Peter Tatchell & why the paedophiles love him

Posted by:

Peter Tatchell & why the paedophiles love him

There are some unpleasant things in this life.

One of them is getting ‘tweeted’ by the prominent British homosexual activist, Peter Tatchell, at 2am in the morning. Just like this morning.

Somehow, Peter got drawn into my recent post about the Sydney Leather Pride Association’s web page and the ‘educational’ information it provided on how to signal a desire to have sex with boys. These guys marched at the Mardi Gras. So did school kids. And yes, this is the same Mardi Gras that Peter Tatchell was given the ‘honour’ of leading in 2011.

So, Peter sent me a message from the other side of the world to explain that he didn’t support paedophilia even though he has campaigned to lower the age of consent in England to the age of 14, defended a book that promoted paedophilia in 1997, wrote an entire chapter for a book published in the early 1980s by the former Vice President of the Paedophile Information Exchange and has claimed that sexual relationships between adults and children aren’t always bad.

In fact, Peter reckons that he’s always opposed the idea of adults having sex with kids.

I can only reply this way: Peter, if you are really opposed to the idea of adults having sex with kids, then you are doing it wrong.

Let’s go through all the ways that Peter is doing it wrong.

It starts with his misguided view that sex is a human right.

It is not. Human rights belong to all people. Like the right to life. And as Peter should well know, children have no ‘right’ to sex. On the contrary, there is an obligation for the parents and guardians of children to protect their innocence.

Sex is the right of a married couple.

So, Peter, that counts you out. All the gay sex that you have and that you promote is illegal and immoral. You have no right to it at all. And as there is such a thing as justice, one day you will pay for the ill-gotten rights that you have stolen for yourself and then abused so perversely.

In the meantime, there is always confession.

Furthermore, Peter’s claim that schoolchildren should be taught fellatio and cunnilingus, as a ‘safe’ option, is both disgusting and unhealthy. And his absurd claim that the new ‘morality’ means that all sexualities are equally valid is nothing but a rejection of morality altogether.

It is also a lie.

The heterosexual relationship is not the same as that of a sodomite such as Peter. Peter Tatchell and his buddies cannot create life. But an unmarried 15 year old boy and girl can do that. That is why heterosexuality is so powerful. It is a power that comes with great responsibility. Hence the necessity for commitment throughout life, in order to raise and nourish new life. Marriage is the institution that ensures the tremendous power found only in heterosexual relationships is ordered and directed for a greater good of the individuals involved and society in general.

But that is not the only way Peter is wrong on this point. He claims that as long there is mutual consent, then anything goes. It’s a philosophy that is comfortable including children.

And we know this, because in 1997 Peter wrote that:

“While it may be impossible to condone paedophilia, it is time society acknowledged the truth that not all sex involving children is unwanted abusive and harmful.”

Just so you know, this wasn’t written in the deep, dark recesses of a publication with a name like ‘BLAZE’. According to a New South Wales Royal Commission into child sexual abuse running at the same time that Peter put pen to paper, this term was found to mean ‘Boy Lovers and Zucchini Eaters’.

Now Blaze is the name of South Australia’s premiere homosexual publication. Don’t you think it’s weird that elements of homosexual culture have this strange, continual yet coincidental link with paedophilic literature and culture?

But I digress, back to Peter…

Peter’s letter was not sent to Blaze, but was posted to The Guardian – one of the largest newspapers in England. And it was duly published.

Peter wrote this letter to defend the ‘courageous’ free speech of a group of ‘intellectuals’ who “challenge the assumption that all sex involving children and adults is abusive”. They are Peter’s exact words.

And a decade before writing a letter in defence of a book that challenged assumptions that paedophilia was wrong, Peter actually contributed a whole chapter to a pro-paedophile book, called The Betrayal of Youth. It was Chapter 9: Questioning Ages of Majority and Ages of Consent.

