Talk:North American Man/Boy Love Association

From Conservapedia

Jump to: navigation, search
! Due to the controversial nature of this article, it has been locked by the Administrators to prevent edit wars or vandalism.
Sysops, please do not unlock it without first consulting the protecting sysop.
Conservlogo.png

Archives: 01


Earlier there was a user who tried several times to add a link to NAMBLA's website in the article of that name, and this user was given tacit support and approval by others for his actions. There are people in Conservapedia, including Andy, who WILL NEVER TOLERATE any site that advocates child molesting, and I don't want to hear the excuses as to NAMBLA's so-called intentions. If I see anyone post a link to a child-molesting site, I will assume they support child molesting and they will never be allowed in this website again. If I see direct evidence that such an editor may be more involved in child molesting then providing a link, then Andy will be notified as well as federal and state law enforcement. Karajou 00:12, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

Agree 100 percent. There is no need for a "link" to that site. --Ed Poor 06:48, 28 April 2007 (EDT)
NAMBLA site visitors are automatically put on the FBI watch list, FYI. Good move, Karajou! --Sysop-TK /MyTalk 09:00, 28 April 2007 (EDT)
I beleive the old discussion should be properly archived or restored, and not deleted. RobS 11:31, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

Rob, I didn't see a quote about it in the article, but I did in recent changes, so keep in mind it's not a "gay activist group." It's a homosexual pedophilia activist group. Gay pedophilia is about as different from homosexuality as straight pedophilia is from heterosexuality :-/ -AmesGyo! 11:39, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

That is incorrect; Harry Hay the "founder of the gay movement in America" [1] in this cite is compared with Thomas Jefferson, Emma Goldman, and Rosa Parks. RobS 12:10, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

Restored text from Archive.

This source, The American Spectator Special Report, When Nancy Met Harry, Jeffrey Lord, 10/5/2006, exrtracted reads as follows,

"Harry Hay was a fierce advocate of man/boy love. While The Chronicle simply ignored Harry's views, the North American Man/Boy Love Association was only too delighted to put up a collection of Harry's views on the need for young boys to have older men as sexual partners. Here's just a sample taken from a talk at a New York University forum sponsored by a campus gay group in 1983.
Said Harry: "Because if the parents and friends of gays are truly friends of gays, they would know from their gay kids that the relationship with an older man is precisely what thirteen-, fourteen-, and fifteen-year-old kids need more than anything else in the world."

The text of this conference speech in full is available on NAMBLA's website. I'd say this goes beyond issue advocacy. RobS 13:47, 27 April 2007 (EDT) and RobS 12:10, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

Equating gays with NAMBLA, though, is still incorrect, even if one guy was both.-AmesGyo! 12:29, 28 April 2007 (EDT)
It is not simply "one guy", it is the recognized founder of the organized gay rights movement in the US, who coincidently had been a CPUSA member since the 1930s. And if you haven't heard by now, this particularly is my area of speciality, which I can proudly assert is the cause of my banning from WP. WP:Cold War Portal carries a few articles I authored, one of which is History of Soviet Espionage in the United States. This is an unwritten chapter, the subversive influence of the homosexual movement on American politics and society. I am greatful to User:JeffersonDarcy, becuase I had no reason to ever pursue this on my own, but when I found the precious little nugget about how Harry Hay had been a CPUSA member since the 30s, it filled in a lot of gaps. And we see now how this socially and politically subversive organization took the leadership role in March of 2003 of the anti-War movement. We have living history here that must be documented. RobS 13:22, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

A lot of movements have people in their fold they're not proud of. Ted Haggart, for one. But the fact that the founder was a creepy doesn't mean the movement isn't still valid, and right.-AmesGyo! 13:36, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

Good. I hope you see the broader picture. RobS 14:09, 28 April 2007 (EDT)

I have no problem with the article. Indeed, I would like to see all these guys locked up for good. However, it is shameful of you to categorize the article into the Anti-war movement and Liberal Activists. While some of these guys are probably anti-war and liberal, I suspect some are exactly the opposite. Shame on you.--Trajsmith 13:34, 5 May 2007 (EDT)--Trajsmith 13:34, 5 May 2007 (EDT)

