJ, the House leader requests they find out "who may have had the [second set of sexually explicit] communications and why they were not given to prosecutors before now."

Bauer concurs, saying there are rumors in the national capital that some Democratic leaders knew of the communiqués and chose to wait until five weeks before the election for their own advantage. Before the news broke last week, Foley was considered an easy winner in his campaign to again represent the 16th congressional district of Florida and help the GOP retain its hold on the majority in the House.

© 2006 AgapePress all rights reserved.

[keltic63]

has anyone mentioned that underage girls are in more danger from predators than are boys?

[Daniel]

And that Mr. Bauer is passing along the rumor (ie Democrats knew about Foely) which has not proven to be not be true. The GOP shot itself in the foot and is blaming everyone but themselves. They could have easily avoided this situation by asking Foley to resign a year ago. But no, they decided to roll the dice instead: better to have a closeted gay man on their side voting the part line. Pure politics, as is this announcement by Bauer.

Again- Bauer and the GOP believe that if you say something enough times it will turn out to be true.

Gay men are sexual pedators and interested in underaged boys. (gee - what about lesbians? How come they get a pass? Oh...I forgot.....they don't exist.)

False!

[hules]

As usual, conservatives are drawing the wrong conclusion from the tawdry affair of Rep. Mark Foley, the Republicans' former attack dog on social issues. "Look," they say, "here it is again, the connection between homosexuality and child molestation." Of course, anyone who's read any serious research on the topic knows that there's no statistical or psychological connection between homosexuality and sexual abuse.

The true conclusion should be, "Here it is again, the connection between conservatism and sexual abuse." That assertion IS backed up by scientific research, although no one's ever heard about it. I've been trying on and off for twelve years to write a book about it, but the lack of interest from commercial publishers and the need to make a living (and my perverse desire to have a life) have prevented me from finishing the manuscript. Someday I'll carve out some pieces of the manuscript and submit them as journal articles, but in the meantime I've posted the work in progress on the Web at www.hules.us (http://www.hules.us). A few excerpts:
---

More than 100 reports in the scientific and professional literature, involving more than 35,000
subjects, indicate that rapists, child molesters, incestuous parents, and sexually motivated
murderers are typically very conservative in their sexual and social values and sometimes more
religious than average—suggesting that in many cases traditional sexual morality is a
contributing factor in sexual abuse rather than a deterrent. At the First International Conference
on the Treatment of Sex Offenders in 1989, there was broad agreement that Western societies
with repressive sexual attitudes and traditional male/female roles are more likely to have high
rates of all forms of sex crimes.
***

I view sexual abuse as a social and cultural problem because sexual aggression comes from a
failure to socialize sexuality—and American society does everything in its power to prevent the
healthy socialization of children’s sexuality.
***

A traditional, restrictive sexual upbringing subverts children’s ability to trust their own perceptions
and judgments regarding sexuality. When children are taught that sexual activities that feel good
are just as wrong as sexual activities that feel bad, they are left with no basis on which to make
judgments. Right and wrong become divorced from personal experience. Traditional morality
teaches children that masturbation, which feels good, is morally bad; but spanking, which feels
bad, is morally good. This morality leaves children helpless to judge for themselves what is
sexually right or wrong. They become totally dependent on what adults—including child
molesters—tell them. Sex with an adult authority figure may feel bad, but it must be good if the
adult says so.

Traditional morality teaches children to be sexually obedient, not to stand up for their rights. It’s
no wonder that children face more danger of sexual abuse in sexually strict families than in
sexually permissive families. Children who are taught that they must always obey, that they do
not have rights over their own bodies, and that their own sexual feelings do not matter, are rarely
able to resist or report abuse. For these children, all sexual experiences are shameful, and all of
them must be hidden from adults. One possible explanation of why so many child molesters are
religious is that sexually abused children from religious families are the least likely to report the
abuse, are the least likely to receive treatment, and therefore are the most likely to become
abusers as adults.
***
Parents who punish children for their sexual interests and activities are actually modeling sexual
abuse. By their actions, these parents are teaching their children disregard for another person’s
bodily autonomy and emotional and sexual feelings; they are teaching that aggression,
humiliation, and violation of personal boundaries are the rights of people with power.
***

In America, sexual abuse is a traditional family value. The suppression and shaming of children’s
sexuality—a defining characteristic of our traditional culture—makes a direct contribution to
sexual aggression.
***

Traditional sexual morality is an irreligious value system promoted by corrupt churches. It is irreligious for several reasons:

1. It is based on a materialistic, reductionistic conception of sexuality.

2. The religious response to nature, exemplified in the Psalms, is wonder and gratitude; but
traditional morality’s response to sexual pleasure is not wonder and gratitude, but fear, guilt, and
shame. Sexual pleasure is the only gift of God that Christians do not give thanks for in their
official prayers.

3. Authentic religion expands and deepens the meaning of life. In contrast, traditional morality
artificially restricts the meaning of sexuality to marriage and reproduction, treating most sexual
experiences as meaningless.

4. The origianl meaning of the word "religion" is "connectedness." Religion and sexuality are both about connection; but excessive sexual shame isolates people from others, alienates them from their own bodies and feelings, and limits their ability to experience God’s love. Unconditional love begins with unconditional love of the body.

5. Authentic religion is about the truths that set us free. But the shame imposed by traditional
sexual morality promotes dishonesty about sex in both our personal and social lives.

6. Looked at in its historical and social context, traditional sexual morality is often more
concerned with social status than with religious values.

7. Traditional morality ignores the possibility of eros as a path to self-knowledge, spiritual
awareness, and healing.
***

[Daniel]

Hules- what a great post! Thank you for introducing this forum to your work. Your perspective (I read the SFC interview) is much needed. And I hope to see you around here more.

