Who doesn't back gay marriage?

Utterly hopeless . . .

No one is trying to force anything down anyone else's throat. To the best of my knowledge, everyone here responding to you (laughing at you and your alleged math) is heterosexual . . . although maybe i should talk to Farmerman's wife--she would know better than i would.

You say that 27% of all victims of pedophiles are male, and then conclude that 27% of all pedophiles are gay men. That's clearly erroneous. If 90% of all murder victims are killed by men, would you conclude that 90% of all men are murderers? Well, maybe you would, but you shouldn't.

I think you arrived at that flawed conclusion by assuming that there's a one-to-one correspondence between pedophiles and victims. That's another error. You can't assume that the percentage of victims in a population is the same as the percentage of perpetrators in a population, even if those populations are the same size - which they aren't. According to your source - and it's not at all clear (see page 1) - the sample size of victims was either 60,991 or 57,762 or 118,753. Let's say its the last one, and let's assume that the sample, drawn from twelve states, is a representative sampling of the entire US, such that the total national population of victims would be approximately four times as many, or roughly 475,000. If 27% of them are male, then about 128,000 victims are male.

You assume that only male pedophiles sexually assault male victims (a bad assumption, but one that we won't get into) and that male pedophiles who assault male victims are, by definition, homosexual (another bad assumption, but we'll pass over that one as well). You then multiply the number of pedophiles by 27% to arrive at the number of gay male pedophiles. That yields, according to your calculations, "2,559,600 homosexual pedophiles."

If those numbers are correct, then there are approximately twenty gay male pedophiles for every one male victim. That's an astonishing figure. One wonders where those victims find the time to do anything else, what with all the constant victimizing that must be going on. Perhaps the twenty pedophiles work in shifts, or maybe take a number like in a deli. The mind staggers at the complexities.

Your result is staggering largely because it's wrong. As pointed out above, your basic math is wrong. In addition, your assumption about the percentage of the population that is composed of pedophiles is based on the work of Michael Seto, who argues that about 3% of the population is sexually attracted to children. That's not the same thing, however, as saying that 3% of the population sexually assaults children, which is what you want it to say. As you put it: "Approximately 3-5% of the population are child molestors according to this article." I very much doubt that the article says that, but then I very much doubt that you read that article.

So, let's recap:

You say that 3% of the population is composed of child molesters. That's wrong.

You say that 27% of child victims of sexual assault are males. That's true, but only for victims under 12 (it's 18% for all juvenile victims). You don't define "child victims," so I'll just assume you're consistent with your source in limiting it to victims under 12.

You assume that 100% of all perpetrators of sexual assault against child victims are men. That's not true (according to your linked source it's 96%), but I'll give you that one because 96% is pretty close.

Based on the above, you conclude that 27% of all pedophiles are homosexual males. That's neither supported by your sources nor by the math nor by basic logic. It's outrageously wrong.

Once you've arrived at your outrageously wrong calculation of the number of homosexual pedophiles, you then calculated the percentage of homosexuals who are pedophiles. Clearly, that's outrageously wrong as well.

Like I said, math is hard.

Lol at least someone attempted to refute me with an argument instead of setantas ridiculous comments.

Unfortunately it was an exceedingly pathetic attempt at a refutation when you consider several issues that joe ignores such as all the assertions he made to drop the %age for homosexual pedophiles also applies to heterosexuals. That means ur numbers are going to drop for the heterosexuals for a comparable amount as well. That STILL leaves homosexuals as overrepresented in the pedophilia category while heterosexuals are even more underrepresented. I'll be happy to recalculate (which ill do when I get off work) but that's still going to leave heterosexuals as being at least 5 times LESS likely to be pedophiles as a homosexual.

You also neglected to acknowledge that sexual assaults on a male are under reported FAR more than assaults on females. That means the rate of pedophilia within the homosexual community is much higher than those numbers indicate.

Math is not that hard.

Btw this was just a short answer. When I get off work ill explain to you why the rest of your post is wrong.

You sneer about other people, and yet you make one unsubstantiated assertion after another, and just after indulging in christian propaganda hysteria. What so fills you with hate?

What do you mean unsubstantiated? I produced 10 or so sources in that last post to farmer alone.

How about the legislature in the secular world of communism, the Russian Duma, voting 400 odd to nothing, repeat nothing, to outlaw homosexual propaganda and in the Christian countries the homosexuals have parades to boast, the media jollying them along and politicians running scared.

Seems a bit odd to me.

This . . .



. . . is an unsubstantiated allegation. It's just one of many you've indulged here. Furthermore, when i produced sources, you just sneered as said they weren't valid--not for any good reason and not with any evidence. So i'm going to call bullshit on your sources. If it works for you, ti works for me.

