Harvey Weinstein: Another Good Liberal...

[rogue06]

Those are the facts. Given those facts, their expulsion of NAMBLA is suspect. Also the fact that only 88% of the membership reportedly voted for expulsion. Apparently 12% were opposed. Why wasn't it 100%, and why wait until it was demanded from outside?

12% stood fast beside their decade long allies even with the offer of international recognition and respectability being waved under their nose.

[Cow Poke]

Facts about Homosexuality and Child Molestation. Prof. Gregory Herek, Ph.D. Social Psychology, UC Davis, 1983 http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/people/gmherek

Conclusion: "The empirical research does not show that gay or bisexual men are any more likely than heterosexual men to molest children. This is not to argue that homosexual and bisexual men never molest children. But there is no scientific basis for asserting that they are more likely than heterosexual men to do so. And, as explained above, many child molesters cannot be characterized as having an adult sexual orientation at all; they are fixated on children".

http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbo...lestation.html

From that same link....

One problem is that none of the studies in this area have obtained data from a probability sample, that is, a sample that can be assumed to be representative of the population of all child molesters. Rather, most research has been conducted only with convicted perpetrators or with pedophiles who sought professional help. Consequently, they may not accurately describe child molesters who have never been caught or have not sought treatment.

[Tassman]

I'm proving with actual citations that there was, indeed, an association, and it was terminated due to political expediency.

Yes, along with 400+ self-governing member organisations in over 40 countries (nowadays there are considerably more). ILGA is an "umbrella organisation". It doesn't have enforceable policies over its member organisations.

http://ilga.org/about-us/

I question the sincerity and permanence of the resolution.

Only after it became a political liability for them, and after 10 years of togetherness. It took them THAT LONG to figure out that pedophilia was a bad thing?

Those are the facts, Jack, and I have presented citations supporting them.

That I prefer truth over drama. You outta try it.

No, you prefer scurrilous insinuations.

Just trying to get you to accept the truth, Tassy. There most certainly was a connection, and there are other sources, as well.

There was (and is) a loose connection between ALL the self-governing members of ILGA. NAMBLA was no more connected than any of the other members. Again, ILGA is only an umbrella organisation, not a governing body.

It does not surprise me at all that this would be lost on you, as you are blinded by your extremist left views and prejudices.

http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbo...lestation.html

[Cow Poke]

I'm making no attack whatsoever - I'm just giving you facts and backup. You, sir, are delusional, and in denial.

[Cow Poke]

That is a flat out lie.

[rogue06]

Yes, along with 400+ self-governing member organisations in over 40 countries (nowadays there are considerably more). ILGA is an "umbrella organisation". It doesn't have enforceable policies over its member organisations.

And considerably fewer back when they tossed NAMBLA under the bus. Didn't you say that the vote was 214-30? So unless there were over 156 abstentions that is far fewer than your 400+ you claim. Being sanctioned by the U.N. in exchange with cutting ties with NAMBLO appears to have been good for business. I means it behooves any gay rights group to affiliate with IGLA since they're the one that's internationally recognized.

[Tassman]

I'm making no attack whatsoever - I'm just giving you facts and backup. You, sir, are delusional, and in denial.

But what is the point you are trying to make with these "facts" of yours. This is what you're not answering.

[Cow Poke]

From ILGA's own website...

o Paedofilia is clearly condemned, and pro-paedophilia members of the ILGA are expelled by a motion which is approved by 88% of the members.
o 27 June 27: ILGA co-hosts the Stonewall 25 commemoration events in New York City

Then there's this "cover my butt" statement....

These people seriously did not know what NAMBLA stood for?

They don't have to "scrutinize the constitutions and policies" -- all they needed to know was what NAMBLA stood for?

So, NAMBLA was there for a decade, and nobody at ILGA knew who they were until OUTSIDE entities objected to ILGA allowing them to be members.

[Cow Poke]

But what is the point you are trying to make with these "facts" of yours. This is what you're not answering.

Basically, that you're full of crap.

And it's downright goofy for you to put 'facts' in quotes, implying they're not really facts, when I have given you the source - and if you believe the facts are in dispute, then man up and dispute them!

Instead, all you have is drama queen garbage.

[Tassman]

And considerably fewer back when they tossed NAMBLA under the bus. Didn't you say that the vote was 214-30? So unless there were over 156 abstentions that is far fewer than your 400+ you claim.