The problem is NAMBLA publicly provided leadership for the anti-War movement in March 2003. Not surprising since NAMBLA trtaditionally takes controversial positions opposed by mainstream America. mainstream America needs to realize however, it has departed from the mainstream and followed NAMBLA's leadership on this issue. RobS 14:24, 5 May 2007 (EDT)

Contents

Problem with a source

I can't find any connection between the Iraq war and NAMBLA. Can someone point out where this is? The only link I find is to Conservapedia. Flippin 14:39, 5 May 2007 (EDT)

Also, could you explain their "leadership role?" Sounds like garbage to me. Flippin 14:41, 5 May 2007 (EDT)
It's on their website, and cited as such in the article. A link to it comes from their main page. RobS 14:42, 5 May 2007 (EDT)
No link on the main page found. sorry. I think someone made this up for ideological gain. Flippin 14:48, 5 May 2007 (EDT)
We can't link to NAMBLA. You'd have to google or clusty it and link yourself; be forewarned, you'll go on the FBI watchlist. Clusty shows two NAMBLA Editorials using these search terms < NAMBLA Bulletin, Editorial "War in Iraq?" >. This ABC News [2] poll shows 77% supported the War whereas 10% strongly opposed it and 7% somewhat opposed. Clearly NAMBLA was in the forefront by publicy taking a stand against the War before it even started. RobS 15:20, 5 May 2007 (EDT)
Why does that merit mention in the article? Should we mention all the groups that ran afoul of the ABC poll? I think this is a lame attempt to connect liberals to this group and an intellectually dishonest attempt at that. It should be removed completely. Otherwise, all you are doing is pushing ideology and specious reasoning. Flippin 15:39, 5 May 2007 (EDT)
It seems like a lousy attempt to link all opposition to the war with pedophiles. --Hojimachongtalk 15:40, 5 May 2007 (EDT)
I checked, the ABC poll does not mention NAMBLA. Please add valid content, not speculation. Flippin 15:41, 5 May 2007 (EDT)

Many, many people opposed the war, not just NAMBLA. Your mistake is you don’t want to admit that 100’s of thousands took part in anti-war protests that month. Also, we now know, ironically, that nambla was right.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/2765215.stm http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0118-03.htm http://www.guardian.co.uk/antiwar/story/0,,1111755,00.html http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,896658,00.html

Even the FBI believes the group only has about 1,100 members. You look ridiculous when you claim that their influence had anything to do with the world’s response to the war. Flippin 15:49, 5 May 2007 (EDT)

Of course many opposed the War, NAMBLA doesn't constitute 16% of the population. The point being, the so-called "center" has now moved to NAMBLAs position, which NAMBLA has been consistent in. RobS 15:56, 5 May 2007 (EDT)


However, you portray it as part of the homosexual agenda to oppose the war, which it most certainly wasn't. If you can show that the ABC poll has anything to do with NAMBLA, other than your interpetation, I am all ears. Flippin 16:03, 5 May 2007 (EDT)
BTW, I don't think there is room enough to list anyone else that might be affected by this study if that is what you mean to do. Flippin 16:05, 5 May 2007 (EDT)
NAMBLA is not exclusively a pedophile group; it is a group which fits within other liberal activist coalitions. RobS 16:14, 5 May 2007 (EDT)
Ah. So then we can look forward to relevant notations where, say, the Klan supports conservative positions?--WJThomas 17:07, 7 May 2007 (EDT)

Thanks

Despite opinions about the organisation itself or its objectives, in my view it's a well-written and objective article. I am pleasantly surprised. G7mzh 14:04, 16 June 2007 (EDT)

Link

Please remove the link to pedophilia. It is a blocked page. I realize that the protecting sysop is no longer here, but I'm sure there's some way around it. Jeffrey W. LauttamusDiscussion 17:52, 21 September 2008 (EDT)


Sean Hannity Link

The link on the page is no longer good. Here is another one regarding the same subject. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lQnfVpHqhBA

Personal tools