Just In Case You Thought Child Adoption By Homosexuals Was A Good Idea

I just wish the rectum of every single liberal could look like this ten year old boys’ does:

Ohio man accused of prostituting adopted boy
By ANN SANNER and DAN SEWELL | Associated Press – 3/1/2012

TROY, Ohio (AP) — A 10-year-old boy shook when asked about being prostituted to two other men by an adoptive father who regularly had sex with him, according to police, who said the boy was fearful of talking because he didn’t want to be taken from his home or separated from his new siblings.

The adoptive father has been charged with raping three boys in his care and compelling prostitution by hiring the 10-year-old out for sex. He and two other men remained in jail Thursday on rape charges.

Federal and local law enforcement officials said they’re widening the investigation into child sexual exploitation allegations against the father, who worked out of his home as an insurance claims adjuster. His name is being withheld by The Associated Press to protect the children’s identities.

Troy police said they impounded the father’s truck and seized four laptops from the home and a video camera and two wooden paddles from the master bedroom.

School officials said the man had recently withdrawn the three adopted children from school, saying he would home school them. A neighbor said he had no idea anything lurid might be going on in the home.

Now please excuse me while I go puke.

About these ads

Tags: , , , , ,

12 Responses to “Just In Case You Thought Child Adoption By Homosexuals Was A Good Idea”

  1. Anonymous Says:

    So, only gay couples are capable of such horror? And one isolated example equates to all gay couples- rational people call that a hasty generalization. Here is a link to a heterosexual couple abusing their adoptive children: http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2012/02/07/Tape-reveals-childs-abuse-in-Miami-home/UPI-62311328634252/?spt=hs&or=tn

    And it is very Christian of you to wish rectal harm to every single liberal.

  2. Michael Eden Says:

    I suppose I can’t argue with the last sentence: liberals demand the right to allow as much rectal harm in this world as possible. And it is liberals who are spreading the “rectal harm” agenda to the world. And so that rectal harm stuff is really the liberals’ thing, and not Christians’.

    It’s just that the reason homosexuals are allowed to adopt children is 1000% because of liberals, and it would be fitting if liberals were actually allowed to experience the result of their own policies for once rather than just keep inflicting them on other people the way they always do.

    As for your link, it’s really not that difficult: there are a lot of people who shouldn’t be allowed to ever adopt children. And homosexuals are in that group of “a lot of people.”

    Whether you want to argue as a Christian or even as an evolutionist, “homosexual parents” are an oxymoron if there ever was one.

  3. Anonymous Says:

    Michael, as a new visitor to your blog I must say that you are an idiot. Your arguments are weak, your logic is flawed, and your claims of being a follower of Jesus don’t sit well with anyone who knows the bible. Moreover, your hatred of all things liberal and homosexual makes me wonder if you are a closeted gay man with liberal leanings. Well, either that or a complete moron who really does not seem to have learned anything from college. Now, go sterilize yourself.

  4. Michael Eden Says:

    Anonymous,

    Do you how often I get the “you are an idiot and your arguments are weak and your logic is flawed” crap from you vile leftists who NEVER BOTHER TO OFFER SO MUCH AS ONE EXAMPLE OF MY “WEAK ARGUMENTS” OR MY “FLAWED LOGIC”???

    Do you know how many times I’ve received dismissive personal attacks that somehow never bothered to make so much as a single factual point???

    Do you know how often I am attacked for my religion by you vile cockroaches who would NEVER DARE pull that kind of stunt if I were anything other than a Christian???

    And my arguments “don’t sit well with anyone who knows the bible”??? Really??? And you just conveniently forgot to provide the vast litany of Bible versus that support the demand for homosexuals to be allowed to adopt children???

    Do you know how often I get self-righteous sanctimonious lectures from you damn liberals about my appalling incivility when you refute yourselves in the very same comment that you denounce me? Your final comment, “Now, go sterilize yourself” reveals you to be a hypocrite as well as a hater.

    I have to mock your own “logic”: you attack me for attacking homosexuals, and then you literally say that my arguments are so weak and my logic is so flawed and I am so full of hate and such a religious bigot that I must be a homosexual – which strikes me as being quite a bit more hateful about homosexuals than anything I say.

    Please never come back. Your “logic” is just too much for me.

