A couple of days ago I posted on a prominent psychiatrist who pioneered sex-education to children in the 60's being arrested for pederasty (molestation of young boys).
Andrei at TBR picked up on the theme of the guy not even being a Catholic Priest, therefore not to expect to much coverage of the arrest here. The irony of Andrei's post is in the comments where the usual suspects come out to bash the Catholic Church, raising a spirited defence from some us here at NZ Conservative (mostly Fletch).
But really, the issue is that a prominent proponent of sex-education, one who could easily be credited with paving the way for sex-education in schools to children being considered normal has been arrested for molestation of children. This is big and yet, there are people who will deflect the conversation back to the Catholic Church, which as an organisation, has never had the aim to normalise and then legalise sex with children, which is where people like the arrested psychiatrist would have had society head towards. But rather than talking about that, their visceral hatred of the Catholic Church blinds them to larger happenings around them.
This is how the West is being lost, piece by piece, step by step.
Andrei at TBR picked up on the theme of the guy not even being a Catholic Priest, therefore not to expect to much coverage of the arrest here. The irony of Andrei's post is in the comments where the usual suspects come out to bash the Catholic Church, raising a spirited defence from some us here at NZ Conservative (mostly Fletch).
But really, the issue is that a prominent proponent of sex-education, one who could easily be credited with paving the way for sex-education in schools to children being considered normal has been arrested for molestation of children. This is big and yet, there are people who will deflect the conversation back to the Catholic Church, which as an organisation, has never had the aim to normalise and then legalise sex with children, which is where people like the arrested psychiatrist would have had society head towards. But rather than talking about that, their visceral hatred of the Catholic Church blinds them to larger happenings around them.
This is how the West is being lost, piece by piece, step by step.
You were quick enough to bash sex education.
ReplyDeleteWhy is your cow sacred?
Because it's not neutral. Because it's ultimate aim is society's destruction. And along the way are the millions of corpses of unborn babies.
ReplyDeleteSeems to be a lot of these cases coming out of the woodwork now. Yet another case came to light yesterday with a woman claiming she was abused by a Salvation Army captain.
ReplyDeleteLink: http://home.nzcity.co.nz/news/default.aspx?id=72241
So in what way is sex education, teaching people which bit fits where and the consequences of that fitting aimed at "society's destruction"?
ReplyDeleteAnd what is this emotional drivel "millions of corpses of unborn babies". Was there no unwanted conception prior to the teaching of sex ed in schools? Were there no bastards born before 1960?
Do you think people are shaped by their environment, culture and values? Consider the way things are taught, the messages kids receive, the age appropriateness and the context and you will be on the right trail. You apparently fume over religious "indocrination" but can't see the danger of gay guy coming into school and teaching the liberal expression of sex through fisting to 12 year olds?
ReplyDeleteWhere bits fit (with the help of vaseline) is only half the message. Most people realise that a casual f*ck has more baggage than first appears. Especially to the young and inexperienced.
As for you last question - I'm not sure. How old are you? :-)
"...gay guy coming into school and teaching the liberal expression of sex through fisting to 12 year olds"
ReplyDeleteI am unaware of this happening in NZ schools, but may be a bit out of touch as my kids are now adults with their own children. But, if this had been raised at any school where I served as a school councillor (2 primary, one secondary) I would have objected most vigorously. I have as little time for homosexual proseltysing as I do for religion. (And note, I will not be conned or browbeaten into calling homosexuals "gays" as you have been).
As to whether or not I am a bastard, I'll leave that to you to judge, but my parents married 3 months before my birth, and are still married.
Fugley
ReplyDeleteSex-ed, per se, in my opinion, is not bad. The application in todays modern world IS wrong and Lucyna is right to point out its disastrous consequences.
At home, between parents and their children, sex ed is OK. BUT, it is no-one else's business. The state and its "academic" advocates need to butt out. The fact that they haven't has resulted in a society soaked in sex, which is ultimately bored with it, and then demanding of further and further "developments" to satiate its desire.
And as for your charge of emotional drivel, oh please...it is perfectly clear that our abortion rates have gone up since the 1980s and STAYED up. The concomitant attempts at "sex-ed" to bring the toll down have failed, and one could argue they have driven it even further.
