About those anti-aviatoin newsgroups

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:OEc0b.184590$uu5.34852@sccrnsc04...
[...] In your example, the Scouts (or any other group) would
quite deservedly have earned the wrath of the School Board and the Civil
Rights community by arbitrarily banning members based on skin color or
religion.

And therein lies the crux of the disagreement (contrary to what was said
earlier by someone else).

You apparently think that sexual preference is different from race, and is
not one that should be protected. Maybe you think it's some kind of option.
That's the classic religious right argument: "it's a lifestyle choice, and
they could change if they wanted to".

Well, that's just not true. Sexual "preference" doesn't mean the person has
decided to prefer one gender over another. It means that nature has decided
that they will prefer one gender over another. A gay didn't decide to be
gay any more than you decided to be heterosexual. The vast numbers of gay
people who have suffered years of self-inflicted psychological torment
because they do NOT want to be gay is about as clear evidence as anyone
could ask for that it's not a choice.

In any case, clearly religious belief IS a choice, and is protected. So
even if sexual preference were a choice, your objection to discrimination
against Jews is only consistent if you also object to discrimination against
gays.

Margy's question is very much apples and apples.

Pete

[...] In your example, the Scouts (or any other group) would
quite deservedly have earned the wrath of the School Board and the Civil
Rights community by arbitrarily banning members based on skin color or
religion.

And therein lies the crux of the disagreement (contrary to what was said
earlier by someone else).

You apparently think that sexual preference is different from race, and is
not one that should be protected. Maybe you think it's some kind of
option.

No, Peter, this has nothing to do with whether homosexuality is a lifestyle
"choice" or not. (I personally don't believe anyone would choose such a
difficult path for themselves.)

This has EVERYTHING to do with the fact that skin color or religious
preference is patently and demonstrably harmless, while sexual attraction is
potentially and demonstrably harmful -- especially in groups of pre-teen
boys (and girls).

I wouldn't want my Girl Scout daughter chaperoned overnight by a male troop
leader, either, for fear of what might happen. How is this any different
than having a homosexual Boy Scout leader?

THAT is an "apples and apples" comparison.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:bUp0b.200383$Ho3.26912@sccrnsc03...
This has EVERYTHING to do with the fact that skin color or religious
preference is patently and demonstrably harmless, while sexual attraction
is
potentially and demonstrably harmful -- especially in groups of pre-teen
boys (and girls).

Skin color is patently harmless? Really? Ever heard of the Black Panthers?
Religious preference is harmless? Really? Funny...seems like a couple of
years ago, some VERY religious-minded folks destroyed the World Trade
Center.

Differences in skin color or religious preference have a GREAT potential for
causing conflict and harm. That potential need not be nearly as militant as
the examples I've given to do serious harm, either psychologically or
physically.

As far as sexual attraction being potentially and demonstrably harmful, I
suppose that depends on what you mean. If teenages are not properly
supervised, there is the potential for fraternization. However, I will tell
you this: there was a LOT more fraternization and a LOT less supervision
when I was a teenager at co-ed church retreats then when I was a teenager at
Boy Scout camping trips (and remember, I was in the Boy Scouts before it
occurred to anyone to ask someone if they were gay before letting them be in
the troop, either as a scout or a leader).

However, I fail to see what is inherently harmful about the fraternization.
Even the military is on pretty thin ice with their claim that romantic
involvements between servicemen can undermine the safety of the entire
group, and at least in their case they do have people shooting at them on a
regular basis.

I can't imagine what harm could come from a couple of gay boys in the same
Boy Scout troop having a romantic involvement (other than the usual problems
of immature teenagers being involved sexually, regardless of sexual
preference). At least you know they're not going to get pregnant.

I wouldn't want my Girl Scout daughter chaperoned overnight by a male
troop
leader, either, for fear of what might happen.

There were lots of women at the summer camp I went to when I was a Boy
Scout. For some reason, no funny business ever happened, nor was anyone
worried about mixed-gender leadership. Beyond that, as has been pointed out
multiple times already, you are more likely to find a heterosexual male
willing to prey on a teenage boy than you are to find a homosexual male
willing to do the same.

Your concern should be based on reality, not your existing prejudice and
lack of understanding of what it actually means to be homosexual.

Pete

There were lots of women at the summer camp I went to when I was a Boy
Scout. For some reason, no funny business ever happened, nor was anyone
worried about mixed-gender leadership. Beyond that, as has been pointed
out
multiple times already, you are more likely to find a heterosexual male
willing to prey on a teenage boy than you are to find a homosexual male
willing to do the same.