Tsk, tsk. Not a good look is it.

And Peter, the staunch anti-Catholic, shared the pages of this book with a Catholic priest. Unfortunately, Fr Michael Ingram, who wrote Chapter 7 of the book, was found guilty a few years later of doing exactly what he wrote about: children and sex.

So Peter might not like the Catholic Church but he’s more than happy to write books with ‘Catholics’ who ignore the Church’s teaching on morality and who write pro-paedophile material.

In his defence, Peter claims that he has an excuse. It’s not a lame one, like he didn’t realise what the book was about. Even that would stretch all credibility. Nor does he claim that it is wrong to write books promoting paedophilia. As we know from above, Peter is on the record as saying that challenging these assumptions about paedophilia is courageous.

No, Peter just states this:

“I had no idea that (Warren Middleton, the Editor) was involved in paedophilia advocacy when I was asked to write my essay.”

And then he says this:

“My chapter in the book did not endorse child sex. It merely questioned whether 16 was the appropriate legal age of consent. Different people mature at different ages. There are many countries that have diverse ages of consent, some higher and some lower than 16. I did not advocate the abolition of the age of consent or specify at what age sex should become lawful.

I was not aware of who the other authors were or what they wrote until the book was published. I would not have agreed to be in the book if I had known. I should not be blamed for what others wrote. It is wrong to tar me with their opinions. There is nothing in my contribution that even remotely condones child sex abuse.”

For those not aware, Warren Middleton went to jail for possessing indecent images sometime after this book was published. Before putting it together, Warren was the Vice President of the Paedophile Information Exchange – the same organisation that is now causing all sorts of embarrassment for senior officials in the UK Labor Party who gave it support and funding in the 1970s. And Peter knew Warren from the time they were comrades in the Gay Liberation Front about a decade before this book was published.

So I find it hard to accept Peter’s excuses. But maybe they are true. And if that’s the case, then Peter must surely face up to this stone, cold fact: he might not be a paedophile, but his campaigning to lower the age of consent sure made him a lot of paedophile friends.

They loved him so much, that they even hoodwinked him into writing a chapter in a book that they used to support their cause.

And that is why if Peter was really serious about opposing paedophilia, then he would face up to the fact that he’s been doing it wrong his entire adult life.

37
If you like this post and wish to contribute financially to support Bernard Gaynor's efforts, please donate. Make a Donation Button

Discussion

  1. neil d.  March 12, 2014 at 3:23 pm

    Many Christians ask is, what is this insane insistence of pushing the boundaries further and further? Legalising sodomy wasn’t enough. Legal recognition of civil unions wasn’t enough, and God forbid, if same sex marriage is passed, that won’t be enough either. Its inter-0species, inter race and then who knows where? Why? Because the ultimate aim is to be rid of the Biblical restraints that are so essential to the fair and balanced society which we enjoy as part of our Judeo Christian heritage and fair minded rejection of heresy, masonic filth and the false idols of a thousand “faiths” ie cults from other non western countries! . Both our laws and our legal system are based on the Bible, without which we would descend into anarchy, lawlessness, pederasty and child eating. The same sex marriage issue is clearly a war of worldviews between the godless Fabian secular humanists, who seek to dominate and change our foundations and replace it with one world government, inter-sex relations and the hegemony of relativism on a parasitical scale, and those with a Christian worldview, who seek to keep them intact. Thos who fight the homosexual and lesbian community and their godless bretheren, are probably the most driven and the loudest of all political lobbies in Australia in the fight to cast off every vestige of Biblical restraint and concept of sin.

    (reply)
    • Troy Simpson  March 12, 2014 at 7:14 pm

      Neil D, you seem to be against “inter race” marriage. Is that right? Also, do you really think same-sex marriage might lead to “child eating”?

