From: pdb059@ipl.jpl.nasa.gov (Paul Bartholomew)
Newsgroups: ca.politics
Subject: Re: Fundamentalist Nightmare
Date: 9 Nov 92 10:22:11 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Image Processing Lab

cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) writes:
>In article <1992Oct31.163312.12176@s1.gov>, lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich) writes:
># 	Idiotic accusation #2. I have _never_ seen much evidence of
># promotion of pedophilia in the gay community. Claytoon, would you be
># willing to go to court with your accusation, and if not will you
># please have the decency to retract it?
>
>Shall I repost the many postings from soc.motss trying to justify
>adults having sex with 12 and even 8 year olds?

You mean the ones you've cross-posted before that *don't* try to justify
adults having sex with 8 year olds?  Sex with pre-pubescent children is
your own particular fantasy, not the gay community's, based on the infor-
mation you've posted.

You've been collecting postings from soc.motss for about a year and a half.
Given the size of that group, that is literally thousands of postings that
you've read.  In all that time, all we've seen from you is about fifty
postings or so, from about a dozen individuals.  This is supposed to convince
us that what you've collected is "typical" and that these individuals are
"typical homosexuals"?  What about the other 20,000 postings from the other
500 people?

I've read your collection every time you post it (about four times now, I
believe).  Face it, Mr. Cramer, it just doesn't say what you claim it does.
Out of everything you've cross-posted, all you've convinced me of is that
there are a few posters to soc.motss who need counseling.  It is dishonest
to make any more significant claims than that, based on what you've posted.
It is even more dishonest to claim, as you do, that these are "typical" of
anything.

>Then why the need to shelter and justify NAMBLA, and give them
>a place in the San Francisco Gay Parade?

Ah, the old tired arguments yet again, despite the fact that they've long
since been discredited.  At least he's no longer claiming that NAMBLA marches
in *all* of the Gay Pride parades.  You do understand, Mr. Cramer, that it was
a very small number of people who actually made the decision to allow NAMBLA
to march, based on Freedom of Speech grounds?  And you do understand that
this decision was not overwhelmingly popular in the gay community?  And you
do understand that NAMBLA was booed along the parade route and did not even
finish the parade?  Yup, those gays are sure sheltering and justifying
NAMBLA, aren't they?

Even in all of your cross-postings of your soc.motss collection, all you've
managed to come up with is about a dozen people who support NAMBLA.  And
several of those base their support on First Amendment grounds, not on
support of their goals.  I'm supposed to be convinced that these dozen men
are representative of several million gay men?  Why should you feel that
this is strong enough evidence to convince anyone of anything?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Bartholomew          |   "The time has come, the walrus said, to talk of
                          |    many things..."                  Lewis Carroll
pdb059@ipl.jpl.nasa.gov   |   Disclaimer:  Opinions?  What opinions?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Xref: sparky ca.politics:9345 ba.politics:6716 talk.politics.misc:58042