  5. Anonymous Says:

    Actually Michael your claim that damn liberals “NEVER BOTHER TO OFFER SO MUCH AS ONE EXAMPLE OF MY “WEAK ARGUMENTS” OR MY “FLAWED LOGIC” is somewhat problematic.

    The comment posted on March 4, 9:16 p.m. points out the hasty, sweeping generalization (the weak argument and flawed logic you claim liberals never offer up) of your argument that all homosexuals should not be able to adopt children, by using one isolated incident and equating it to all people from this community you are committing one of the most common fallacies in argumentation: the sweeping generalization.

    Plus you make so many huge assumptions about me and I guess because you use ALL CAPS, it makes you right? The loudest voice wins, huh Michael, even on the Internet? How do you know if I have ever been critical of Muslims or Jews or Buddhists? And from what I can see, your entire blog is tagging other articles to support your name-calling.

  6. Michael Eden Says:

    Actually Michael your claim that damn liberals “NEVER BOTHER TO OFFER SO MUCH AS ONE EXAMPLE OF MY “WEAK ARGUMENTS” OR MY “FLAWED LOGIC” is somewhat problematic.

    Anonymous,

    Do you want to know what’s “problematic”? The straw man way you just rephrased what I said.

    I did NOT say that “liberals never bother to offer so much as one example…”; I very clearly said – and it was INCREDIBLY DISHONEST of you to omit it:

    Do you how often I get the “you are an idiot and your arguments are weak and your logic is flawed” crap from you vile leftists who NEVER BOTHER TO OFFER SO MUCH AS ONE EXAMPLE OF MY “WEAK ARGUMENTS” OR MY “FLAWED LOGIC”???

    Apparently you are simply either too mentally incapable or too hypocritical and dishonest to comprehend that rather glaringly obvious clarification that you chose to ignore. You deceitfully – because you are quite the liar – try to make it appear I gave a blanket statement that no liberal in the history of the world ever once offered an example. And that is very obviously not what I said at all.

    That stated, finding an example of a heterosexual – and by the way, I read the link and failed to see where it specifically stated “these nasty people are HETEROSEXUAL” – who does something godawful to a kid doesn’t in any way, shape or form demonstrate that heterosexuals have no more right or business to adopt than heterosexuals.

    I’m trying to think how many homosexuals have given birth through homosexual intercourse. And the answer is ZERO POINT ZERO ZERO ZERO to the trillionth digit.

    And then I think of the estimated 100 billion human beings who have been born through heterosexual intercourse.

    And somehow, when you compare the set of the 100 billion with the set of the 0.000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000… that “zero” set starts looking really, really pathetic.

    But, hey, way to go urging me to conclude that the 100 billion set and the 0.000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000… set are identical such that both sets ought to have the exact same rights when it comes to parenting.

    Your last “point” about how I used all caps somehow nullifying my argument kind of documents how pathetically weak even YOU (there I go again) know your argument is.

    One final thing: when you say “Plus you make so many huge assumptions about me…” without offering even ONE assumption I made about you that isn’t true, you just jumped right into the damn group of liberals who “NEVER BOTHER TO OFFER SO MUCH AS ONE EXAMPLE.” People like you just can’t help yourselves, can you???

  7. Anonymous Says:

    You still have not responded to the flaw in your specific argument about homosexuals adopting children and the singular, isolated event you have held up as your proof for all homosexuals being sexual predators and unworthy of adoption? Waiting for your to address this?

    I quoted you word for word, did I not? How does omitting the phrase: “Do you know how often I get the ‘you are an idiot and your arguments are weak and your logic is flawed’ crap from you vile leftists …” change my point or the context of your claim that liberals never offer proof of your flawed arguments?

    You specifically stated that I did not offer a demonstration of your weak, flawed argument when I did in the initial comment – I will state it once more: you committed a hasty generalization.

    Second, no where in my reply did I use the language “no liberal in the history of the world ever once offered an example” – no where in my reply, so your claims to the straw man do not hold, you have made this up.

    You assumed that I would “NEVER DARE pull this stunt if I was anything other than a Christian?” Your words exactly? Did you not make this assumption?

    You are creating a red herring, my reply had NOTHING to do with homosexual reproduction, absolutely nothing! I was pointing out the flawed argument you made about homosexual adoption, that is all, and by the way, you did invite this request after all. I did not urge you to do anything, just consider the flaw in this specific argument.

