Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
(March 21, 2015 at 8:06 pm)Spooky Wrote: I will add that "Sex Offenses" aren't necessarily committed only by adults. Also, all (every single one of them) of the homosexual or bisexual men that I know, have no attraction to minors.
However, I don't think Huggy was attempting to make the connection that gay people are necessarily pedophiles, I think he was pointing out- no less fallaciously- that because some atheists defended Harvey Milk for having an underage boyfriend, therefore that somehow makes us hypocrites because we're atheists too, and because of that must have the same opinions as those atheists.
Fair enough. Guilt by association. Seems like standard christian MO.
(March 21, 2015 at 8:00 pm)NuclearJaguar Wrote: To be honest, I wouldn't describe a pedophile as "straight" or "gay" based on the child's sex. It's not "gay", it's just perverted. Gay men are attracted to masculine characteristics found in adult males (facial features, body shape, hair, not found in young boys), not interested in hairless feminine little boys
Be careful how you throw around "the gay person" when discussing pedophilia. And if you insist on attaching adult sexuality to it, remember the overwhelming majority of sex offenses are committed against women and young girls, by men.
Harvey Milk WAS gay, that's a fact.
(March 21, 2015 at 8:10 pm)Esquilax Wrote: However, I don't think Huggy was attempting to make the connection that gay people are necessarily pedophiles, I think he was pointing out- no less fallaciously- that because some atheists defended Harvey Milk for having an underage boyfriend, therefore that somehow makes us hypocrites because we're atheists too, and because of that must have the same opinions as those atheists.
(May 31, 2014 at 10:59 am)Esquilax Wrote: 16 is the age of consent where I am. Bit shaky, but I don't find this particularly objectionable on its own, and certainly not enough to label the guy a pedophile. Seems like classic theistic stretching beyond their means to me.
Would you be fine with a straight man in his 30's having sexual relations with a 16 year girl....
(March 21, 2015 at 8:16 pm)Spooky Wrote: Fair enough. Guilt by association. Seems like standard christian MO.
I'm talking about a few members of this forum, I don't believe you were part of the conversation however.
(March 21, 2015 at 9:04 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: Would you be fine with a straight man in his 30's having sexual relations with a 16 year girl....
It's legal in most parts of the world. So what's your point again? In fact when being a teenager myself, I knew a 16 year old girl having a 37 year old boyfriend. Hated him, but that's because she was lost to us.
March 21, 2015 at 9:09 pm (This post was last modified: March 21, 2015 at 9:39 pm by Regina.)
(March 21, 2015 at 9:04 pm)Huggy74 Wrote:
(March 21, 2015 at 8:00 pm)NuclearJaguar Wrote: To be honest, I wouldn't describe a pedophile as "straight" or "gay" based on the child's sex. It's not "gay", it's just perverted. Gay men are attracted to masculine characteristics found in adult males (facial features, body shape, hair, not found in young boys), not interested in hairless feminine little boys
Be careful how you throw around "the gay person" when discussing pedophilia. And if you insist on attaching adult sexuality to it, remember the overwhelming majority of sex offenses are committed against women and young girls, by men.
Harvey Milk WAS gay, that's a fact.
Yes he might have identified as gay, but in that particular instance, the relationship with the child was not.
The only qualifier that determines if you are a "gay man" is that you are a man who is attracted to other adult men. If you are not attracted to other adult men, then you are not a gay man regardless of whether you identify as one or not. That's not "no true scotsman" mentality before anyone says it is, that's how it actually is.
