Bosky.. the key words are more accurately :

we have yet to see any example
of a regression from an adult homosexual
orientation.

Emphasis on 'we have yet to see'.... which could mean anything.

The issue I take with Altman is his position on 'man boy sex' as being 'stigmatized' and 'least dangerous' .. and if correctly reported by Aslan, constitutes an 'attitude' to such activities which may indeed influence his perception of risk or danger of certain teaching materials, or even to promote them because he see's them as 'socially benign'.

That is my issue with him, and the idea of getting all the kids into state (left controlled/flavored) primary schools.

Bosk,
On mere statistical record of the number of incidence of sexual abuse of children it is more likely that adult heterosexual males will abuse female children. Simply because each group make up about about 50% of the population.

Homosexuals make up only 3% of the population. However in male child sexual abuse the act is primarily homosexual behaviour and not heterosexual acts. This behaviour is practised by less than 3% of the male population and on the record of insidence showed that each of these persons had a higher number of insidence of abuse. This SA study reported the frequently of incidence of molestation of boys by the 3% male engaging in homosexual acts was 26 times more likely to occurr. No school can afford a place for a child molester.

Philo
Need I point out that your research paper is NOT peer reviewed & that all research papers that are NOT peer reviewed are worthless. From your last post I get the idea that all the researchers have done is count the number of victims, done a quick estimate of the homosexuals in the religious schools & made a direct corelation. I hope you realise that is pretty lousy methodology for several reasons. a) how did they define homosexual? Did their definition of homosexuals merely include someone who slept with other men? if that's so then that includes all bisexuals as well. Something that would inevitably push up their figures. b) you do realise that many child molesters molest large numbers of victims. The idea that you can just compare the number of victims with the number of homosexuals in a given group & get any sort of pertinent information is rediculous. A peer reviewed journal would catch out such lousy methodology which is why such articles will NEVER appear in peer reviewed publications. They are for propaganda purposes only.
Not only this but a test was done two years ago in which large numbers of homosexual & heterosexual men were tested for arousal when viewing pictures of naked children. The vast majority of both groups registered no physical or emotional stimulation when viewing such material. That's about as conclusive as you can get but My bet is it will not budge you one inch.
Face it Philo the facts are against you. your oposition to homosexuals is based on a personal emotional reaction, not the evidence. Such an emotional reaction, to quote Ronald Dworkin "we tend to describe - in lay terms - as a phobia or obsession."
Since your reaction to homosexuals is purely emotional & emotions cannot be reasoned with then I see little point in continuing this discussion. I'm not trying to offend you & if I have I appologise but I really do see little point in continuing. Everyone I wish you well. Take care

Bosk,
Are you revealing your defence of a group of sexually disoriented males who perform anal sex on other males? The fact is the act of homosexuality is a male performing sex acts on another male or by having anal sex. Many in this group prefer different partners and especially boys. Are we discussing a perverted act performed by adults on boys that is to be eradicated from schools, or are you defending a group that did not have secure emotional role bonding in infancy?

To the uneducated person who seems to know NOTHING about pedophilia:

According to Finkelhor et al. (1989), women's sexual abuse of the children was more serious than men's abuse of children. Because they were likely to have sexually abused more children and for a longer time, they were more likely to fit the DSM-III-R requirement that pedophilia be a recurrent pattern over 6 months. Their sexually abusive actions consisted of a single case 8% of the time, compared with 33% of the cases involving male perpetrators. Both men and women were more likely to sexually abuse girls than boys. Women were more likely to sexually abuse younger children. They were more likely to commit multiple acts of sexual abuse and to use force and threats. Some of the sexual abuse by both women and men seemed to be opportunistic and more general and diffuse in motivation--a key factor being the availability and vulnerability of children rather than a particular sexual attraction or recurrent persistent urge, as pedophilia is defined in DSM-III-R

Philo give it up your not being rational at all. Our fundamentalist religious folks are seeking to subvert our tolerant, secular agenda and hijack the rules and government and public services to fit their own moral worldview.

You're also on the record here as a Barnaby supporter.