Many Left-wing liberals and progressives are known for their insane and often dangerous ideals. I have seen articles where the Left wants to remove the right of a radio network to choose their own political commentators. It’s called the “Fairness Doctrine.” They allow a Nazi sympathizer control vast amount of money and campaigns. His name is George Soros. They call a man who let an innocent woman drown in his car a hero and even a lion. That is Ted Kennedy.
I could go on and on and on some more, but I want to focus on this actual Gawker headline that appears in their Science section: Born This Way: Sympathy and Science for Those Who Want to Have Sex with Children
These men are rapists yet somehow they deserve our sympathy.
The article begins by the author telling the story about how a man raped and molested his SEVEN YEAR OLD niece. In the article, this pedophile describes how he seduced her and eventually had sex with this innocent child. He is in jail, where he belongs, but somehow, the article on this little known gossip blog instead dives into America’s hatred for pedophiles. Yes, Americans do not want pedophiles around their children. It is true! It should be this way.
That’s not how this columnist thinks:Leslie Walker, a prisoner’s rights activist, told James, “[Child sex offenders] are at risk of being murdered, having their food taken, having their cells defecated and urinated in. Their life is truly a living hell.” Good, most people will say. But there is a growing number of researchers, many of them out of Canada, whose work suggests that pedophilia is an illness deserving of the public’s sympathy the way any brain disorder is. Some of the scientists say pedophilia is a sexual orientation, meaning that it’s unchangeable, regardless of how much jail time or beatings or therapy someone is dealt. Others have reason to believe that pedophiles are born that way, and that some of them will suffer through entire lives without hurting a single child. If this research proves to be correct, it should help shape both our public policy and our public attitude, so that we’re protecting kids while also protecting pedophiles from angry mobs, cellmates, and themselves.
Wow, so now we are protecting these rapists. You would think this columnist would stop there, but nope. It only gets worse from there:
Currently, there is no significant longitudinal evidence that pedophiles can be made to not be attracted to children, and thus it can be defined as their orientation. And if pedophilia is a sexual orientation, that also means it’s futile to send pedophiles to prison in an effort to alter their attractions. Doing so is akin to sending a homosexual child off to a religious-based institution that claims it can “pray the gay away.”
You know, homosexuals have fought the science that says they are more likely to be pedophiles, and now here it is, a comparison on a left-wing website. I wonder how that will pan out.
Raping and molesting a child is a crime and criminals do not need to be protected. We give criminals too many rights as it is, but ones who hurt children, they do not deserve any consideration. None. The article then goes on even further to try to include Jesus Christ into this article.:
The old adage is that the true mark of a society is how it treats the weakest in its ranks. Blacks, women, Latinos, gays and lesbians, and others are still in no way on wholly equal footing in America. But they’re also not nearly as lowly and cursed as men attracted to children. One imagines that if Jesus ever came to Earth, he’d embrace the poor, the blind, the lepers, and, yes, the pedophiles.
Excuse me, sir, but in my Bible Jesus said,”But whoever causes the downfall of one of these little ones who believe in Me—it would be better for him if a heavy millstone were hung around his neck and he were drowned in the depths of the sea!”
That is Matthew 18:6, thank you very much. Jesus came to forgive sin, not condone them. Do you really think Christians are that stupid?
The Media Research Center broke this story in an article written by Noel Sheppard on their Newsbusters website. I would like to thank him for his excellent journalism because I know the mainstream media will ignore this. He concluded his article with this quote:
“No matter how preposterous this Gawker editor’s views, we learned in the very next sentence how someone could actually think this way.
“As a self-professed ‘progressive.’”
That’s all you needed to know, isn’t it?”