If this is the type of source you are using in your "research" - all I can say is "Oh dear!" I believe a few other posters have also commented on the source but check out the 'references' within the piece.
World Net Daily - commonly denigrated with the title of World NUT Daily
Regent University Law School - I think this is a well-balanced article that shows how the school has improved its standing over the years as it has dropped the evangelical focus from most of its courses. The school is still fighting perceptions created by the graduates of those early years and it is still ranked as a "fourth tier" school
Dr. Judith Reisman
Council for National Policy - "an umbrella organization and networking group for social conservative activists in the United States"
All of the 'research' cited by Reisman and Baldwin has been shown to be sheer and utter crap, driven by their religious and political beliefs and not by any adherence to scientific standards.
Things change, what today we consider paedophilia was once accepted as not only normal but legal. In 1886, twenty-five of the American states, following earlier English law, had an age of consent of ten years; four states, following Christian canon law on marriage, had an age of consent of twelve; Delaware, following Christian canon law on the age of discretion, set its age of consent at seven. As late as 1892, a bill was put forward in the New York State Senate to lower the age of consent to ten, it was defeated. Look for the following book, if you are interested in how the changes in societal acceptance of what we today call paedophilia, came about: Purity Crusade: Sexual Morality and Social Control, 1868-1900 by David J Pivar