"Adulthood is like looking both ways before you cross the road, and then getting hit by an airplane"- sarcasm_only
"Ironically like the nativist far-Right, which despises multiculturalism, but benefits from its ideas of difference to scapegoat the other and to promote its own white identity politics; these postmodernists, leftists, feminists and liberals also use multiculturalism, to side with the oppressor, by demanding respect and tolerance for oppression characterised as 'difference', no matter how intolerable."- Maryam Namazie
(March 21, 2015 at 8:00 pm)NuclearJaguar Wrote: To be honest, I wouldn't describe a pedophile as "straight" or "gay" based on the child's sex. It's not "gay", it's just perverted. Gay men are attracted to masculine characteristics found in adult males (facial features, body shape, hair, not found in young boys), not interested in hairless feminine little boys
Be careful how you throw around "the gay person" when discussing pedophilia. And if you insist on attaching adult sexuality to it, remember the overwhelming majority of sex offenses are committed against women and young girls, by men.
Harvey Milk WAS gay, that's a fact.
(March 21, 2015 at 8:10 pm)Esquilax Wrote: However, I don't think Huggy was attempting to make the connection that gay people are necessarily pedophiles, I think he was pointing out- no less fallaciously- that because some atheists defended Harvey Milk for having an underage boyfriend, therefore that somehow makes us hypocrites because we're atheists too, and because of that must have the same opinions as those atheists.
(May 31, 2014 at 10:59 am)Esquilax Wrote: 16 is the age of consent where I am. Bit shaky, but I don't find this particularly objectionable on its own, and certainly not enough to label the guy a pedophile. Seems like classic theistic stretching beyond their means to me.
Would you be fine with a straight man in his 30's having sexual relations with a 16 year girl....
(March 21, 2015 at 8:16 pm)Spooky Wrote: Fair enough. Guilt by association. Seems like standard christian MO.
I'm talking about a few members of this forum, I don't believe you were part of the conversation however.
Just finished reading that thread. Nope. Wasn't part of that conversation. (Didn't know I had to be). What appears to be the case here, is we have proven, documented and consistent cases of "Pedophilia" in christianity (basis for thread), and you have nothing to prove otherwise. So instead of defending your delusion, you're displacing, i.e, trying to turn the conversation around on Atheism. And you're quite unsuccessfully trying using only one example of suspected Pedophilia.
I strongly suspect you've never actually met a Pedophile. Well I have. If you read my bio, in addition to my degree in Psychology, I spent a little over 2 years working with convicted sex offenders. Attraction to a person who is 16 (regardless of gender or your sexual orientation) doesn't necessarily mean pedophiliac tendency.
Your religion is sinking, and you're bailing with a dixie cup.
March 21, 2015 at 9:48 pm (This post was last modified: March 21, 2015 at 9:55 pm by SteelCurtain.)
Since you are so fond of definitions, Huggy, I'll throw this one at you:
Wikipedia Wrote:Pedophilia or paedophilia is a psychiatric disorder in which an adult or older adolescent experiences a primary or exclusive sexual attraction to prepubescent children, generally age 11 years or younger.[1][2] As a medical diagnosis, specific criteria for the disorder extend the cut-off point for prepubescence to age 13.
If anything, we are talking about an ephebophile in Milk, not a pedophile. When we are talking about pedophile priests, we are talking about men who molested pre-pubescent or pubescent boys. There were ephebophilic and hebephilic priests as well. In my opinion, there is a distinction of degree here. If you molest a 10 year old, I think differently of that crime than a person who has sex with a 16-18 year old. I still think it's awful for a 30+ year old to take advantage of a teenager, but I do think it's different. There are reasons the law treats these crimes differently as well.
Now, I don't say any of this to excuse Milk's actions. The age of consent in California at the time was 18, what he did was illegal. He had a history of taking advantage of teenagers with substance abuse problems. That made him a predator in my book. I would say the same of a straight man who did the same to teenage girls. His homosexuality had nothing to do with it. He was privately not so good a person.
It is difficult to separate the two, but he still did amazing things for society. That cannot be taken away. Some of his actions deserve to be celebrated.
