Vegas Free-for-All - Walt Disney

Walt Disney

pjstroh

Mar 12, 2014
4:54am

Quote

Originally posted by: jphelan
So, which situation poses the greatest risk to sexual assault of a boy scout?

A) Heterosexual Scout master sharing a two person tent with his son
B) Gay Scout master sharing a two person tent with his son
C) Heterosexual Scout master sharing a two person tent with a boy who is not his son
D) Gay Scout master sharing a two person tent with a boy who is not his son

I think the risk increases as you go down the alphabet. Blindly excluding gay scout leaders is not the answer, with but ignoring the risk of scout masters alone with children who are not their own is a recipe for disaster. Unless you are naïve, you gotta see the difference between C and D and additional background checking is needed. Anyone who has had children has to realize this.

Call me naive. I dont see an increased risk between C and D....and I'm confident you wont find and scientific studies to back up your statement. Its obvious you dont have any gay, adult friends.

I dont fear openly gay men or women....its the repressed-self-loathing-straight-but-really-disturbed people you need to worry about: Many priests, Terry Sandusky, Michael Jackson, Larry Craig. I would not worry for a second about a child with Richard Simmons, RuPaul, Elton John, or Greg Lugannis.

Dan Svatass

Mar 12, 2014
6:10am

Block User

Quote

Originally posted by: Boilerman
Liberals don't believe that Americans should be allowed to start a club with other people of like thoughts............assuming the Liberals don't like those thoughts.

Bullshit.

The liberals I know believe the Boy Scouts should be allowed to continue with its bigoted policy. It's a free country.

But the liberals I know also believe we should be permitted to remind the world that the Boy Scouts' policy is indeed bigoted and would be revised were decent people in charge there.

Bigotry apologist like yourself just don't like others exercising their First Amendment right to speak up when you can't handle what's being said. That's what's really gets bigotry apologists like yourself crying, that we keep pointing out the bigotry.

Good on the Disney Corporation for refusing to keep subsidizing the Boy Scouts. Hopefully BSA will soon complete their transition and decent Americans can again be proud of the group's good potential.

snidely333

Mar 12, 2014
6:18am

Block User

Quote

Originally posted by: Boilerman
How the hell is anyone going to gain accurate data on this subject? Not a chance.

Quote
Originally posted by: snidely333
Quote
Originally posted by: Boilerman
The field of Psychology is incredibly ineffective in both its ability to cure people and its ability to predict the future actions of people. In other words, psychologists don't know squat. Hell, I was at a dinner party several years ago and the marriage counselor was twice divorced and his son was a drug addict.

Quote
Originally posted by: forkushV
Quote
Originally posted by: Boilerman
Forkie will tell us that gay men are no more likely to be interior decorators, and flight attendants. Next he will call me homophobic for pointing out the truth. Then Forkie will ask "How do you know the truth?". Finally he will ask, "Did you poll interior decorators and flight attendants?".
Nope, I'll decline to do all of the above, and simply quote the American Psychological Association - again - and then watch you sputter.

So basically, you just poo poo any data that doesn't support your thinking. See my signature. You're its poster boy.

Your position is simply that you're right because you think you're right and anything to the contrary is wrong. Even though you have no data or really anything other than some prejudice to support yourself.

Boilerman

Mar 12, 2014
6:23am

Block User

Really? I've never met but a few such sensible Liberals. Have you articles written on the subject of gays in Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts? Seems to me as these writers believe anything but gay inclusion should be illegal. Most Liberals that I know believe that country clubs MUST include woman and blacks. While I believe that such clubs should include woman and blacks, I don't that these clubs should be forced to associate with those that they don't wish to.

Bull shit to your bull shit.

Quote

Originally posted by: Chilcoot

Quote
Originally posted by: Boilerman
Liberals don't believe that Americans should be allowed to start a club with other people of like thoughts............assuming the Liberals don't like those thoughts.

Boilerman

Mar 12, 2014
6:29am

Block User

The words Psychology and science should never be used within the same sentence.

Quote

Originally posted by: Chilcoot
Another guy who confuses rape and sex.

Straight men want to have sex with women.
Gay men want to have sex with men.
Neither want to rape children.

Oncly child rapists want to rape children.
And one's sexual orientation is unrelated to whether one wants to rape children.

Is there no science these neanderthals can accept?

Boilerman

Mar 12, 2014
6:39am

Block User

If Boilerman can produce proof that the Psychologists divorce at an average to above rate, would Snidely agree that Psychology is not a science? Certainly if these folks knew of what they speak, they would live happily ever after. Would Snidely agree that Psychologists don't know their ass holes from a hole in the ground?