      (reply)
      • nathan  March 14, 2014 at 11:19 am

        Troy, I think you’ll find that the original poster Neil D. isnt so much against inter-race marriage but more pointing out that the slippery slope is very sloped! And the more you let society run down it the more races will be encouraged to interbreed and thus change the genetic makeup of what was once a very Judeo Christian society in all its glory. The days of Empire may be gone but the benefits and privileges it provided in the Anglosphere must not be lost. And strange as it seems “baby eating” has become prevalent amongst some sub-cultures in the homosexual and masonic demi monde largely in sub-Saharan Africa if we are to believe the blogs. Whilst I have seen no evidence of it myself in the inner city enclaves of Carlton and Surrey Hills, I believe you will find the “swinging Saharan” towns of Lgupo and Manbde with the crazed all-night drumming and sodomonic rituals are the scene for this abhorrent cultural trope. More serious in the Australasian context is the prevalence of illegal halal-meat trading and homosexual halal-centric “farmers markets” springing up in Islamic centres such as Gosford and Bendigo.

        (reply)
      • Jim from Boomba  March 15, 2014 at 10:52 am

        You’re not fooling anybody, mate – your real name is “Homer Simpson”, isn’t it?

        (reply)
        • david  March 17, 2014 at 12:53 pm

          Jim, that is a childish response to Nathan’s post. I dont think its fair to call people names because they have a different view to your – well unless they are asking for trouble or are demeaning our country or some like. We can all argue about things like whether homosexuals are demeaning the Judeo Christian heritage of this land but lets not stoop to the puerile humour of the left in doing so.

          (reply)
  2. JIMMIE HANSEN  March 12, 2014 at 10:52 pm

    REALLY!!!!!!!!!!! THE IDEA THAT YOU THINK OF CHILDREN HAVING SEX MAKES ME SICK…..WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH YOU, THRERE IS NEVER EVER EVER A REASON FOR ADULTS TO HAVE SEX WITH CHILDREN…YOUR A SICK SICK PERSON…I CAN’T EVEN TYPE HOW SORRY YOU ARE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

    (reply)
    • Bernard Gaynor  March 13, 2014 at 7:11 am

      Hello Jimmie. I can understand why you are a little upset at the thought of adults having sex with children. You should know that your concern is being directed at the wrong person. Peter Tatchell is the bloke who has said these things. I am just the messenger.

      (reply)
  3. Kat  March 13, 2014 at 10:54 am

    Ah Peter Thatchell, the man who threw away his Christian upbringing and is a self proclaimed atheist who supports the age of sexual consent to be dropped to 14 years, encourages destructive sex education directed at children and relaxed strict laws to access pornography saying pornography can have some social benefits. Believer of global warming theories, co organiser of green socialist conferences, hits out against the Catholic Church without even attempting to understand the position as to why the Catholic Church opposes homosexuality. Thatchell criticised the Catholic Church and Pope Benedict XVI, whom he described as “the ideological inheritor of Nazi homophobia”. Thatchell is also an animal rights activist heavilty involved with PETA who seem to think that animal rights are more important than human life. Confused much? something went very wrong with this guy, calls himself green because he is too yellow to admit that he is red. its called the traffic light effect.

    (reply)
    • damian  March 14, 2014 at 10:06 am

      Whilst I agree with all your points, especially regarding pedophilia in the Left, I think you may find that not all homosexuality in nature is “wrong” and much of it involves Christians. For example, if a prominent monarchist were to for example “marry” his life long loving partner, and keep a gaggle of young lads who are experimenting with their sexuality – would you throw a stone? I think not. If polygamists DID involve for example members of their distant family in the marriage bed – all above board? Well, probably if they followed the Old testament! I am not sure why you cant see that religion binds up to our Lord and love itself – and if the law recognises Christian and Muslim marrying into a joint religion where common goals are shared in loving matrimony – we would be a lot better off! I know for example a Priest who has wed a young chap and theres no ructions in the congregation =- and thats on the North Shore of Sydney! It takes all kinds.

