• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should Seattle's First Gay Mayor Resign?

Should Seattle Mayor Murray Resign?


  • Total voters
    31
  • Poll closed .
Of course, he should if it is true. The need to highlight his sexuality is transparent as well. His crime and his sexuality are not related insofar in that one did not intrinsically cause the other.

Far to many equate homosexuality are predisposed to molest children.
Facts do not matter for some, their bile and hatred will buy into anything concerning Gays
 
Unfortunately being Gay is used as a tool to attack someone who has been accused of child molestation.You know that as well as I

That said i am not commenting on this case as I need more info.

An in this case being gay is being used as a shield to protect a child molester
 
And the frequenct cases of straight men raping young girls that, of course, dates back centuries and is statistically more common what does that say of your heterosexual ilk?

Statistically more common? Did you forget that heterosexuals outnumber homosexuals by about 49 to 1? Oh well, I'm sure you'll change your argument now and say that the sex of the child has nothing to do with the sexual orientation of the abuser.
 
Lol, you think those priests were straight? How cute.

How cute another topic you just factually proved your posts are severely uneducated about. LMAO
 
Last edited:
Of course this is going to happen. This sort of activity is far too common in the homosexual culture, and stories like these are their worst nightmare.

There's a reason that the Inglewood police put out that video in the 1950's warning boys about homosexuals. It's because this abuse was happening in their community.

It is " far too common" everywhere.

Do you have any evidence that homo's are more abusive than Hetro's?
 
Statistically more common? Did you forget that heterosexuals outnumber homosexuals by about 49 to 1? Oh well, I'm sure you'll change your argument now and say that the sex of the child has nothing to do with the sexual orientation of the abuser.

You didn't answer the question. If straight men are raping young girls, then and now and well into the future, what does that say about you, a straight man, in relation to what this gay man and his alleged crime says about me, a gay man?
 
An in this case being gay is being used as a shield to protect a child molester

No, it is being used to attack Gays. you know that as well as I. Why bring his sexuality into it?
Unless you believe Gays are predisposed to child molestation?? Well do you??
 
It is " far too common" everywhere.

Do you have any evidence that homo's are more abusive than Hetro's?

The majority of abusers are men, and a way outsized proportion of victims are boys. But of course we'll get the lame argument that a man attacking a little boy doesn't mean he's a homosexual, which is nonsensical.
 
You didn't answer the question. If straight men are raping young girls, then and now and well into the future, what does that say about you, a straight man, in relation to what this gay man and his alleged crime says about me, a gay man?

Why are 1 in 5 girls attacked while 1 in 20 boys attacked? This means that girls are attacked 4x as frequently as boys. We would expect that to be 49x as likely given that straight men outnumber homosexual men 49:1. The fact that the ratio is far lower means that boys are attacked way more than we expect, and what kind of men abuse boys? Homosexuals.
 
What the hell has this got to do with Murray's being gay? Nothing, that's what. Either he committed these inappropriate acts and should resign immediately, or he didn't and he should ride out the firestorm.

I bet liberals celibrated the election of a homosexual when he took office
 
The majority of abusers are men, and the majority of victims are men. But of course we'll get the lame argument that a man attacking a little boy doesn't mean he's a homosexual, which is nonsensical.

Even if we accept your claim that gender of the child one molests determines their sexual orientation

and

Even if we accept your claim that boys are molested more than girls (something I'd like to see a statistic for)

That still doesn't absolve you, using your own guilty by association logic, of all the men who rape young girls.

If you allow yourself to rope me in, a homosexual, for the sexual crimes gay men commit, why can I not do the same to you? Pray tell.
 
I bet liberals celibrated the election of a homosexual when he took office

And they adored Harvey Milk even though he abused underage boys too.
 
Why are 1 in 5 girls attacked while 1 in 20 boys attacked? This means that girls are attacked 4x as frequently as boys. We would expect that to be 49x as likely given that straight men outnumber homosexual men 49:1. The fact that the ratio is far lower means that boys are attacked way more than we expect, and what kind of men abuse boys? Homosexuals.

You pissing contest in regards to statistics does not erase the fact that there are men who also rape little girls. What does that say about you, a straight man?
 
