The homosexual 'rights' movement seeks to destroy freedom of conscience. We are confronted by a new kind of orthodoxy and collective social understanding.

In the new European order a person is a thousand times more likely to be attacked for his or her Catholicism, Islamic faith or Jewish religion than for being gay.

They are victims because they say so. There are few police records illustrating their persecution because the police are in cahoots with the evil heterosexualists.

In Europe, In Spain and France, gays organizations have orchestrated as much violence as some of the far-right groups. In Paris a Catholic Monsignor was kicked and trampled by gay rights activists in front of Note Dame Cathedral.

To complain of sexual abuse by a gay teacher in western Europe is to lose an education and invite retaliation. In Scotland the govt. policy is to punish any child who suggests the possibility that a gay teacher may be their abuser.

In the United Kingdom it is accepted as an article of faith that gays do not molest children and paedophilia is a heterosexual condition. A gay teacher is presumed scientifically innocent and the accuser maliciously 'homophobic'.

A classic liberal society concedes the right of people to be wrong, that has been lost in the new dispensation. Separate toilets for males and females may reflect heterosexual tyranny, the gay lobby will get back to us when they decide.

They may want to pass some legislation to enable a few Catholic bishops to be put in jail for 'hate crime' first. To have firm moral convictions is to be a bigot and a traitor to democracy.

The utopian depiction of any educational institution as ideal and benign is not a betting certainty. Every large school with male staff will have a few paedophiles working on the premises. Four percent of males recruited from the general population will probably be active paedophiles.

For example: How can two police officers or two paramedics decide to *both* rape a child? If they were one in a thousand it would be impossible. However gang rape, networked sexual abuse, is possible because the active A group meets the non-active B group.

The active paedophiles trigger the non-active candidates. The impossible to understand abuses happen because they are inevitable.

Cadiz,
Studies on male child sexual abuse indicate homosexuals are 26 times more abuse boys than hetrosexual women. An education of sexual abstinance till marriage is the best practise.

HHS Study Confirms Abstinence Education Effective

National Desk, Education Reporter - Jessica Neiman of the Abstinence Clearinghouse, 605-335-3643

WASHINGTON, June 14 / -- A new study released today by the US Department of Health and Human Services, and completed by a contract with Mathematica Policy Research, Inc, reveals that abstinence education works. According to the interim report, teens who participated in abstinence programs had an increased awareness of the potential consequences of sexual activity before marriage, thought more highly of abstinent behaviours, and less favourable opinions about sexual activity before marriage than did students who were not in abstinence programs.

"Students who are in these [abstinence education] programs are recognizing that abstinence is a positive choice," HHS Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation Michael O'Grady said. "Abstinence education programs that help our young people address issues of healthy relationships, self-esteem, decision-making, and effective communications are important to keeping them healthy and safe."

Leslee J. Unruh, president of the Abstinence Clearinghouse agrees. "The evidence from this and other studies is overwhelming; abstinence education results in self-confident, healthy kids," said Leslee J. Unruh, president of the Abstinence Clearinghouse. "Every child in America deserves the best. When it comes to health instruction, the best is abstinence until marriage education."

"While evidence of the effectiveness of abstinence education continues to mount," Unruh concluded, "pro-promiscuity groups continue to push for more of the same failed contraceptive sex ed of the past. It does not matter to groups like SIECUS and Advocates for Youth that their version of sex education has never been scientifically proven to prevent unmarried pregnancy or STDs. On the contrary, abstinence education has been weighed, measured, and found exceptional."

The study released today is part of a longitudinal study spanning five years. Youth participating in four abstinence education programs were tracked. An additional phase of this study examining how abstinence education affects behaviour is expected next year.

http://aolsvc.news.aol.com/news/article.adp?id=20050614143509990006&cid=1291

Philo, how are "abstinence till marriage" programs relevant? Anyway:

"HHS Study Confirms Abstinence Education Effective"
Effective at what? Increasing students support for abstinence after one year. No results yet as to whether students remain abstinent or have lower rates of STDs & pregnancy - other studies have had the common sense result showing general failure & higher rates. (Including those who have taken pledges.) The study didn't even show a statistically significant increase in *expectations* of remaing abstinent.

Also, only one of the four programs didn't include extra-curricular promotion of abstinence. Not exactly the way to conduct a comparative study. http://www.mathematica-mpr.com/Press%20Releases/abstinence.asp

It should be no suprise that men are much more likely to commit sexual abuse, not that it has much relevance either, however a cite for your claim would be nice.

It seems to me that Christian zealots have been preaching that homosexuality and heterosexual sex outside marriage are sinful for a couple of thousand years now, to limited effect even among their own followers.

This is their right, of course, but I wish they'd keep it to themselves rather than demand that everybody else accepts their version of morality.

Garra,

Re Christian morality, you said: "This is their right, of course, but I wish they'd keep it to themselves rather than demand that everybody else accepts their version of morality."

Why should we keep it to ourselves? Why shouldn't we demand everyone else accept our version of morality?