all 30 comments

[–]ActuallyNot[S] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (10 children)

Remember who is abusing kids when these "people" are pushing for "religious freedom" to discriminate against the LGBT community.

And know that the reason behind the anti abortion laws is to produce a poorly-parented group of victims to meet their disgusting needs.

[–]Vulptex 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

Only in such a polarized time as this would people think that only one side ever diddles kids. I hear about pastors and troons being pedophiles at about the same frequency. An anti-LGBT Christian group engaging in it doesn't prove that the LGBT community doesn't, any more than Stalin killing millions of people proves that Hitler did not.

[–]ActuallyNot[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

Only in such a polarized time as this would people think that only one side ever diddles kids.

The LGBT community doesn't cover up the guilty. Only Christians do that.

[–]Vulptex 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

They don't? They literally act like LGBT people can do no wrong, and any criticism of them at all is homophobia or transphobia. They both try to say they're spotless.

[–]ActuallyNot[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Okay. Give me an example of the LGBT community covering up child abuse.

You know there's thousands of various churches doing that. Tens of thousands if you count victims.

[–]Alienhunter 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

https://nypost.com/2023/01/20/couple-pimped-their-adopted-sons-out-to-pedophile-ring-report/

https://www.nambla.org/

Rarely does the larger "LGBTQ" community, as they don't really have institutions, cover up child abuse (unless we start counting government scandles)

It happens though. And groups like Nambla openly call for legalized child abuse. Most gay people won't accept them but it's an element of the movement that like it or not hangs on.

The church also has problems. But looking at the picture here when your church looks more like a stadium than a house of worship I assume the thing they worship is money.

[–]ActuallyNot[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Who are you claiming covered up that abuse?

[–]Alienhunter 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Whomever knew about it before it went public.

The abusers, in the case of the gay pimps pimping out their adopted children, the clients as well.

Where are they finding the clients?

[–]ActuallyNot[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The abusers, in the case of the gay pimps pimping out their adopted children, the clients as well.

That's not a cover up. That's the people involved not being caught yet.

A cover up is like in the OP where the "International Churches of Christ leaders failed to report as well as plotted to conceal abuse of women and children".

Where are they finding the clients?

Locally, according to your press article.

[–]Vulptex 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

LGBT people are much more likely to molest kids. Yet they insist that NONE of them ever do so. Not one. They need to at least admit to their failings and do something about it instead of ignoring them.

[–]ActuallyNot[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

LGBT people are much more likely to molest kids.

Than Christians?

You'll have to show me your data on that.

I quick glance at the literature suggests not: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8008535/

But religious people are more likely to be sex offenders, and the more religious, the more victims, the younger victims, and more convictions for sex offences: https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/religious-affiliations-among-adult-sexual-offenders

[–]Godknight 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (18 children)

Aaaaah, so when Christians do it it's a problem?

50% of black babies dying in the womb isn't child abuse. Sterilizing and mutilating children isn't abuse. No, let's zoom in on the Christian community to see what anomalies we can find there.

Jane's Revenge? What's that? Antifa? BLM? CDC? Phizer?

Nah let's demonize these fake Christians that everybody already hates.

The Guardian, everybody.

Continue...

[–]ActuallyNot[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (17 children)

Aaaaah, so when Christians do it it's a problem?

Of course. How would covering up sexual abuse of minors not be a problem?

50% of black babies dying in the womb isn't child abuse.

Most babies die in the womb, if you count prior to 12 weeks.

Call it abuse if you want, but its normal, unavoidable, not sexual abuse an not being covered up.

Sterilizing and mutilating children isn't abuse.

Would be if it was happening.

No, let's zoom in on the Christian community to see what anomalies we can find there.

When Christianity is operating as a child abuse ring is needs to be called out. Because sexual abuse of children is bad, and we should know about it and act against it.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (15 children)

I've seen accounts on Reddit saying the same thing you are...shill accounts. Make it about Christians and turn the tables when people claim LGBTQ grooms, which they have and do. you my friend should go back.

[–]ActuallyNot[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (14 children)

I've seen accounts on Reddit saying the same thing you are...shill accounts.