You never answered my question. What is it that so fills you with hate?

I don't think he sees himself as "filled with hate" He considers himself a card carrying Christian.
These bozos are the most dangerous because they consider civil rights as arbitrary.

And none of them underpinned the point you were so trying to make.

Civil rights are arbitrary. Don't you know a simple thing like that yet old boy?

maybe in your world.

I didn't drop any percentages. I pointed out that your extrapolation from the percentage of victims to the percentage of victimizers was unwarranted - which it was. Frankly, I don't know what percentage of child molesters are gay men. But then that just puts me even with you.


How do you know that?


How do you calculate the "rate of pedophilia?"


That's the spirit!


I tremble with anticipation.

Uhhh yes actually they are. Homosexuals are attempting to force their lifestyle onto my children in school.

I dont know the sexual orientation of anyone on here.. nor do I care. If you're advocating for it then you're just as dangerous as they are because you're supporting their behavior.

Didn't you know... they're all closet christians... because christians are the only ones who disagree with homosexuality.

Any more so than heterosexuals have forced their lifestyle on children for hundreds of years?

You can't force someone to be something they ain't. Would you like to have a child of yours live a life as someone they were not or would you like that child to be free to live as who they really are?

Illustrating acceptance of all people, no matter their sexual orientation is just the "christian" thing to do.

Odd that so many "christians" are dead set against such freedoms.

and to Joe
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21653264
"As a result of the prevalence of such beliefs, there is an underreporting of sexual assaults by male victims; a lack of appropriate services for male victims; and, effectively, no legal redress for male sexual assault victims. By comparison, male sexual assault victims have fewer resources and greater stigma than do female sexual assault victims."

http://health.usnews.com/health-news/blogs/on-men/2008/09/08/the-silent-phenomenon-of-male-sexual-abuse
"Male sexual abuse is largely a silent phenomenon that tends to go unreported."
"One of the statistics that you'll hear frequently is that 1 out of every 6 boys is sexually abused by the age of 16."

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/may/20/victims-of-sex-assaults-in-military-are-mostly-sil/?utm_source=RSS_Feed&utm_medium=RSS
“It appears that the DOD has serious problems with male-on-male sexual assaults that men are not reporting and the Pentagon doesn’t want to talk about,” Elaine Donnelly, who heads the Center for Military Readiness. She noted that only 2 percent of assailants are women.

http://www.collegiatetimes.com/stories/12903/sexual-assault-goes-underreported
While women are statistically more likely to be victims of sexual assault, men are also victimized by sexual assault. For male victims, reporting what happened can be a very daunting challenge.

"It's even less likely that they will report it. It's the stigma that if they're sexually assaulted -- typically we hear women have been sexually assaulted -- so if a man is sexually assaulted what does that mean?" Kuhn said. "There's more (instances of a male) victim blaming on themselves for something like that happening. That's a population we'd like to see more come forward or at least get some support and help."

The lack of reported cases is worrisome for officials such as Kuhn.


I can get plenty more... but it's kind of belaboring the point.

My claims are completely substantiated... as usual.

"And none of them underpinned the point you were so trying to make. "

What are you even talking about with this comment?? I produced multiple surveys which all indicated that the rate of homosexuality was under 5% Which was my original claim.

I'll ask you the same thing I asked JTT earlier.

Do you really believe in civil rights? Or do you only believe in civil rights when its beneficial to your argument?

Do you think an adult incestuous couple should be allowed to marry? A 50 year old dad and his 20 year old son or daughter? A brother and sister who are both 22 years old?

Should they be allowed to marry and receive benefits that you and I pay for out of our tax dollars? Should they be allowed to force their lifestyle on our children at school and teach them that as long as they're adults and in a consentual relationship that being incestuous is just as much of a moral lifestyle choice as any other relationship paradigm?

"I didn't drop any percentages. I pointed out that your extrapolation from the percentage of victims to the percentage of victimizers was unwarranted - which it was. Frankly, I don't know what percentage of child molesters are gay men. But then that just puts me even with you."

You can be dishonest if you'd like, but your intention was to attempt to bring up issues which you thought would make the numbers for homosexuals look better. Hence why you only pointed out those issues for homosexuals while completely ignoring that everything you stated for the homosexuals would also be true for the heterosexuals. Meaning that the comparable statistics would not change in any significant measure(ie homosexuals are still ~5x more likely to be pedophiles than heterosexuals).

You calculate the rate of pedophilia in the homosexual community by finding the amount of homosexual pedophiles and dividing that by the amount of homosexuals in the total population. If you know anything about math... you shouldn't have needed to ask that.

You have then determined what the likelihood is that the individual homosexual you meet might be a pedophile. You can do the same thing with heterosexuals... but you're not going to like the way the numbers come out.