Being sanctioned by the U.N. in exchange with cutting ties with NAMBLO appears to have been good for business. I means it behooves any gay rights group to affiliate with IGLA since they're the one that's internationally recognized.

Certainly it makes sense. Especially as NAMBLA's agenda was not consistent with that of ILGA. Namely: Being "dedicated to achieving equal rights for lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans and intersex (LGBTI) people"

http://ilga.org/about-us/

Basically, that you're full of crap.

And it's downright goofy for you to put 'facts' in quotes, implying they're not really facts, when I have given you the source - and if you believe the facts are in dispute, then man up and dispute them!

Instead, all you have is drama queen garbage.

AGAIN: "what is the point you are trying to make with all this stuff. This is what you're not answering. Waiting!

[Cow Poke]

AGAIN: "what is the point you are trying to make with all this stuff. This is what you're not answering. Waiting!

What a drama queen! Tassy - you are being incredibly dishonest portraying this as simply "ILGA expelled NAMBLA, end of story".

THAT, sir, is the point. But I don't think you're going to change.

[Tassman]

What a drama queen! Tassy - you are being incredibly dishonest portraying this as simply "ILGA expelled NAMBLA, end of story".

THAT, sir, is the point. But I don't think you're going to change.

No, the point is why you are continuing to associate LGBT's with pedophillia?

[Cow Poke]

No, the point is why you are continuing to associate LGBT's with pedophillia?

Show where I am "continuing to associate LGBT's with pedophillia [sic]". I'm not doing that at all. This is just you avoiding the truth because it doesn't fit your agenda.

I'll try this one more time.

You have been INCREDIBLY dishonest with your presentation of this issue. I'm calling you out on it. Your goofy "end of story" was crap. There was a LOT more to the story, and I was providing "the rest of the story" with FACTS, and citations from ILGA's own website.

Instead of simply acknowledging the FACTS, you turn to dishonest accusations.

Which of the following FACTS do you dispute?

FACT: NAMBLA was, indeed, a member of ILGA for a decade.
FACT: ILGA didn't do anything about it until (according to ILGA's own website) "the US right publicized that the NAMBLA (North American Man Boy Love Association) is a member of ILGA."
FACT: ILGA did not deny that NAMBLA was a member.
FACT: Following the FACT that they were called out on NAMBLA, ILGA decided to oust NAMBLA
FACT: The vote was not 100% - obviously 12% voted no, and it's reasonable to assume that others (given your data) abstained.

Which of these FACTS are in dispute?

[Tassman]

Show where I am "continuing to associate LGBT's with pedophillia [sic]". I'm not doing that at all. This is just you avoiding the truth because it doesn't fit your agenda.

What is the "truth" that I'm avoiding?

I'll try this one more time.

You have been INCREDIBLY dishonest with your presentation of this issue. I'm calling you out on it. Your goofy "end of story" was crap. There was a LOT more to the story, and I was providing "the rest of the story" with FACTS, and citations from ILGA's own website.

Instead of simply acknowledging the FACTS, you turn to dishonest accusations.

Which of the following FACTS do you dispute?

FACT: NAMBLA was, indeed, a member of ILGA for a decade.
FACT: ILGA didn't do anything about it until (according to ILGA's own website) "the US right publicized that the NAMBLA (North American Man Boy Love Association) is a member of ILGA."
FACT: ILGA did not deny that NAMBLA was a member.
FACT: Following the FACT that they were called out on NAMBLA, ILGA decided to oust NAMBLA
FACT: The vote was not 100% - obviously 12% voted no, and it's reasonable to assume that others (given your data) abstained.

Which of these FACTS are in dispute?

So what do all these FACTS of yours prove, as far as you're concerned? ILGA clearly made an error of judgement by allowing NAMBLA under it's umbrella, particularly as their goals were different, and it rectified its mistake 23 years ago. What more is there to say?

[Cow Poke]

What is the "truth" that I'm avoiding?

First of all, you can't seem to answer the question - which of the following facts do you dispute?

FACT: NAMBLA was, indeed, a member of ILGA for a decade.
FACT: ILGA didn't do anything about it until (according to ILGA's own website) "the US right publicized that the NAMBLA (North American Man Boy Love Association) is a member of ILGA."
FACT: ILGA did not deny that NAMBLA was a member.
FACT: Following the FACT that they were called out on NAMBLA, ILGA decided to oust NAMBLA
FACT: The vote was not 100% - obviously 12% voted no, and it's reasonable to assume that others (given your data) abstained.

Why can't you answer that simple question?