--- Eternitytime1@xxxxxxx wrote: > Here is the official site of the North American > Man/Boy Love Association. I knew of NAMBLA: >>>>Thus by the mid-1980s, NAMBLA was virtually alone in its positions and found itself politically isolated. Gay rights organizations, burdened by accusations of child recruitment and child abuse, had abandoned the radicalism of their early years and had "retreat[ed] from the idea of a more inclusive politics,"[14] opting instead to appeal more to the mainstream. Support for "groups perceived as being on the fringe of the gay community," such as NAMBLA, vanished in the process.[15] Today almost all gay rights groups disavow any ties to NAMBLA, voice disapproval of its objectives, and attempt to prevent NAMBLA from having a role in gay and lesbian rights events.<<<< http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nambla NAMBLA apparently had (wikipedia) 1100 members in 1995 (FBI: it keeps its membership secret). > Having known far too many women and men who have > been abused as children by > pedophiles (both male and female children--), I have > a major problem with the > NAMBLA folk who say that there is no abuse occurring > with a child who is of > the age 14 to 18. But is NAMBLA *in any way* representative of gay and lesbian groups? (No.) Do they support it? (No.) Isn't it rather a small group whose views are given publicity precisely because they are extreme? (Yes.) Should gays and lesbians be expected to distance themselves even further from NAMBLA than they already have? (Presumably not.) Age of consent laws of course vary by US State and also vary across Europe, and discussion of a lowering of the age of consent is not in itself nefarious. (NAMBLA is a different matter.) > Discussion on the main scouting site which deals > with political and social > issues has been talking about the new report that is > supposed to be released > from Sweden shortly. It is reportedly going to be a > major report [I've heard > nothing about it except on the scouting websites > which have forums devoted to > scouting topics]--and is going to state that > homosexuality is definitely > inborn. The thinking is that this is going to > radically change a lot of > viewpoint in regards to allowing gay folk into BSA. > The biggest problem is that > NAMBLA argues against the inborn nature--and [it > seems] states that they are a > gay organization. I got it -- that they call themselves gay. But the issue is whether other gays (assuming the NAMBLA people are gay as well as "boy-lovers") think so. While it was promising to see the > links you posted which DO > state the differences and that do disassociated > themselves from it, they have > not done a very good job (at least in this area) of > doing so. What people believe in your locality despite the disclaimers of gay groups who do not support NAMBLA is not, I suggest to you, the fault of gay groups. > Whose job is it to monitor who says they are 'gay' > or not? I don't know. It is not anybody's job. > It does seem that NAMBLA considers itself a gay > organization- *So*? > It is this group which has caused a lot of the > confusion in the typical > heterosexual protective parent type. Then the TPPT should be shown the wikipedia piece, and other relevant data. (It took me *seconds* to find the UK +NZ pieces; it's a lot harder to find the US ones because masses of Family Council -- or whatever it's called -- garbage crowds them out.) They cloud the > issue. I believe that they > keep a lot of dialogue from occurring because people > simply point to what they > say (ie that homosexuality is a cultural/social > action and not inborn) I have no problem, and never have had, with the notion that homosexuality is not inborn (I accept that most gays now prefer to believe it is). and can > then say that the first step towards legitimizing > sex with a kid ages 14 to > 18, is to legalize/legitimize things like gay > marriage, etc. The US is a very homophobic place compared with various other countries (this one is, survey data suggests, the least so). Even so the notion that legalizing gay marriages leads to paedophilia is *crazy*. These people need to be taught about paedophilia or their children will get abused while they're busy neuroticising about gays. > it. I do NOT think that is what is really > happening--but because I can see > the fear and understand where it is coming from and > who is feeding it--well, > I can (hopefully) do something about it. and you could also tell them that NAMBLA is not a representative gay organization.... > Is this a fringe group or > not? I think I have shown -- by means of a quick Google -- that NAMBLA is rather more than simply "fringe", it is minute. Would legitimizing gay marriage/families/etc > open the door for their > viewpoint to become legit? Nope. (Unless the US differs radically from the countries that have legalised gay marriages or civil partnerships.) Nor do I see why it should. > NAMBLA portrays as being fine.) But, the 'fear' is > that by legitimizing the one, > the other will become the next item on the But why? (I ask because I don't remember any opponents of gay civil partnerships here raising that issue.) Judy Evans, Cardiff ___________________________________________________________ To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! Security Centre. http://uk.security.yahoo.com ------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html