      (reply)
      • Kat  March 14, 2014 at 11:09 am

        Um I not sure what you are trying to say Damian, your reference to a priest being ‘married” to another man is Anglican no doubt, a Church which was founded by a man who tried to redefine marriage and if he did not get his way lopped off a few heads, and I do believe he was a prominent monarchist in his time that the True Church founded by Christ (Catholic) opposed. homosexual behaviour in nature is always wrong, because it goes against natural law itself. Christ said go and sin no more, not do whatever makes you feel good.

        (reply)
        • paul  March 14, 2014 at 12:42 pm

          Kat, I think what Damian is getting at is that whilst the origins of our churches may be closely tied to homosexuality and the rich homo-erotic heritage of early christian worship rites attests to this, contemporary homosexuality with its vile predilection for gluttony, materialism, venality and “offence for offence’s sake” has driven the sacred into the cupboard so to speak. I dont think its an Anglican thing – but rather more pertinent in Rome where the “bearded guidos’ do tend to run the shop – converting their political allies from third world “social engineering theology” and the like! And I dont think they are paying much attention to whats natural law and what isnt! That plus the odious self-seeking plague of Opus Dei influence has goaded even outwardly heterosexual congregations to take up the rose – and pervert what was surely a practice handed down by the Lord pure and now cheapened and flagrantly debased. In the name of a physical practice loathed by all God-worshippers apart from the heathens, a practice that even the so-called “Bears” of the Gay Community if there really is one – afford no particular significance except signifying revulsion and disgust! And as Damian himself says there are priests actively marrying boys as young as 12 in well to do suburbs in our own country if you are to believe the Theology blogs, and some even riding motorcycles in gang colours as part of bikie wars! You do wonder where this liberalisation will end – meth labs in church cellars as an experiment in “community engagement”!

          (reply)
          • Bernard Gaynor  March 14, 2014 at 12:50 pm

            Paul, homosexuality was not tied to the early Church, except for that fact that it was condemned.

          • Kat  March 14, 2014 at 2:48 pm

            Paul your ramblings make no historical sense, homo erotic heritage of Christian practices? Dont know where you got that info from….. and if there are priests who supposedly marry young boys they are not Catholic ones, and please if you know of any who call themselves “married” to boys as young as twelve report it to the police as this is a crime.

      • Bernard Gaynor  March 14, 2014 at 12:49 pm

        Damian, all homosexuality is immoral. If it wasn’t, you would necessarily arrive at the conclusion that the Mardi Gras was fine and dandy.

        (reply)
      • Ben  March 17, 2014 at 3:19 pm

        @damian Pure fantasy my friend.

        (reply)
    • Ben  March 17, 2014 at 3:15 pm

      Well written Kat, very skilfully written.

      (reply)
      • Kat  March 19, 2014 at 4:43 pm

        Thankyou Ben :)

        (reply)
  4. lydia  March 13, 2014 at 8:21 pm

    I agree with you Jamie. It is sick sick sick…….It is NEVER ok to have sex with children. No child even thinks of it little wants to do it. Its the furtherest thing from there mind. Children are innocent and should be kept that way. They need to be protected from idiots like Peter Tatchell. I mean its WRONG……..totally WRONG….its disgusting……