    By the way, what else do you call a married couple that are man and woman other than heterosexual.

    Have you ever replied to a someone on this blog who disagrees with you without name-calling? And I am sure this question will be answered by more “idiots” and “evil liberal” claims.

  8. Michael Eden Says:

    This will be the last time I tolerate you.

    1) Your “How does omitting the phrase” question is simply breathtakingly stupid. And I refuse to deal with stupid people. It would be one thing if you simply didn’t see an important qualification in a statement and then allowed yourself to be corrected upon someone providing you the full statement. But you refuse to stand corrected, which is to say that you are truly hopeless. And I’m not merely labelling you as “stupid”; you are clearly being truly stupid. If you lack the intellectual capacity or honesty to not be unable to understand the difference between someone saying, “Do you know how often I get this crap in which liberals never bother to offer an argument” and “liberals never bother to offer an argument,” then I might as well be arguing with an insect. I am wasting my time.

    For the record, I have received the following comments just in the last couple of days (posted in their entirety):

    - You should probably get your facts straight, but than again, it is the internet and we know how reliable that is.

    - You are such a moron. I cannot waste anymore of my time talking to someone who is lost in an alternate universe. I only hope that you get hit by a truck or die a horrible death. You are an enemy of America scumbag. THATS A FACT.

    - What a bunch of trash

    Now, maybe you see the logical- and fact-based arguments in those comments, but I sure as hell don’t. The first “gentleman,” for example, tells me to get my facts straight without bothering to point out which facts or provide any corrective to my facts that he alleges I need to get straight. My statement as I expressed it is completely factually true; your straw-man mischaracterization from your selectively quoting me to omit a clearly significant qualification is completely dishonest.

    2) Similarly, you tell me, “You still have not responded…” when you don’t bother to do anything more than wave your hand at the fact that a hundred billion heterosexual parents versus 0.0000000000 homosexual parents demands that the former set be accorded preferential status as adoptive parents. You call it a “red herring” like a “hundred billion” and “0.00000000000000000″ are identical. And any fool knows they aren’t – which is why you clearly don’t recognize that a “hundred billion” and “0.0000000000000000000000000″ are clearly not the same thing. That said, I’ll have more credibility than you will ever have in your life and respond to your “you have not responded” point:

    3) You assert that the case I reported was a “singular, isolated event” do you? You want more examples of homosexual “fathers” molesting their adopted children and even renting them out for sex with other homosexual men? This is not hard – which is to say that your “argument” suffers from the fatal flaw of being utterly irrelevant. There are THOUSANDS of cases:

    Boys in foster care with Ian Wathey and Craig Faunch
    Homosexual couple sexually abuse four children that were placed in foster care with them. Investigations found out social workers were afraid to act upon allegations for fear of being labeled homophobic. The man fostered 18 children in 15 months, having requested boys aged 5 to 12 years old. After the 4th complaint of inappropriate activity, the police became involved.

    Wathey was jailed for five years after being convicted of four counts of sexual activity with a child and one offence of causing a child to watch sexual activity.

    Faunch received a six-year prison sentence after he was found guilty of five charges of engaging in sexual activity with a child and two of taking indecent photographs of a child.
    Date: 2003-01-01
    Placement type: Foster care
    Type of abuse: Sexual abuse
    Abuser: Foster father

    Children adopted by Kenneth H. Brandt
    Four children, three boys and a girl, were adopted by Kenneth H. Brandt from Texas in 2011. Brandt allegedly raped three of the children and allowed two other men to have sex with one of the boys. The adoption of one of the four children was not finalized yet.

    The children briefly enrolled in public education, but were removed from school, to be home-schooled.
    Date: 2011-03-01
    Placement type: Adoption
    Type of abuse: Sexual abuse, Sexual exploitation
    Abuser: Adoptive father

    Ariel Ariza (aka Ariel James Mitchell), and L.M. in care of Rev. James Mitchell
    At least 2 teen-aged boys brought to Vancouver, WA, from Colombia by Catholic priest James Mitchell. He promised them U.S. citizenship via adoption and then subjected them to years of sexual abuse. At least 4 boys lived with Mitchell over the years. Ariel and L.M. have alleged sexual abuse. Ariel was told he was adopted by Mitchell, but was only granted US visa. It is unclear if the boys were ever legally adopted.
    Date: 1982-01-01
    Placement type: To be adopted
    Type of abuse: Sexual abuse
    Abuser: Adoptive father