Saying what? That covering up sexual abuse is a problem, or that most babies die in the womb if you count prior to 12 weeks?

Make it about Christians and turn the tables when people claim LGBTQ groom

If that's what the evidence shows, then isn't it the opposite? Christians trying to turn the tables and blame the LGBTQ community when it is them that sexually abuse children?

There are studies that show that religiosity predicts child molestation. Religious Affiliations Among Adult Sexual Offenders

religiosity was linked to a higher number of sex offense victims and more convictions for sex offenses. Those sex offenders who reported regular church attendance, a belief in supernatural punishment, and religion as important in their daily lives had more known victims, younger victims, and more convictions for sex offenses than the sex offenders who reported irregular or no church attendance and no or less intense allegiance to religious beliefs and practices.

And there's a stack of literature that shows that LGBTQ are not more likely to molest children than the general population.

For example: Are children at risk for sexual abuse by homosexuals?

which they have and do.

Granted they do. But the do at a rate similar to the cis population, whereas religious people to it more.

[–]UbiquitousCultOfSelf 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (9 children)

Not OP, but really, what the genuine cluck? lol
An NIH government study for a source? They couldn't be biased!
And to claim that Christians and the LGTBQ+ community have similar rates of minor abuse?
It honestly flies in the face of logic.

Try this. Which of the two has "pride" displays and trans-sexual crossdressers featuring children in sexually explicit compromising exploitative roles in their marches, front and center?
Yes, the group that features abominations as 'normal'

When society takes away the reason for sexuality (Pro-creation) and makes it all about the libido and lustfulness aspect, then perversions are the norm and nothing is too taboo.

Society and American society has been accused of repressing sexuality under Elizabethan and puritanical values, and the LGBTQ+ community feeds off that pendulum swing to the opposite direction.
Again, absent of the natural course of a man with a woman for the reason of procreation and fun, you just have poopoo on your peepee and that's just flat out revolting to everyone normal, let's be honest.
Abomination.

[–]ActuallyNot[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

Not OP, but really, what the genuine cluck? lol An NIH government study for a source? They couldn't be biased!

You may be responding to the wrong comment.

I linked to two papers. The first author's affiliations of the first is School of Criminology and Criminal Justice, Griffith University; and of the second is Kempe Children's Center, Department of Pediatrics, University of Colorado Health Sciences Center, Denver.

Neither is an NIH government study.

But you don't make clear why you think a government study would be biased.

And to claim that Christians and the LGTBQ+ community have similar rates of minor abuse? It honestly flies in the face of logic.

That's right. LGBTQ+ are the same as the community at large. Christians are worse.

Which of the two has "pride" displays and trans-sexual crossdressers featuring children in sexually explicit compromising exploitative roles in their marches, front and center?

Neither.

Try this: which has an exploitative power structure backed by the threat of hell, and teaches that the blame for sins is external, and everything can be forgiven?

[–]UbiquitousCultOfSelf 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

Not OP, but really, what the genuine cluck? lol An NIH government study for a source? They couldn't be biased!

You may be responding to the wrong comment.

I linked to two papers. The first author's affiliations of the first is School of Criminology and Criminal Justice, Griffith University; and of the second is Kempe Children's Center, Department of Pediatrics, University of Colorado Health Sciences Center, Denver.

Neither is an NIH government study.

Right, but you did because I wasn't limiting what I replied to to your OP. You did so in the comments

For example: Are children at risk for sexual abuse by homosexuals? > https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8008535/

But you don't make clear why you think a government study would be biased.

That would be like asking me to explain to you why Nabisco Oreos and Starbucks are biased supporting pride parades.
The answer to both of those would be, constituency/consumers/lobbyists. The FDA/USDA has provably bad science because they were bought by "big aggra" / big sugar. Scientific studies and experiments should be done without bias, therefore there's the control group and the experiment. If the litmus test is faulty, the results will be skewed. Right?

And to claim that Christians and the LGTBQ+ community have similar rates of minor abuse? It honestly flies in the face of logic.