    (reply)
  5. carol  March 14, 2014 at 10:15 am

    The gay agenda is very invasive. Indeed, as we have seen the motive behind Same Sex Marriage is ideological and political In Europe, so that in its manic drive to impose uniformity at every level, “gay marriage” is to be enforced so that a same-sex couple “marrying” in one member state, will be legally recognisable in any other EU member state, together with all the all the state benefits, and status under EU law, whether or not the national policy of a member state opposes it or not. This is more than an extension of statism – it it totalitarian. Its likely that in the future – as in Finland – gay marriage wont just be legalised but enforced for a certain proportion of the population – so that citizens have to marry same sex just to keep the statistsics up! Talk about the slippery slope! Next men will be forced to live their lives as draught horses, with paying customers riding them bare back around cities, and using them for breeding at night! It will be enforced under exactly the same moral imperatives that insists that gays be entitled to anything they like in a society (ie marry). A Christian voice is being raised, but nationally in Australia at least, it is relatively weak. My own belief is that so important is the issue that ALL Christian churches, as a matter of principle (separately, not as denominations) should formally register their protest to the government on SSM, so that the latter is beseiged by the testimony of thousands of churches which will stand for the truth of real, that is ultimately Christian, marriage. If they dont it is highly probable that within a decade the churches will be all torn down and filled with refuse as mega-tips, and giant homosexual rave-style parties held on top of them every weekend, featuring homosexual rock stars and celebrities whose new found power will be drawn from a satanic order. At that point I dont expect there will be anyone left to protest!

    (reply)
  6. brent  March 14, 2014 at 11:11 am

    Carol – I think you are correct but perhaps we should see less government and more freedoms for the citizen – not some humbuggery like young dilettantes like Tim Wilson crave – but full-on moral and social freedoms for the citizen who chooses his own path and his own model of living – completely within a Bernardi-approved Judeo-Christian context of course. We know of course that religious freedom is increasingly coming under attack by those committed to the secular left worldview – many of them WITHIN the Christian churches and the British Royal family! Nowdays we see counterfeit religious movements arising everywhere, largely committed to the destruction of personal freedom, ie the radical green agenda. Whilst this agenda would like to suggest Islam is not on a par with Christianity, it has fundamental values which are inimical both to Christianity and to freedom and democracy. While ordinary Muslims are to be welcomed, the political ideology of Islam must be rejected if it gets too close to power or attempts any sort of takeover of the House of Windsor (ie va backdoor – eg Harrods!) As Bernard has repeated MANY MANY times, if Australia is to survive as a genuinely free and open society it will have to embrace a more loyal form of theology, based around Papal-clan memory and a rejection of Masonic structures and fallacies. There certainly are moderate homosexuals, but Islam is not moderate and the social science data on it proves why the institutions of marriage and the heterosexual family are so overwhelmingly vital to society especially whilst under cultural threat from foreigners, excepting the Judeo Christian heritage and the Royals.

    (reply)
    • kay bee  March 14, 2014 at 12:57 pm

      Part of the problem of the spread of rampant homo-sexual culture and the entitlements it demands is that it is largely a product of the Masonic traditions – free will, libertarianism and the individualism derived from centuries of fighting papism has made it very strong. Throw in a few homo-sexuals and you get a very dangerous brew. As I am myself 67 degree of York (Scottish) Rite in the Orange Lodge with Duke of York, father of Princess Mary of Denmark and Prince of Wales, I can speak with some conviction, and breeding. John Howard is Order of Garter which is honorary Lodge ruled by Prince Philip and The Queen. Kim Beasley, Malcolm Turnbull and Tony Abbot are well-known members of the Lodge Prudence, which is judiciary Blue Lodge, but I don’t know what degree, as I was never interested to find out because this lodge is full of moral issues never you mind that. Not that Im implying any of them are actively pushing the gay rights agenda as far as I know but they cant speak publicly on their Lodge affairs and they may have already seen things that show where the currents are flowing. Your average Joe, gay straight or bi, is not a real masonic material. On the other side he could be loyal to the organisation and we need sock puppets like him. He is also protected by rites of secrecy and involvement in a coven of highly placed “activists” which even the blind can see that he is working against Australian interests all the time but thats a result of indoctrination and he cant be held responsible. Homosexuals abhor the dark anonymity of the Lodge but crave its security, its prestige and the material benefits it provides. Same Sex marriage or indeed Transexuality’s acceptance as a new “Gender” provides the Lodge with a new agenda to push, even if it only pays off a small portion of its members. Its got the anti-papists all excited but it will founder on the rocks of sleaze and mental disturbance before it corrupts a whole generation into a sexual misanthropy. In my view.