"There remain four irreducible objections to religious faith: that it wholly misrepresents the origins of man and the cosmos, that because of this original error it manages to combine the maximum servility with the maximum of solipsism, that it is both the result and the cause of dangerous sexual repression, and that it is ultimately grounded on wish-thinking." ~Christopher Hitchens, god is not Great
PM me your email address to join the Slack chat! I'll give you a taco(or five) if you join!--->There's an app and everything!<---
Sex with a 16 year old is legal in most western countries. H. Milk's boyfriend was 16 when they started their relationship, so why even humor the moronic troll, who's simply trying to derail the conversation, when he clearly has no arguments relating to the topic at hand?
"The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one." - George Bernard Shaw
March 21, 2015 at 9:50 pm (This post was last modified: March 21, 2015 at 10:07 pm by Huggy Bear.)
(March 21, 2015 at 9:08 pm)abaris Wrote:
(March 21, 2015 at 9:04 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: Would you be fine with a straight man in his 30's having sexual relations with a 16 year girl....
It's legal in most parts of the world. So what's your point again? In fact when being a teenager myself, I knew a 16 year old girl having a 37 year old boyfriend. Hated him, but that's because she was lost to us.
except it wasn't legal in milk's case
My point is, apparently (as your post would indicate) you're ok, with adults sleeping with underage kids if legal correct? Age of consent is 12 in Mexico.
I think you know where i'm going....
(March 21, 2015 at 9:48 pm)Homeless Nutter Wrote: Sex with a 16 year old is legal in most western countries. H. Milk's boyfriend was 16 when they started their relationship, so why even humor the moronic troll, who's simply trying to derail the conversation, when he clearly has no arguments relating to the topic at hand?
lol, it would seem that every action i take is considered "trolling"...
This IS related to the topic, you're ok with adults having relations with underage girls if it's legal, except when it comes to the Bible.
Hypocrite
Besides, there is no mention of the age of the girls in relation to the Bible, the guy in the video just throws out "9 years old" for shock value.
(March 21, 2015 at 10:21 am)Huggy74 Wrote: The Ironic thing is, When the fact surfaced that Harvey Milk was having sexual relations with an underage boy, many "atheists" came to Milk's defense, explain that one.
It would seem you guys make exceptions for gays.
I just have to make the statement, because it appears no one else did, though I do remember the thread and discussion being mentioned and I know it was brought up there what I am going to reiterate.
There is a huge difference between sixteen, Milk's lover, and eight, the prey of sick priests.
Not everyone is the same, of course, and I am not stating that it is perfectly fine for all sixteen year old individuals to have sexual relations with adults, but I do believe there is an unnecessary stigma associated with a two year age difference. Personally, I was no different at eighteen than I was at sixteen. The only difference was that society was only willing to slap the adult label on me at eighteen.
"Never trust a fox. Looks like a dog, behaves like a cat."
~ Erin Hunter
(March 21, 2015 at 10:06 pm)Sionnach Wrote: I just have to make the statement, because it appears no one else did, though I do remember the thread and discussion being mentioned and I know it was brought up there what I am going to reiterate.
There is a huge difference between sixteen, Milk's lover, and eight, the prey of sick priests.
Not everyone is the same, of course, and I am not stating that it is perfectly fine for all sixteen year old individuals to have sexual relations with adults, but I do believe there is an unnecessary stigma associated with a two year age difference. Personally, I was no different at eighteen than I was at sixteen. The only difference was that society was only willing to slap the adult label on me at eighteen.
Quote:Their relationship was troubled. When McKinley first began his relationship with Milk in late 1964, he was 16 years old, and therefore legally underage, though Milk recorded him as 18 in his address book. He was prone to depression and sometimes threatened to commit suicide if Milk did not show him enough attention.
He actually did end up committing suicide later...
![[Image: Bumper+Sticker+-+Asheville+-+Praise+Dog3.JPG]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=1.bp.blogspot.com%2F-d-3rfdI7nG0%2FTerwtFyFXoI%2FAAAAAAAACak%2F7kFSmHeVrng%2Fs320%2FBumper%2BSticker%2B-%2BAsheville%2B-%2BPraise%2BDog3.JPG)