I wish you much success in getting published- and know how trying this can be- I am working on a book myself (music) and sometimes despair at getting it finished. I know what you mean by years and years of research!

Please do not give up the faith. I know we both can do it.

[Huggins293]

has anyone mentioned that underage girls are in more danger from predators than are boys?

For some reason our heterosexists ignore this. BTW do you know of any place in the DC or Maryland area that I can do the following:
A) Be a volunteer operator for gay teen agers
B) Hear pro-gay speeches and solutions to heteosexism
C) Engage in book discussions concerning heterosexism

[Huggins293]

As usual, conservatives are drawing the wrong conclusion from the tawdry affair of Rep. Mark Foley, the Republicans' former attack dog on social issues. "Look," they say, "here it is again, the connection between homosexuality and child molestation." Of course, anyone who's read any serious research on the topic knows that there's no statistical or psychological connection between homosexuality and sexual abuse.

The true conclusion should be, "Here it is again, the connection between conservatism and sexual abuse." That assertion IS backed up by scientific research, although no one's ever heard about it. I've been trying on and off for twelve years to write a book about it, but the lack of interest from commercial publishers and the need to make a living (and my perverse desire to have a life) have prevented me from finishing the manuscript. Someday I'll carve out some pieces of the manuscript and submit them as journal articles, but in the meantime I've posted the work in progress on the Web at www.hules.us (http://www.hules.us). A few excerpts:
---

More than 100 reports in the scientific and professional literature, involving more than 35,000
subjects, indicate that rapists, child molesters, incestuous parents, and sexually motivated
murderers are typically very conservative in their sexual and social values and sometimes more
religious than average—suggesting that in many cases traditional sexual morality is a
contributing factor in sexual abuse rather than a deterrent. At the First International Conference
on the Treatment of Sex Offenders in 1989, there was broad agreement that Western societies
with repressive sexual attitudes and traditional male/female roles are more likely to have high
rates of all forms of sex crimes.
***

I view sexual abuse as a social and cultural problem because sexual aggression comes from a
failure to socialize sexuality—and American society does everything in its power to prevent the
healthy socialization of children’s sexuality.
***

A traditional, restrictive sexual upbringing subverts children’s ability to trust their own perceptions
and judgments regarding sexuality. When children are taught that sexual activities that feel good
are just as wrong as sexual activities that feel bad, they are left with no basis on which to make
judgments. Right and wrong become divorced from personal experience. Traditional morality
teaches children that masturbation, which feels good, is morally bad; but spanking, which feels
bad, is morally good. This morality leaves children helpless to judge for themselves what is
sexually right or wrong. They become totally dependent on what adults—including child
molesters—tell them. Sex with an adult authority figure may feel bad, but it must be good if the
adult says so.

Traditional morality teaches children to be sexually obedient, not to stand up for their rights. It’s
no wonder that children face more danger of sexual abuse in sexually strict families than in
sexually permissive families. Children who are taught that they must always obey, that they do
not have rights over their own bodies, and that their own sexual feelings do not matter, are rarely
able to resist or report abuse. For these children, all sexual experiences are shameful, and all of
them must be hidden from adults. One possible explanation of why so many child molesters are
religious is that sexually abused children from religious families are the least likely to report the
abuse, are the least likely to receive treatment, and therefore are the most likely to become
abusers as adults.
***
Parents who punish children for their sexual interests and activities are actually modeling sexual
abuse. By their actions, these parents are teaching their children disregard for another person’s
bodily autonomy and emotional and sexual feelings; they are teaching that aggression,
humiliation, and violation of personal boundaries are the rights of people with power.
***

In America, sexual abuse is a traditional family value. The suppression and shaming of children’s
sexuality—a defining characteristic of our traditional culture—makes a direct contribution to
sexual aggression.
***

Traditional sexual morality is an irreligious value system promoted by corrupt churches. It is irreligious for several reasons:

1. It is based on a materialistic, reductionistic conception of sexuality.

2. The religious response to nature, exemplified in the Psalms, is wonder and gratitude; but
traditional morality’s response to sexual pleasure is not wonder and gratitude, but fear, guilt, and
shame. Sexual pleasure is the only gift of God that Christians do not give thanks for in their
official prayers.

3. Authentic religion expands and deepens the meaning of life. In contrast, traditional morality
artificially restricts the meaning of sexuality to marriage and reproduction, treating most sexual
experiences as meaningless.

4. The origianl meaning of the word "religion" is "connectedness." Religion and sexuality are both about connection; but excessive sexual shame isolates people from others, alienates them from their own bodies and feelings, and limits their ability to experience God’s love. Unconditional love begins with unconditional love of the body.

5. Authentic religion is about the truths that set us free. But the shame imposed by traditional
sexual morality promotes dishonesty about sex in both our personal and social lives.

6. Looked at in its historical and social context, traditional sexual morality is often more
concerned with social status than with religious values.

7. Traditional morality ignores the possibility of eros as a path to self-knowledge, spiritual
awareness, and healing.
***
I fully agree, I am just trying to find a local organization where I can meet people with these values in person. Are there any events promoting pro-gay ideas in the DC area this month? I am just getting frustated that I have not find one ye.

[dewdrop_world]

For some reason our heterosexists ignore this. BTW do you know of any place in the DC or Maryland area that I can do the following:
A) Be a volunteer operator for gay teen agers
B) Hear pro-gay speeches and solutions to heteosexism
C) Engage in book discussions concerning heterosexism

I can answer A.

http://www.smyal.org/ -- Sexual Minority Youth Assistance League, headquartered in DC.

James