That's right. LGBTQ+ are the same as the community at large. Christians are worse.

So incredibly incorrect. Christians have a guide book, a rule set and a moral compass in the form of the Bible and "Jesus".
The queer community has the Disney and Sheryl Crow philosophy that if it "it feels good" go with it, it can't be wrong. Go with your inner self.

This is flawed thinking and gives rise to perversions and abominations.
Even evolution states, survival of the fittest. In nature, if you don't procreate you stagnate and die. Therefore in every generation, such types will be rendered feeble and obsolete. They have no capability of replacing and replenishing human stock.

Which of the two has "pride" displays and trans-sexual crossdressers featuring children in sexually explicit compromising exploitative roles in their marches, front and center?

Neither.

I don't understand your one word answer. The pride parades are synonymous with LGBT, etc. And yes, such things have indeed happened.
Not to mention the push by affiliate groups to de-criminalize pedos. They have lobby groups doing such.
Not so with Christians.

Try this: which has an exploitative power structure backed by the threat of hell, and teaches that the blame for sins is external, and everything can be forgiven?

So then, are you claiming it's at the systemic level with Christianity? That's a horrible lie that you'd have to prove.
Post a single piece of literature or any media work pointing to this claim in a favorable light? Or using such methods as you describe.
Otherwise what we have is an individual taking advantage of and preying on the vulnerable. When they are discovered, at least by their fellow believers not involved in the abuse, they are shunned and handed over to authorities.
Catholicism is a different animal. It seeks to protect the "priest class" at all costs. Therefore the Catholic structure is much like the bias inherent in government studies with vested interests.

[–]ActuallyNot[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

You did so in the comments

Which comments?

That would be like asking me to explain to you why Nabisco Oreos and Starbucks are biased supporting pride parades.

Okay, why are they biased?

The pride parades are synonymous with LGBT, etc.

Not exactly

LGBT people have been around throughout history. Pride parades are a recent phenomenon: They're about standing bravely against the recent violence and hatred.

But you also said "trans-sexual crossdressers featuring children in sexually explicit compromising exploitative roles in their marches, front and center". Which doesn't happen.

Not to mention the push by affiliate groups to de-criminalize pedos. They have lobby groups doing such. Not so with Christians.

The Christians are doing more than their fair share of pedophillia. They'll be more involved in attempting to legalize it. They've certainly been influential in seeing up statues of limitations so that the victims can't sue them as adults: https://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/14/us/sex-abuse-statutes-of-limitation-stir-battle.html

So then, are you claiming it's at the systemic level with Christianity?

Isn't that what the paper i linked to shows?

That's a horrible lie that you'd have to prove.

I've offered some proof of mine. What's your proof that the LGBT community are more likely to be pedophiles?

[–]UbiquitousCultOfSelf 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

this will be no less than the third time I quote your own words, so I'm starting to naturally question your cognative uptake. Sorry, I don't mean to, and didn't start off this back and forth that way... but come on!

There are studies that show that religiosity predicts child molestation. Religious Affiliations Among Adult Sexual Offenders

religiosity was linked to a higher number of sex offense victims and more convictions for sex offenses. Those sex offenders who reported regular church attendance, a belief in supernatural punishment, and religion as important in their daily lives had more known victims, younger victims, and more convictions for sex offenses than the sex offenders who reported irregular or no church attendance and no or less intense allegiance to religious beliefs and practices.

And there's a stack of literature that shows that LGBTQ are not more likely to molest children than the general population.

For example: Are children at risk for sexual abuse by homosexuals?

Those bolded links are yours, that you commented to lolz or lulz with and the links were both to gov sites, one being the NIH.

[–]ActuallyNot[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

this will be no less than the third time I quote your own words, so I'm starting to naturally question your cognative uptake. Sorry, I don't mean to, and didn't start off this back and forth that way... but come on!

Please accept my humble apologies. I made the mistake of trying to read your comments with the erroneous assumption that you have a clue. I will try to do better in our future conversations.

Those bolded links are yours, that you commented to lolz or lulz with and the links were both to gov sites, one being the NIH.

