When The Camel’s Nose Comes Into The Tent, The Rest Is Sure To Follow

I realize that many of the people reading this article are going to disagree with it. That’s ok. This site is called rightwinggranny. I am an old-fashioned grandmother, and I remember when things were different than they are today. So please exercise your right to be upset–I will exercise my right to post the article.

Hot Air posted an article yesterday reporting the following:

B4U-Act is a 501(c)(3) organization in Maryland that was established “to publicly promote services and resources for self-identified individuals (adults and adolescents) who are sexually attracted to children and seek such assistance, to educate mental health providers regarding the approaches helpful for such individuals, to develop a pool of providers in Maryland who agree to serve these individuals and abide by B4U-ACT’s Principles and Perspectives of Practice, and to educate the citizens of Maryland regarding issues faced by these individuals,” according to the group’s website.

…Last week, the group hosted a scientific symposium to discuss a proposed new definition of pedophilia in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) of the American Psychiatric Association. Presenters expressed a wide range of views — but the thrust of the B4U-Act movement appears to be, ultimately, to decriminalize pedophilia.

This follows an article at Hot Air last week about a Vogue photography spread recently showing a 10-year old in provocative poses. This writer at Hot Air was concerned that the photo spread might somehow make the idea of sexual attraction to minors acceptable.

I would like to point out that In 1973, the American Psychiatric Association declassified homosexuality as a mental disorder. The American Psychological Association Council of Representatives followed in 1975. Up until that point, homosexuality was considered something to be treated and not publicly acceptable as a lifestyle. Now, the aim of the gay rights movement is to make homosexual unions totally acceptable and the same as heterosexual marriage. Let me say at this point that I am not opposed to civil unions among homosexuals, but I also believe that marriage as a church sacrament needs to be protected.  The right of a Pastor in a Bible-believing church to refuse to perform a gay marriage on the basis of his religious beliefs needs to be protected. If a Pastor has a different view, he should be allowed to perform the wedding, but I am afraid that if gay marriage becomes the law of the land, the first Pastor will be prosecuted for discrimination.

Now that there is an effort to decriminalize pedophilia, are we looking at a time when children will not be protected from adults preying on them? Does this mean that there will no longer be public lists of sex offenders? Does this put more children at risk?

Enhanced by Zemanta