Adult hetero's avoid sex with teenage girls?
I think the weight of evidence would indicate otherwise...
I think the weight of evidence would indicate otherwise...
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Another Pervert Republican Exposed...
- Thread starter ZZZzzzzzzz
- Start date
Quote from AAAintheBeltway:
So your contention is that adult homo's avoid sex with teen age boys? I think the weight of the eividence would indicate otherwise.
It's already been noted that these were hardly children. They were very mature, savvy high school students. They had to be to get the job. They regarded Foley as creepy, not a threat. No one had sex with him, that we know of.
It seems to me if the Republicans are at fault for letting Foley interact with pages, then liberals need to reconsider their position on gay scoutmasters, gay teachers, gay priests, etc. Of course not all of them will try to take advantage of young boys, but, as liberals love to say, if it saves one child isn't it worth it?
Savvy tactic - turning attention away from the pedophile and into an attack of gays.
First, you have no evidence that shows that gays are more likely to commit crimes. Even if that were true, you still cannot equate all gays with criminals. In this country, homosexual behavior is no longer criminalized. But pedophilia is. That's the difference that you right wingers are trying hard to trivialize.
Second, 16 year old boys are still children, by common sense as well as by legal definition. They're not "mature" as you contend. Pages are not jobs. They're students in a school that is run by the Congress. Now you're trying to shift the blame on the children who were taken advantage of, and due to their young age, may not have the maturity or sense to judge whether Foley's behavior was wrong or simply "creepy."
So you first blame the Democrats, then blame the children. What a bunch of cowards!
Quote from james_bond_3rd:
Savvy tactic - turning attention away from the pedophile and into an attack of gays.
First, you have no evidence that shows that gays are more likely to commit crimes. Even if that were true, you still cannot equate all gays with criminals. In this country, homosexual behavior is no longer criminalized. But pedophilia is. That's the difference that you right wingers are trying hard to trivialize.
Second, 16 year old boys are still children, by common sense as well as by legal definition. They're not "mature" as you contend. Pages are not jobs. They're students in a school that is run by the Congress. Now you're trying to shift the blame on the children who were taken advantage of, and due to their young age, may not have the maturity or sense to judge whether Foley's behavior was wrong or simply "creepy."
So you first blame the Democrats, then blame the children. What a bunch of cowards!
I'm not blaming anyone. I'm asking for consistency and a little common sense, but I know attacking republicans before an election is the agenda. Anyway, I was not at all pleased with how the republican leadership handled this.
Let me ask you though, if they had removed Foley from his Committee Chairmanship and he went to the media and said they did this because I am a gay man, what do you think the fallout would have been? Wouldn't liberals be saying this is an example of republican homophobic discrimination?
Quote from AAAintheBeltway:
I'm not blaming anyone. I'm asking for consistency and a little common sense, but I know attacking republicans before an election is the agenda. Anyway, I was not at all pleased with how the republican leadership handled this.
Let me ask you though, if they had removed Foley from his Committee Chairmanship and he went to the media and said they did this because I am a gay man, what do you think the fallout would have been? Wouldn't liberals be saying this is an example of republican homophobic discrimination?
Since when the Republicans cared about what the liberals would say? If they had properly handled this two years ago, even without revealing the evidence they had at their hands (which would totally discredit any defense Foley would put up and deflect any possible criticism from media), they would not have this disaster today, would have a safe Republican seat in FL, and would have a much better chance at keeping their majority.
They did wrong, so they have only themselves to blame for all the criticism they get now. If we forbid the opposition to point out the problems of the ruling party, then we're no longer a democracy.
Quote from james_bond_3rd:
Since when the Republicans cared about what the liberals would say? If they had properly handled this two years ago, even without revealing the evidence they had at their hands (which would totally discredit any defense Foley would put up and deflect any possible criticism from media), they would not have this disaster today, would have a safe Republican seat in FL, and would have a much better chance at keeping their majority.
They did wrong, so they have only themselves to blame for all the criticism they get now. If we forbid the opposition to point out the problems of the ruling party, then we're no longer a democracy.
No one is forbidding the opposition pointing this out, nor is anyone defending this guy. Where do you get these red herrings?
I think the leadership screwed up badly here, but I'm not sure it's a very important issue with actual voters. They understand that Foley is one guy and that republicans are far less tolerant of this sort of thing than democrats. In fact, I think it could end up hurting democrats, because average voters will correctly see the gay agenda as creating a climate that encourages this sort of inappropriate behavior.
Quote from james_bond_3rd:
Which one of them was convicted in a court of law?
Why are you still defending a pedophile? "Family value" my ass!
What do you see in my statement as a defense of pedophilia? Or supporting "family values"? I think you let your emotions get ahead of your thinking, which is par for liberals. All emotion, no intelect.
Where have you been? They've been blaming Democrats for this since the story broke. And they've been "shocked" at Democrat's "intolerance" to a gay congressman.Quote from AAAintheBeltway:
No one is forbidding the opposition pointing this out, nor is anyone defending this guy. Where do you get these red herrings?
Although I disagree with you, I think this is the first meaningful contribution from the right wingers on this board since the discussion began.Quote from AAAintheBeltway:
I think the leadership screwed up badly here, but I'm not sure it's a very important issue with actual voters. They understand that Foley is one guy and that republicans are far less tolerant of this sort of thing than democrats. In fact, I think it could end up hurting democrats, because average voters will correctly see the gay agenda as creating a climate that encourages this sort of inappropriate behavior.
The net effect of this Foley thing will end up helping the Republicans. The average people I hear are saying. Gee! Clinton didn't resign. Jefferson didn't resign. Studds didn't resign. Franks didn't resign. Reynolds didn't resign. At least Foley did. Besides my Congressman wasn't involved. So do I vote for homeland security and continued lower taxes or 24/7 sex like in the Clinton years? Guess which one wins that contest.
Besides this insulates any Republican making last minute charges against a Democrat. ie. The sting tape of Murtha and the NY DA charging phone sex on his government credit card. Plus lots more to come.
Besides this insulates any Republican making last minute charges against a Democrat. ie. The sting tape of Murtha and the NY DA charging phone sex on his government credit card. Plus lots more to come.