The paper "Religious Affiliations Among Adult Sexual Offenders" was written by Donna Eshuys of the School of Criminology and Criminal Justice, Griffith University, Queensland, 4001, Australia. It was published in the scholarly journal "Sexual Abuse", which is one of the Sage journals, which is an independent publisher.

Because journals are a money making business, the version of the paper on the publishers site cannot be read unless you have a subscription. So for free, I found you the full paper elsewhere on the web. This is why the link points to a department of justice hosted page. You have confused the hosting of a version of the paper with being associated with the authors or publishers.

I wondered if this might be the case when I copied out the author affiliations for you, but you didn't seem to understand.

Similarly the paper Are children at risk for sexual abuse by homosexuals had the lead author at the Kempe Children's Center, Department of Pediatrics, University of Colorado Health Sciences Center, Denver, and was published in Pediatrics, which is one of the journals of the American Academy of Pediatrics, which is the main professional association of pediatricians in the US. Again it is independent of the government.

Since I found you a link to the whole paper, in this case at a NIH hosted page, you have confused this will affiliation with the NIH. It is not. They just host some papers relevant to their work.

In my defence, the author affiliations and the publishing journal are pretty clear at the links. But perhaps I've made the situation sufficiently clear enough even for you now?

[–]UbiquitousCultOfSelf 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

That would be like asking me to explain to you why Nabisco Oreos and Starbucks are biased supporting pride parades.

Okay, why are they biased?

Why are companies that suddenly care about pride biased? Because they (such companies) sense that if you offend this demographic or those who mistakenly think that "I don't care what people do behind closed doors in the privacy of their own homes", their profit margins will be dramatically decreased.
In other words, money is their motivator.

The pride parades are synonymous with LGBT, etc.

Not exactly LGBT people have been around throughout history. Pride parades are a recent phenomenon: They're about standing bravely against the recent violence and hatred.

Here we have a disconnect. You may have had a point if you had cited demonstrations of the past where they chanted "Here, queer, deal with it" or some such as fully clothed hopefully productive members of society.

Pride parades are nothing as you describe them. They are a, you don't like what I do? I am going to shove it in your face. So every corner of their perversion, yes, takes center stage. You'd be lying if you said otherwise.
There are condoms and candy thrown out, leather bdsm displays, drag shows, on and on.
These are not things happening privately in a bedroom, they are on full display and that was my sub-point.

But you also said "trans-sexual crossdressers featuring children in sexually explicit compromising exploitative roles in their marches, front and center". Which doesn't happen.

It absolutely does. Just as for trans people, it's not enough if people were to leave them alone, they say it's transphobic if a straight man doesn't date them. They don't care if they "pass" and are left alone, they want proof in that, "would you date a trans person?" Most people would answer, hell no!

Not to mention the push by affiliate groups to de-criminalize pedos. They have lobby groups doing such. Not so with Christians.

The Christians are doing more than their fair share of pedophillia. They'll be more involved in attempting to legalize it. They've certainly been influential in seeing up statues of limitations so that the victims can't sue them as adults: https://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/14/us/sex-abuse-statutes-of-limitation-stir-battle.html

This is misdirection. Equating decriminalization with statute of limitation is disingenuous.
One says it shouldn't be a crime, the other acknowledges it is criminal but states that--for example, it's a 20 year old crime, they should face charges as if it happened yesterday.
I would say, of course they deserve to be punished. Could they have made changes during that time to combat their criminal deviancy? Perhaps, but they still deserve punishment and/or recompense to the victims.

There's a push to let "non offending" pedos off the hook, but honestly it's a time bomb waiting to explode and cause damage.

So then, are you claiming it's at the systemic level with Christianity?

Isn't that what the paper i linked to shows?

Possibly? Is it you tell me. If it does it's garbage and not worth any moneys paid.
Any study that relies on self reporting, like polls and statistics is junk.

That's a horrible lie that you'd have to prove.

I've offered some proof of mine. What's your proof that the LGBT community are more likely to be pedophiles?

I think it boils down to innate biases. You seem biased against Christianity or maybe catholicism, and I have my bias against deviancy and fetishes that normalize things like fudge packing.
If you were to say though that built into Christianity was a systemic habit of abusing minors you'd have to take that from an accepted source like the Bible, when in fact there's absolute proof to the opposite of your claim. Jesus stating that better a millstone be tied around an offender's neck and they be thrown into the sea than they offend a child. Take that for what you will, but historically Christians have used this to condemn in the strongest terms pedo behavior.

Do perverts hide in individual homes professing X-ianity? Yes, but that's not inherent in their belief system.
You may as well, at that point, accuse hetero fathers of being inherently pedo. It's not a battle you'd win.

[–]ActuallyNot[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Because they (such companies) sense that if you offend this demographic or those who mistakenly think that "I don't care what people do behind closed doors in the privacy of their own homes", their profit margins will be dramatically decreased.

I would've thought that the companies are run by good loving people. They worry about the hate that is rained on minorities by the christian-influenced groups. And they know that as they demonstrate acceptance it reinforces a social standard of tolerance, which in turn reduces the bullying, discrimination, beatings and murders of the minorities. So they do it because it is the right thing to do.

But what's your best evidence that they're doing it for the profit?

They are a, you don't like what I do? I am going to shove it in your face.

This isn't about pedophilia. This is about adults and freedom of speech.

It sounds link you just need to move your face on one day a year.

There are condoms and candy thrown out, leather bdsm displays, drag shows, on and on.

Condoms are good. They stop you getting diseases and pregnant. I suggest that don't take your young children to such an event: It's not age appropriate.

Just as for trans people, it's not enough if people were to leave them alone, they say it's transphobic if a straight man doesn't date them.

All of them? You'll need to provide some proof that this is the most common position.

This is misdirection. Equating decriminalization with statute of limitation is disingenuous.

They're working on it. You gave no evidence at all of LGBT working on decriminalisation.

Would you please do that?

Possibly? Is it you tell me.

Okay: Yes it does.

I think it boils down to innate biases.

No, show me some research. "Judge a tree by the fruit it bears", Matthew 7:20

If the LGBT community aren't associated with pedophillia, which is what the research shows, then you really shouldn't be bearing false witness against them, if you were a decent christian.

Big if. There are very few such things. Hatred seems to be part of their doctrine.

[–]Godknight 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

God bless you, and may He have mercy on your soul.

[–]ActuallyNot[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

... thanks, I guess ...

Flying Spaghetti Monster bless you too, and may He touch you with his noodly appendage.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

re-read my original comment.

[–]ActuallyNot[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I've re-read it and my questions are largely the same:

I've seen accounts on Reddit saying the same thing you are

Saying what?

That covering up sexual abuse is a problem, or that most babies die in the womb if you count prior to 12 weeks?

Make it about Christians and turn the tables when people claim LGBTQ grooms

That's the wrong way around though, isn't it. You're blaming a problem that is related to religiosity on LGBTQ people, who are no more likely to be child molesters than the general public.

you my friend should go back.

Your opinion is noted. The fact that it doesn't seem to be based in reality is also noted.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

You're doing same thing as happened to me on reddit: look at all these Christian church abusers. Take the eye off of LGBT and put it on these Christians over here. You have an agenda. Nope. You will not get away with minimizing the rainbow crowd's participation.

https://reduxx.info/

[–]ActuallyNot[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You're doing same thing as happened to me on reddit: look at all these Christian church abusers.

Do you look at them?

Take the eye off of LGBT and put it on these Christians over here.

Did you read that paper I linked to?

You appear to disagree with the finding: "Using the data from our study, the 95% confidence limits, of the risk children would identify recognizably homosexual adults as the potential abuser, are from 0% to 3.1%. These limits are within current estimates of the prevalence of homosexuality in the general community."

On what basis?

You have an agenda.

Yes. I value the truth.

You will not get away with minimizing the rainbow crowd's participation.

The facts seem to be that they don't have more "participation" than the public in general.

Do you think that you should get away with minimizing the church crowd's "participation"?

[–]Godknight 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

🧢