    Boy adopted by Claude Edward Foulk
    For over a decade a boy adopted by Claude Edward Foulk, was allegedly sexually abused by his adoptive father. Faulk allegedly abused five other children, while working at a mental facilities in Southern California.
    Date:
    Placement type: Adoption
    Type of abuse: Sexual abuse
    Abuser: Adoptive father

    Boy adopted by Donald Shissler
    14-year-old boy was adopted from foster care by Donald Shissler with the intent to sexually abuse him. At least two other boys were also abused by Shissler, who made sexual explicit photos and videos of the boys while engaging in sexual activity. Shissler was a former Episcopalian priest, high school teacher, and foster parent.
    Date: 2002-05-31
    Placement type: Adoption
    Type of abuse: Sexual abuse, Sexual exploitation
    Abuser: Adoptive father

    Boy adopted by Douglas John Burnham
    In the 1970′s a 9-year-old boy was adopted by Douglas Burnham and molested for years. Burnham was convicted of first-degree sexual abuse in 1983 and received probation. Burnham continued to molest children and in March 2011 was sentenced to 12 1/2 years.
    Date: 1983-01-01
    Placement type: Adoption
    Type of abuse: Sexual abuse
    Abuser: Adoptive father

    Boy adopted by George Alex Allen
    16-year-old boy adopted by a former supervisor for the Administration for Children’s Services and his wife, was sexually abused by his adoptive father.
    Date: 1998-11-26
    Placement type: Adoption
    Type of abuse: Sexual abuse
    Abuser: Adoptive father

    Boy adopted by James and Linda Ramaglia
    19-year-old mentally disabled boy adopted by James and Linda Ramaglia was sexually abused by his adoptive father, who was a convicted sex offender and who had served four-and-a-half years in prison for molesting two of his other children.
    Date: 2009-08-24
    Placement type: Adoption
    Type of abuse: Sexual abuse
    Abuser: Adoptive father

    Boy adopted by Scott Legrand
    17-year-old former foster child was sexually abused by his adoptive father, who was a Devereux Florida state-contracted foster care facility worker
    Date: 2008-02-08
    Placement type: Adoption
    Type of abuse: Sexual abuse
    Abuser: Adoptive father

    Boy adopted by Stephen Pratt
    12 year old boy brought from the Dominican Republic in 1983 was sexually abused by Stephen Pratt. the adoption was finalized in the US in 1986. Investigators also found evidence of child pornography in the home. Outcome of the case is unknown.
    Date: 1983-11-01
    Placement type: Adoption
    Type of abuse: Sexual abuse
    Abuser: Adoptive father

    Boys adopted by John Krueger
    John Krueger, a 53-year-old Bakersfield man is accused of molesting four young boys, all children adopted from an orphanage in Kherson, Ukraine. Three of the boys were his sons, the fourth, an acquaintance.
    Date: 2006-04-13
    Placement type: Adoption
    Type of abuse: Sexual abuse
    Abuser: Adoptive father

    Boys adopted by William Fox
    Three boys adopted by William Fox were sexually abused by their adoptive father. William Fox made headlines in 1981 when talking a teen boy out of committing suicide. Fox later adopted the boy and wrote a book about his experience. He also received the National Father of the Year Award. William Fox adopted 10 boys in total, three of whom filed complaints about sexual abuse.
    Date: 2011-03-21
    Placement type: Adoption
    Type of abuse: Sexual abuse
    Abuser: Adoptive father

    The fact of the matter is that I can go on and on and on and on and on. I guess I could have done it earlier but I frankly couldn’t believe that anybody would be so mind-bogglingly stupid as to think that I was citing the only case out there. For you to assert that the case from my article is a “singular, isolated event” merely becomes a statement that there is something very profoundly wrong with you.

    3) This one – more than any other – is why I am blocking you as an utterly vile human being.

    You earlier said to me:

    Plus you make so many huge assumptions about me and I guess because you use ALL CAPS, it makes you right?

    You just now said to me:

    You assumed that I would “NEVER DARE pull this stunt if I was anything other than a Christian?” Your words exactly? Did you not make this assumption?