Even if we accept your claim that gender of the child one molests determines their sexual orientation

Called it.

Even if we accept your claim that boys are molested more than girls (something I'd like to see a statistic for)

I corrected what I said. Girls are attacked more frequently, but knowing that straights outnumber homosexuals 49 to 1, we would expect girls to be abused 49x as often as boys. However, it's only 4x, meaning that boys are being attacked more than we would expect, and what kind of a man attacks a boy? A homosexual.

If you allow yourself to rope me in, a homosexual, for the sexual crimes gay men commit, why can I not do the same to you? Pray tell.

When did I ever say that all homosexuals were child abusers?
 
The majority of abusers are men, and a way outsized proportion of victims are boys. But of course we'll get the lame argument that a man attacking a little boy doesn't mean he's a homosexual, which is nonsensical.

LMAO

And another post that proves how severely uneducated and or dishonest your posts are about this topic :)

Facts and the vast majority of the medical community all disagree with your retard dishonest claim but please, tell us more and provide facts to prove it! Thanks!!
:popcorn2:
 
You pissing contest in regards to statistics does not erase the fact that there are men who also rape little girls. What does that say about you, a straight man?

Note how the argument changes from homosexuals not being responsible for an inordinate amount of child abuse to the weak defense that not all homosexuals are child abusers.
 
Girls are attacked more frequently, but knowing that straights outnumber homosexuals 49 to 1, we would expect girls to be abused 49x as often as boys. However, it's only 4x, meaning that boys are being attacked more than we would expect, and what kind of a man attacks a boy? A homosexual.


I don't know what type of man attacks girls? A heterosexual. Do you have the integrity to address the point about heterosexual men or is that impossible for you?
 
I don't know what type of man attacks girls? A heterosexual. Do you have the integrity to address the point about heterosexual men or is that impossible for you?

Lol. Yes, some heterosexual men abuse girls. But homosexuals far more frequently abuse boys. I'm not supposed to notice this?
 
Note how the argument changes from homosexuals not being responsible for an inordinate amount of child abuse to the weak defense that not all homosexuals are child abusers.

I'm noting how you initially associated homosexuals with child abuse, claiming it was prominent in the culture ( suggesting that gay men cultivate these activities as part of our identity), but immediately coward away from the point that young girls are statistically more often raped by adult men.

Now you can't even recon yourself with that data piece. It's wrench and you have to deal with it to make you point not seem entirely prejudice and special pleading.
 
But of course we'll get the lame argument that a man attacking a little boy doesn't mean he's a homosexual, which is nonsensical.

It's not nonsensical, you just choose to pretend it is because you don't like the answer.
 
Lol. Yes, some heterosexual men abuse girls. But homosexuals far more frequently abuse boys. I'm not supposed to notice this?

Are we supposed to ignore the fact that raping young girls is apart of the culture of heterosexual men? That is me using your logic of course.
 
The majority of abusers are men, and a way outsized proportion of victims are boys. But of course we'll get the lame argument that a man attacking a little boy doesn't mean he's a homosexual, which is nonsensical.

I do believe that you are the first person to tell me that more little boys get sexually abused than little girls.

I am all ears.
 
I'm noting how you initially associated homosexuals with child abuse, claiming it was prominent in the culture ( suggesting that gay men cultivate these activities as part of our identity), but immediately coward away from the point that young girls are statistically more often raped by adult men.

It's irrelevant because there are far more straight men than homosexual men. The fact is when you run the numbers using the statistics of 1 in 5 girls and 1 in 20 boys, it means that homosexuals are 12.5x more likely than a straight man to abuse an underage child. That's massive.
 
I do believe that you are the first person to tell me that more little boys get sexually abused than little girls.

I am all ears.

Check what you quoted.
 
It's irrelevant because there are far more straight men than homosexual men. The fact is when you run the numbers using the statistics of 1 in 5 girls and 1 in 20 boys, it means that homosexuals are 12.5x more likely than a straight man to abuse an underage child. That's massive.


It's irrelevant that straight men continue to rape young girls? Statically, young girls are more likely to be raped by an adult man. Historically, that remains true. Precedent suggests that trend won't change anytime soon.

So, again, what does that say about you and the culture that is "male heterosexuality".
 
Back
Top Bottom