Quote

Originally posted by: snidely333

Quote
Originally posted by: Boilerman
How the hell is anyone going to gain accurate data on this subject? Not a chance.

Quote
Originally posted by: snidely333
Quote
Originally posted by: Boilerman
The field of Psychology is incredibly ineffective in both its ability to cure people and its ability to predict the future actions of people. In other words, psychologists don't know squat. Hell, I was at a dinner party several years ago and the marriage counselor was twice divorced and his son was a drug addict.

Quote
Originally posted by: forkushV
Quote
Originally posted by: Boilerman
Forkie will tell us that gay men are no more likely to be interior decorators, and flight attendants. Next he will call me homophobic for pointing out the truth. Then Forkie will ask "How do you know the truth?". Finally he will ask, "Did you poll interior decorators and flight attendants?".
Nope, I'll decline to do all of the above, and simply quote the American Psychological Association - again - and then watch you sputter.

So basically, you just poo poo any data that doesn't support your thinking. See my signature. You're its poster boy.

Dan Svatass

Mar 12, 2014
6:46am

Block User

Quote

Originally posted by: Boilerman
The words Psychology and science should never be used within the same sentence.

Or man-made climate change and science.

Or evolution and science.

Or carbon dating and science.

Or vaccines and science.

Or groundwater contamination from fracking and science.

Or planetary roundness and science.

We understand each other.

Quote
Originally posted by: Boilerman
If Boilerman can produce proof . . . .

Damn, another bloviating gasbag who refers to himself with a third person fake name. This may be my limit . . . .

snidely333

Mar 12, 2014
7:28am

Block User

Quote

Originally posted by: Boilerman
If Boilerman can produce proof that the Psychologists divorce at an average to above rate, would Snidely agree that Psychology is not a science? Certainly if these folks knew of what they speak, they would live happily ever after. Would Snidely agree that Psychologists don't know their ass holes from a hole in the ground?

Quote
Originally posted by: snidely333
Quote
Originally posted by: Boilerman
How the hell is anyone going to gain accurate data on this subject? Not a chance.

Quote
Originally posted by: snidely333
Quote
Originally posted by: Boilerman
The field of Psychology is incredibly ineffective in both its ability to cure people and its ability to predict the future actions of people. In other words, psychologists don't know squat. Hell, I was at a dinner party several years ago and the marriage counselor was twice divorced and his son was a drug addict.

Quote
Originally posted by: forkushV
Quote
Originally posted by: Boilerman
Forkie will tell us that gay men are no more likely to be interior decorators, and flight attendants. Next he will call me homophobic for pointing out the truth. Then Forkie will ask "How do you know the truth?". Finally he will ask, "Did you poll interior decorators and flight attendants?".
Nope, I'll decline to do all of the above, and simply quote the American Psychological Association - again - and then watch you sputter.

So basically, you just poo poo any data that doesn't support your thinking. See my signature. You're its poster boy.

Your position is simply that you're right because you think you're right and anything to the contrary is wrong. Even though you have no data or really anything other than some prejudice to support yourself.

Now, instead of not believing the data you attack its messengers. Do you have any data to disprove what we're talking about? I'm not interested in straw men. I saw a cardiologist that was fat and didn't exercise. Doesn't make his scientific analysis any less valid.

pearlguy

Mar 12, 2014
10:01am

Block User

Quote

Originally posted by: DonDiego

Quote
Originally posted by: nemesis
What is NAMBLA?

North American Marlon Brando Look-Alikes
Ref: N.A.M.B.L.A.

DD... you crack me up !

jphelan

Mar 12, 2014
1:51pm

Block User

Okay here is a little evidence to support my assertion that D is more of a risk than C:

C) Heterosexual Scout master sharing a two person tent with a boy who is not his son
D) Gay Scout master sharing a two person tent with a boy who is not his son

UC Davis Pyschology of Molestation Link

In particular - look at this line....

The researchers found that homosexual males responded no more to male children than heterosexual males responded to female children (Freund et al., 1989).

NOTE THEY DID NOT COMPARE HOMOSEXUAL MALE RESPONSE TO MALE CHILDREN VERSUS FEMALE CHILDREN.

Duh - Heterosexuals are not interested in the same sex but gays are. I needed a psychologist to tell me this!

I think I'd rather be a Neanderthal who looks to reduce the risk of abuse to his children than a Naïve Liberal who sees no risk - but that's just me.

«‹6 ›

Already a LVA subscriber?
To continue reading, choose an option below:

Diamond Membership

$3 per month

Unlimited access to LVA website

Exclusive subscriber-only content

Limited Member Rewards Online

Join Now

Platinum Membership

$50 per year

Unlimited access to LVA website

Exclusive subscriber-only content

Exclusive Member Rewards Book

Join Now