    But before either of those two remarks, you said this:

    Michael, as a new visitor to your blog I must say that you are an idiot. Your arguments are weak, your logic is flawed, and your claims of being a follower of Jesus don’t sit well with anyone who knows the bible. Moreover, your hatred of all things liberal and homosexual makes me wonder if you are a closeted gay man with liberal leanings. Well, either that or a complete moron who really does not seem to have learned anything from college. Now, go sterilize yourself.

    Now, for you to actually become morally indignant toward me for making an “assumption” about you when you have JUST gotten through saying that you “wonder if I am a closeted gay man with liberal leanings” is beyond merely hypocritical. It goes beyond my wondering how your skull doesn’t explode from trying to contain the contractions. You are simply total vermin You are maximally dishonest. You are utterly incapable of manifesting any integrity whatsoever. You are a vacuum where any sort of virtue ought to belong.

    What in the world is morally wrong with you that you can barge in on my blog and make the nastiest assumption imaginable about me and then actually become outraged that I would make any sort of assumption about you whatsoever???

    I wrote an article about people just like you here: http://startthinkingright.wordpress.com/2012/01/26/of-liberalism-victimism-avoidance-projection-and-other-personality-disorders/

    And I quickly get tired of wasting time with headcases such as yourself.

    Good riddance.

  9. James Pate, MD Says:

    I feel terrible for the children damaged by this pedophile. It makes me sick to my stomach also. But homosexuailty has nothing to do with pedophilia especially given that most pedophiles consider themselves to be straight. Children are not harmed by loving parents, regardless of their blood relation or sexual attraction. Children are indeed harmed by pedophiles, but also by bigots who vilify entire groups of individuals and imprint their hatred upon them.

  10. meredithancret Says:

    Coming from a lesbian conservative, this is an outrageously offensive post.

    Sexual abuse of ANY gender has nothing to do with homosexuality or heterosexuality. I would NEVER harm a child, in any way whatsoever. Neither would ANY of the other homosexuals I know.

    You don’t have to be gay to rape a member of the same sex. Rape, of a child especially, is about power and having the time and ability to do so.

    I witnessed, doing vision screenings in pre-schools and working with children in childcare positions in churches and in secular areas, more cases of child abuse (physical mostly, but some sexual) in children of heterosexual parents (some their own child, some adopted, some foster children) than I have ever read about in homosexual families.

    One case does not make a trend.

  11. Michael Eden Says:

    James Pate,

    I am painfully aware of your politically correct definition of pedophilia as having nothing whatsoever to do with homosexuality.

    Prior to and throughout the vast majority of the 20th century, common standard psychology viewed homosexuality in terms of pathological models as a mental illness. And then one day they embraced PC.

    In the exact same way, for all of history there were two and only two sexual genders: male and female, boy and girl. And then one day there were suddenly ALL KINDS of sexaul genders (such that boys were no longer “male” but ???) and even more sexual orientations. And of course they were ALL equally legitimate.

    Nowadays, a man can literally decide he’s a woman trapped in a man’s body, and he wants to sexually mutilate himself by cutting off his own penis, and psychologists perceive that as the epitome of mental health. Because the field is as diseased as the people chopping off their penises.

    I wrote an article back in 2008 that deals with one of the infamous “pedophile” examples: the story of the “pedophile priests” in the Catholic Church. According to the February 2004 research study conducted by the John Jay College of Criminal Justice – found that 81% of the so-called abuse cases involved teen-age boys and up. And teenage boys are fully-formed sexually. But let’s not allow facts to get in the way.

    In that same article, I also document the massive homosexual sub-culture that has sadly come to dominate the Catholic priesthood and which by some incredibly bizarre coincidence just happens to mysteriously coincide with all these priests humping boys.

    Not to unintentially arouse any homosexuals out there,but PEDOPHILE MY BUTT.

  12. Michael Eden Says:

    Meredithancret,

    See my response to most of what you say here.

    As to your “one case does not make a trend” line, I was easily able to find a dozen other cases. And I could have gone on an on finding such cases.

    I’ll tell the guys who get butt-raped in prison to relax because there’s absolutely nothing whatsoever that is sexual – and certainly not “homosexual” about the fact that they just got raped and sodomized. And just remember, boys: there’s absolute nothing homosexual about a man sodomizing you no matter how much simple common sense says otherwise.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 493 other followers

%d bloggers like this: