G from AlaOppressionBama
To clarify exactly, I am not intending to insult or demean any individual.
I mean exactly what I wrote on the other subjects.
I did not precisely advocate for age of consent changes, as you mistakenly state. But, it is clear they are what they are for the benefit of making criminals out of persons engaging in victimless and consensual relationships.
If someone genuinely harms and victimizes a ‘child,’ well, we already have laws that pertain to harm and victimization realities, regardless of ages. Why would age difference have any special significance? Why, because we have a mistaken society wide belief that children are ‘special’ or innately innocent, and they are not. Children know how to lie and manipulate and connive AND they volunteer and are interested in learning about their bodies. They are happy to have friendly guidance from an adult sometimes. My main point here is that simply because sex contact happens, it is not necessarily creating in reality a victim that has suffered harm or injury.
In case you’re curious, I’ve never had nor do I want anything personally to do with children. My ‘sex’ crime did not involve a child. It is a non-contact misdemeanor and the alleged ‘victim’ was an adult male. It was a crazy misunderstanding between neighbors.
The laws of long ago had homosex behavior as illegal – the original reference was in reply to Jeremy’s reference of 70s and 80s – an era preceding the law changes that have us in the present homosex permissive culture.
I do not believe the statistics and percentages you cite are bona fide, irrefutable, or unbiased, purely-scientifically collected data. Most likely it is skewed and manipulated data. Many, many studies and polls could be cited, but only those done by reputable pollsters using unbiased methods are reliable.
Normal male sexual behavior is adult heterosex. That is what reproduces. That is what fathers are. Homosex is inherently self destructive and non-reproductive. If someone wants to lead a life of homosex behavior, as several of my relatives do, that is their private business.
To reiterate, my main point is how is RSOL going to want to portray itself in a public relations way? Like I wrote, we want press about RSOL and any contact the uninitiated public has with RSOL to be positive and to come across as a group that has the better interest of civil and human rights for all in mind. Better, of course, than the proponents of registries and strict laws based upon fear-mongering, myth and conjecture.
I spoke with several RSOL members at the Atlanta conference and I found the consensus does agree with my previous assertions. The desire of identification with the lgbtq advocates is not shared by most of those I asked. Of course, that was just me asking, nothing scientific about that. I was posting here being a voice for those I did speak with. Maybe RSOL should have a broader mission statement that clearly defines their position on this specific issue, and other issues as well??