      (reply)
  7. Suze  March 17, 2014 at 7:32 pm

    I do not agree with Peter Tatchell. But Gaynor tells lies, twists facts and purposely mislead others. Speaking of paedophiles…when are you Catholics going to pay compensation to the children who were violated – sexually and physically abused by your Catholic priests?

    (reply)
    • Kat  March 18, 2014 at 8:56 am

      @ Suze, Will the Anglican Church, Salvos, police force, gov education department (teachers) etc. also pay compensation for Child abuse? Or do we bring to justice the people who commit these crimes and make them responsible for their own actions? This whole idea that all Catholics are responsible for the personal actions of the infiltration of paedophiles/homosexuals within the Catholic Church is pathetic, the Catholic Church never condoned child abuse and never will.

      (reply)
      • Rory Donnellan  March 19, 2014 at 1:46 pm

        Kat, Unfortunately the Catholic Church has done very little to prevent the sodomite infiltration of the clergy in the last 40 years – including the College of Bishops and Sacred College of Cardinals. A 1962 instruction that “sodomites were not to be admitted to Holy Orders” was widely ignored. There are also sodomites throughout Catholic healthcare and Catholic education up to senior levels. In South Africa, Bishop Reginald Cawcutt, the spokesman of the South African Bishops Conference, ran a website for fellow sodomite clergy (“St Sebastian’s Angels”), where he boasted that no so-called homophobes were permitted to become Priests in his diocese. This Bishop would let “Gay Pride” ran amok in Catholic Churches (Cape Town’s Sacred Heart Church for example) where Our Lord is reserved in the tabernacle. In my wife’s home diocese of Palm Beach, Florida, one Bishop who resigned after sodomising boys, was promptly replaced by another Bishop who had a criminal history in another diocese involving young men. The replacement Bishop (another Pope John Paul 2 appointee) had to similarly resign in disgrace in very short order. In the adjacent Archdiocese of Miami, an investigation found that more than 90% of Priests were homosexuals – the seminary there was dubbed the “Pink Palace”. Even now, Pope Francis has just appointed a notorious sodomite, Monsignor Ricca – who was caught in the act in an elevator with a “rent boy” and lived “in flagrante” in Uruguay with his boyfriend for many years – to clean up the Vatican bank.

        (reply)
        • Rory Donnellan  March 19, 2014 at 2:37 pm

          Please note that the cases mentioned above are only a small selection – an exhaustive list would likely run into the thousands. Other recent examples that received prominent media attention are Cardinal O’Brien of Scotland who made homosexual advances on many of his Priests, Archbishop Rembert Weakland of Milwaukee who paid 450 thousand dollars of archdiocesan funds for the silence of one of his many “gay-lovers”, Bishop Daniel Ryan of Illinois etc etc. It’s also ludicrous to hold the Catholic Church – the True Church of God – to the same standard as perverse false religions like the Anglicans, salvos etc. Anglicans have no valid Holy Orders – and thus their so-called “Bishops” and “Priests” are nothing more than heretical laymen and laywomen.

          (reply)
          • Kat  March 19, 2014 at 4:12 pm

            It is very sad that the Catholic Church was infiltrated by homosexuals/paedophiles, just another attempt the devil to try destroy Gods Church , however I think you are missing my point. it is not ever the fault of anyone else but the individual person who commits a crime, in this case not the institution. If anyone perverts the course of justice in hiding the actions of these people who have committed these crimes they should also be held accountable, however to blame good people who are Catholic, Police force, Anglican, Salvos etc. or anyone else involved in a institution were these crimes were committed is wrong. It also seems as if the Catholic Church is continuously singled out, when really it is rife everywhere in our current society, especially were the faith has been lost. Pray hard for our Bishops, they need it more now than ever.