I would say the odds of a woman "preying" upon a teenage boy are an order of
magnitude smaller than the reverse example (i.e.: A man preying on a teenage
girl.). According to my wife (a Girl Scout leader, BTW), most women just
ain't wired "that way". (I'll have to take her word for it.)

Men, on the other hand, I understand. It would be sheer folly to assume
that a man, left alone with a teenage girl, overnight, wouldn't be tempted.
Would most men ACT on this temptation? No, of course not. But I'd bet you
a hundred bucks that a higher percentage of men than women would... This is
the model to follow when considering leaving a gay man in charge of a Boy
Scout troop, IMHO.

Finally, I'm totally baffled by your statement that "you are more likely to
find a heterosexual male willing to prey on a teenage boy than you are to
find a homosexual male willing to do the same." In what way would a
HETEROsexual male be likely to prey upon a teenage boy?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:wIt0b.201425$YN5.140717@sccrnsc01...
In what way would a
HETEROsexual male be likely to prey upon a teenage boy?

That would be a pedaphile.

They are sickos that don't think along lines that normal-thinking people do.
That would include GAY normal-thinking people.

Jay Honeck wrote:

There were lots of women at the summer camp I went to when I was a Boy
Scout. For some reason, no funny business ever happened, nor was anyone
worried about mixed-gender leadership. Beyond that, as has been pointed
out
multiple times already, you are more likely to find a heterosexual male
willing to prey on a teenage boy than you are to find a homosexual male
willing to do the same.

I would say the odds of a woman "preying" upon a teenage boy are an order of
magnitude smaller than the reverse example (i.e.: A man preying on a teenage
girl.). According to my wife (a Girl Scout leader, BTW), most women just
ain't wired "that way". (I'll have to take her word for it.)

Didn't hear about that teacher out west then (the one who had a kid by her
middle school student). We had a PE teacher here in VA (female) busted for
fooling around with the boys.



Men, on the other hand, I understand. It would be sheer folly to assume
that a man, left alone with a teenage girl, overnight, wouldn't be tempted.
Would most men ACT on this temptation? No, of course not. But I'd bet you
a hundred bucks that a higher percentage of men than women would... This is
the model to follow when considering leaving a gay man in charge of a Boy
Scout troop, IMHO.

Gee, so men are inherently evil! I knew it, I knew it, I knew it!!!!!! (Yes,
I am joking!)



Finally, I'm totally baffled by your statement that "you are more likely to
find a heterosexual male willing to prey on a teenage boy than you are to
find a homosexual male willing to do the same." In what way would a
HETEROsexual male be likely to prey upon a teenage boy?
-

Because pedophilia isn't necessarily related to gender. Male pedophiles who
prey on little boys might be straight when it comes to normal sex.

Margy

Because pedophilia isn't necessarily related to gender. Male pedophiles
who
prey on little boys might be straight when it comes to normal sex.

Really?

I would submit that any male who is sexually aroused by the same sex -- no
matter what the age -- is NOT "straight". What your are describing, IMHO,
is a bisexual male.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message news:kVv0b.201928$YN5.141200@sccrnsc01...
Because pedophilia isn't necessarily related to gender. Male pedophiles
who
prey on little boys might be straight when it comes to normal sex.

Really?

I would submit that any male who is sexually aroused by the same sex -- no
matter what the age -- is NOT "straight". What your are describing, IMHO,
is a bisexual male.
Someone who is sexually aroused by small girls isn't "straight" either.
What part of molesting small children is an unnatural act (even for homosexuals)
do you have a hard time wrapping your more-rigtht-wing-than-Ronald-Reagan brain
around?

Jay Honeck wrote:

Because pedophilia isn't necessarily related to gender. Male pedophiles
who
prey on little boys might be straight when it comes to normal sex.

Really?

I would submit that any male who is sexually aroused by the same sex -- no
matter what the age -- is NOT "straight". What your are describing, IMHO,
is a bisexual male.


The pedophile is attracted to kids. I think to label a male as gay or bi they
need to be attracted to adult males.

Margy

On Tue, 19 Aug 2003 14:30:04 -0400, Margy Natalie
wrote:

Because pedophilia isn't necessarily related to gender. Male pedophiles who
prey on little boys might be straight when it comes to normal sex.

Um, male pedophiles who prey on little boys, and are "straight"
otherwise, are "bisexuals", aren't they?

I think y'all are splitting hairs, there.

Rob