Well, if contraception was free, if RU48 was available over the counter, there would be fewer abortions.
ReplyDeleteBesides, a foetus is NOT a human life.
Besides, a foetus is NOT a human life.
ReplyDeleteFugley, could you describe the process involved whereby a foetus becomes human?
For the amused among us.
For, I content that human life begins at conception, and everything that occurs thereafter is a process of maturity only.
But, the floor is yours ...
Well, I seem to be in good comapny - even George W Bush doesn't believe that "human life begins at conception".
ReplyDeleteAnyways, you can "content" as much as you like about the issue, I'll stick with the folks who know what tey are talking about from research and study, not those who "believe" without evidence, study or research.
Indeed -
ReplyDeleteIt doesn't matter at what age you kill it or what it looks like, you're still killing a person.
As I have said before, if you kill the tadpole, you're killing the frog it will become.
Lets say a woman gets pregnant, and lets say it's a normal healthy pregnancy. If she leaves the baby to grow and come to term it will be born and you have another person.
If she aborts that baby, the person's life is ended - his or her life has been extinguished. To me it doesn't get any more straightforward.
Formula 1.
PREGNANT WOMAN -> TAKE IT TO TERM - > NEW PERSON
Formula 2.
PREGNANT WOMAN -> ABORTS -> NO PERSON.
Simple.
In one case you have a new person. In the other the life cycle is interrupted and the person that DEFINITELY WILL RESULT is no more.
I don't see how people can't see that.
Well, given that premature babies have lived from 23 weeks (and is the record now 21 weeks?), there is obviously a line to draw in our conception of human.
ReplyDeleteCan we at least agree a baby doesn't have to be born and the umbilical cord cut to magically become "human" at that point.
And are any of the pro-abortionists listening in ready to contend killing a pre-born at 23 weeks IS murder?
Is anyone else as disgusted as me by the picture to the left?
ReplyDeleteHere we have a woman, offering a naked child, nay baby, to an old man. A pederast, no doubt.
Such faux outrage Fugley. I can't see much in your comment other than a weak attempt at some kind of insult.
ReplyDeleteStill, it is exactly why many fathers hesitate to hug their children in public - they worry some loser will make something of it.
Lift your game old man.
Hey Tiger, I find that picture disgusting with the sexualised imagery it portrays.
ReplyDeleteOh, and I hug my adult children when I feel like it, even in public.
Fugley, any more comments of same type as the last two will be deleted. This is your final warning.
ReplyDeleteThat's very interesting Fugley. A family scene conveys disgusting sexual imagery to you. How do you feel about billboards with scantily clad airbrushed women selling mobile phones? Which of the two scenes would seem more natural to you?
ReplyDeleteAnd back on topic - I'd be interested in your answer - since you get lots of your information from experts and the like - is a pre-born at 23 weeks human?
fugley says:
ReplyDelete"a foetus is not a human life."
And how old a foetus are you? 40 years, 60? At the other end, how dotty does a geriatric have to be to not be human?
"I'll stick with the folks who know what tey are talking about from research and study"
Like a typical layperson, what makes you think scientists DON'T think it's life? Of course a foetus is living and of course its on the trajectory of human development.
People have no problems calling a whale foetus a whale or a tiger foetus a tiger, so therefore...
The decision to award "humanity" is political not scientific.
Fugley said:
ReplyDelete"I'll stick with the folks who know what they are talking about from research and study, not those who "believe" without evidence, study or research."
Um. Fugley, as a practitioner with some experience in the research and study of which you speak, I can assure you the consensus in the medical community is that you are onto a sure hiding if you try and argue the biology of a foetus as "not human". NO-ONE dares argue that a foetus is not human and expect to be taken seriously. This is also one of the reasons why an increasing number of medical graduates are refusing to perform abortions. Its just plain icky and wrong.
Which comments so offend you lucyna?
ReplyDeleteThat I hug my adult children? I am proud I can still do that.
That I see sexual imagery in your graphic? A bit like seeing god in a forest.
That a foetus is not a person? And that abortion can be a good option?
Fugley.
ReplyDeleteStill waiting for your expert response on human development!