  8. Rory Donnellan  March 19, 2014 at 9:44 pm

    Kat, You say that anyone who perverts the cause of justice should be held accountable. What then do you make of the Catholic Church’s plan to canonize Pope John Paul 2 who sheltered notorious sexual predators like Marcial Maciel (founder of the Legionaries of Christ) and Archbishop Paul Casimir Marcinkus? When Italian police issued a warrant of arrest for Archbishop Marcinkus, their prime suspect behind the masonic ritual slaying of Vatican banker, Roberto Calvi, Pope John Paul 2 pleaded “diplomatic immunity” on his behalf, and he was protected from prosecution. Archbishop Marcinkus was also a suspect in the slaying of Carmen “Mino” Pecorelli, an investigative journalist compiling an expose of freemasons within the Roman Curia and College of Bishops. Once again, diplomatic immunity frustrated justice. Archbishop Marcinkus was one of the many freemasons on Pecorelli’s list.

    (reply)
    • Rory Donnellan  March 19, 2014 at 10:08 pm

      Well worth a read for anyone unfamiliar with some of the subjects under discussion… http://www.christianorder.com/editorials/editorials_2012/editorials_augsept12.html

      (reply)
    • Kat  March 20, 2014 at 9:48 am

      Rory I am not sure where you are coming from with your opinions but in my experience they are leaning toward radical traditionalist. I am no Authority over who is to be Canonised, and I cannot comment or make assumptions about Blessed Pope John Paul II and if he had knowledge of these men and what they did. I am familiar with the Latin Mass, grew up going to to a Latin Mass every sunday, so no I am not anti Latin Mass either and yes I am younger than 35, however I will not discuss conspiracies and assumptions against Authority, Pope John Paul II will be canonised regardless of yours mine or anyone else opinion. I believe Blessed Pope John Paul II was a man who suffered a lot in his Papacy, which ultimately drew him closer to a very deep relationship with God. Also it is ones state of the soul at death that really counts in regard to sainthood, remember St. Peter denied Christ three times yet is a Saint.

      (reply)
      • Rory Donnellan  March 20, 2014 at 9:20 pm

        Pope John Paul 2 also sheltered Bernard Cardinal Law who was wanted for questioning in connection with the transfer of known sodomites from one parish to the next throughout his Boston Archdiocese. After his promotion as Archpriest of a Roman Basilica, he too enjoyed diplomatic immunity from prosecution. We do know that St Peter REPENTED of having denied Our Lord. Sadly we don’t know whether Pope John Paul 2 ever repented of all the sodomites he turned into Bishops – not to mention his active participation in repeated Assisi indifferentist extravaganzas – or his public veneration of the koran. You don’t want to be held responsible for the infiltration of sodomite clergy within the Catholic Church, and yet when you label as a “rad-trad” or “conspiracy” nut anyone who wishes to shine a light on this issue with a view to exposing the lavender mafia, you become part of the problem.

        (reply)
        • Kat  March 21, 2014 at 6:54 am

          Sorry Rory, i am done with this conversation as it may become uncharitable, PAX.

          (reply)

Add a Comment

  1. Welcome to the Bottom of the Sexual Slippery Slope » RickMick | RickMick  April 28, 2014 at 6:54 pm
  2. The Left’s Push For Adult-Child Sex  April 29, 2014 at 12:23 pm
  3. The Left Pushes for Adult-Child Sex | Your high education waits for you!  April 29, 2014 at 7:50 pm
  4. Left’s Push for Adult-Child Sex  April 30, 2014 at 2:39 am
  5. More Hollywood ‘Gay’ Sex Exploits and Your Vulnerable Teenagers » RickMick | RickMick  May 5, 2014 at 10:46 pm
  6. LGBTACS: Adult-Child Sex Added to growing acronym « Oregon Magazine  May 12, 2014 at 12:25 am