Following your reasoning, men who abuse young girls are "motivated by heterosexual underpinnings"?... no, it's called pedophilia and has nothing to do with hetero or homosexual issues
So what is your reasoning? Your kind of logic is used to justify the exposure of openly homosexual individuals to young boys which I contend is dangerous using the same reasoning as why I shouldn't be placed in charge of a high school girls gym class - too much temptation. I'm sorry post-it, but I strongly disagree with your assertion that pedophilia and homosexuality are different.
Both are forms of deviancy and condemned by traditional Judeo-Christian theology. It is significant that a statistically higher proportion of males not only abuse children but abuse male children. Since there are statistical weights recognized in relation to the number of males vs. females who are the victims of sexaul abuse with the skew occuring toward the male group then the inference can be made that the behaviors motivating the acts are unique and as such male and female sexual abuse can be classified differently. If your assertions that pedophilia is a homogenous phenomenon then one should hypothesize that there would be no significantly different statistical weighting skewed toward either group. In other words the smapling numbers of abuse victims with respect to sex would be equally weighted or a classic bell curve. But that is not the case as studies have shown that, as previously stated, it appears more males are the vitims of sexual abuse and with males being the abuser.
Websters dictionary defines homosexuality as:
Main Entry: 1ho·mo·sex·u·al
Pronunciation: "hO-m&-'sek-sh(&-)w&l, -'sek-sh&l
Function: adjective
Date: 1892
1 : of, relating to, or characterized by a tendency to direct sexual desire toward another of the same sex
2 : of, relating to, or involving sexual intercourse between persons of the same sex
- ho·mo·sex·u·al·ly adverb
By definition then sexual abuse by a person of the same sex does indeed fit the description of someone who is classified as a homosexual.
In comparison recent studies suggest that males tend to be more predisposed to adhering to same sex attraction, or the purest(no irony intended)definition of what constitutes a homosexual as opposed to females who are much more likely to drift back and forth between hetero and homo relationships.
So in lieu of these findings I propose that a relationship does exist between a person's sexual orientation and a predisposition to abuse male children and that relationship is:
1. Most sexual abuse is committed by male perpetrators, more victims of sexual abuse are male, and of this group the greatest number are abused by male adults.
2. Since most sexual abuse occuring involves same sex encounters these encounters therefore can be classified as homosexual owing to the fact that the sheer discrepancy in the weights as previously noted makes them unique.
Of course more research needs to be done to clarify grey areas but your assertion that no relationship exists between a person's sexual orientation and predisposition toward pedophilia lacks any support owing to the statistical evidence of previous studies in human sexual deviancy.
Aside from science, homosexuality is clearly condemned by scripture and if you are pro-gay then you are anti-Christ just as if you are pro any sin you would be classified as the same. The currentt contention over this issue stems from the fact that it is the foremost counter-christian behavior that churches are being politically pressured to accept.
</font>[/QUOTE]no you are wrong, i believe dr bob is showing the difference in how many are bombarded from the media, and the implication is made that homosexuals are innocent in all respects and that they are considered martyrd to become some sort of little angel in heaven. i believe dr bob is showing that shepard, though wrongly killed was a sinner and even though he being a promiscuous sodomite was in fact a sinner with a horrid abominable practice.