|Father Brendan Smyth|
Gay men as pedophiles pretty much shapes the anti-gay agenda. It always has. Even when not stated explicitly, it is often implied. When Robert George was trying to oust Kevin Jennings from the US Department of Education, he blew that dog whistle and he was none too subtle about it. They do it because they know that it works. They also do it because they believe it.
I received one of those emails this morning from John Stemberger of Florida Family Action that screamed “EMERGENCY ALERT: BOY SCOUTS CONSIDER ALLOWING HOMOSEXUAL SCOUTMASTERS.” In the alternative, one need only to read Buster Wilson’s blog for their daily dose of dire dread:
But then, I would refer you again, to my friend Bryan Fischer’s latest
article where he reminds us all of the Jerry Sandusky story! Say
whatever you will about ole Jerry, but man on boy sex is homosexuality.
There’s no other name for it!
Sandusky is every parent’s worst nightmare. However, Wilson is wrong. Would we describe man-on-female-child sex as heterosexuality? Probably not. Folks like Peter LaBarbera and Matt Barber et al lack the critical thinking skills to arrive at a different conclusion in spite of both the FBI’s reports on this subject and the overwhelming consensus of the psychiatric community that pedophilia has nothing to do with sexual orientation.
The bottom line to all of this is that openly gay men are not child molesters. Indeed, if parents want to hedge their bets, their kids are much safer with an openly gay man than the married guy who is still coaching little league long after his children are in college.
We must also remember that a gay man would look at another male in the
same way that a straight man would look at a female. So, with that in
mind, change my camp scenario and make the scout leader a straight man
and the kids he’s taken camping all beautiful teen age girls! You nor I
WOULD EVER AGREE to that as a sensible and trustworthy environment for
Are we to assume then that Mr. Wilson objectifies female children as sex objects? Ultimately, that is what he is positing. How else would he arrive at that assumption? Then why would we presuppose that an openly gay man would objectify a male child as a sex object? Mr. Wilson and others come to that conclusion because, in their minds, gay people are depraved and indifferent to the well-being of others.
Nothing could be further from the truth. I was watching PBS last night