| Related Links |
|
Rosendall: "Homosexuals pooh-pooh pedophilia" (The Washington Times) 01/08/03 Reed Irvine: "Dissing the 'Dish' about pedophilia" (The Washington Times) 12/28/02 Regent University Law Review, Spring 2002 Family Research Council paper: "Homosexuality and Child Sexual Abuse" "NAMBLA: Out of the Movement's Bounds" 02/94 International Lesbian and Gay Association |
Washington Times prints GLAA response on pedophilia, with changes
Dear GLAA members and friends,
Today's (1/8/03) Washington Times prints my letter to the editor on behalf of GLAA, responding to a homophobic letter on Dec. 28 from Reed Irvine of Accuracy in Media, which responded to an Andrew Sullivan column in which Andrew had pointed out that gay organizations have overwhelmingly rejected pedophilia.
My letter is online at:
http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20030108-79003880.htm#5
Reed Irvine's letter, to which I was responding, is online at:
http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20021228-83919074.htm#4
I appreciate the Times' willingness to print contrary viewpoints, but I object to their editor's action in changing "gay" to "homosexual" throughout my letter, about which he said nothing when he confirmed yesterday that they would print my letter. (Talk about accuracy in media!) I am almost surprised that he did not go ahead and change GLAA's name at the bottom of it. It is one thing to have a particular style sheet (however biased) for their own articles, and another thing to put words in the mouths of the readers whose letters they publish. I have sent their letters editor, Matthew Rarey, the message below. (I should have addressed him "Aunt Sally.") Oh, well, it's an occupational hazard.
Rick Rosendall, "homosexual activist"
GLAA Vice President for Political Affairs
I strongly object to your changing "gay" to "homosexual"
throughout my letter as printed in today's letters page.
Regardless of your own style sheet, this sort of editorial
policy makes no sense, as it is my name below the letter
and not yours, and that is not what I wrote. Virtually no
one talks that way any more, including Times readers.
This is such a relic, I cannot believe you would insist on
doing this. Why can't you let people speak in their own
voices, short of obscenity? In fact, why don't you insist on it?
Rick Rosendall
Thanks for writing, Mr. Rosendell. Your letter will run tomorrow.
Cordially,
--------------
----------
Dear Editor:
Reed Irvine
of Accuracy in Media ("Dissing the 'Dish' about pedophilia,"
Letters, Dec. 28) defends the
work on pedophilia done by Dr. Timothy
Dailey of the Family Research Council, and questions the motives of
International Lesbian and Gay Association
delegates who voted in 1994 to expel NAMBLA and other pedophile groups.
I was there as a delegate at the ILGA World Conference in New York
City in 1994, as Mr. Irvine was not, when we voted to expel the
pedophile groups. There was a small minority defending the North American
Man Boy Love Association (NAMBLA),
but they were defeated by an 89 percent majority after a debate that
featured impassioned calls for the protection of children and youth
from exploitation. That decision may have been long in coming, but
it happened over eight years ago. As part of the lead-up to the vote,
I wrote an op-ed column
condemning pedophilia that ran in several
gay newspapers around the country.
If gay people are going to be condemned regardless of whether we
do the right thing or not, and our actions are going to be discounted
based on groundless aspersions about our motives, then the problem
is not with gays but with those who are passing such biased
judgments.
Any study done under the auspices of the Family Research Council (FRC)
is suspect, given that organization's history of vicious, venomous
attacks against gay people conducted without the slightest moral
or intellectual scruple. FRC's claims are not supported by the scientific
community. Last spring, the homophobes had to resort to publishing
their smears in the
Regent
University Law Review (yes, that's Pat
Robertson's right wing diploma mill) because they couldn't get
published in a credible, peer-reviewed professional journal.
Mr. Irvine and his allies appear more interested in attacking gay
people than in protecting children. In fact, gay and lesbian youth
also deserve understanding and protection. Denying the existence
of such youth does not protect them any more than teens in general
are protected by denying and rendering taboo any discussion of
their sexuality.
Gay communities around the country have established service
organizations to help and protect the very at-risk youth who have
been thrown out of their houses by parents who were swayed by
the likes of Mr. Irvine's friends at the Family Research Council. It
is the intolerant religious right that is exploiting youth, in furtherance
of their hateful political agenda. Fortunately, fewer and fewer
Americans are buying it.
Richard J. Rosendall
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rick Rosendall"
To: "letters to the editor"
Sent: Wednesday, January 08, 2003 5:54 AM
Subject: Re: Dissing the 'Dish' about pedophilia
Matthew,
----- Original Message -----
From: "letters to the editor"
To: "'Rick Rosendall'"
Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2003 4:52 PM
Subject: RE: Dissing the 'Dish' about pedophilia
Matthew Rarey
Matthew A. Rarey
Letters Editor
202.636.3386
From: Rick Rosendall
Reply To: Rick Rosendall
Sent: Saturday, December 28, 2002 10:31 AM
To: letters@washingtontimes.com
Subject: Re: Dissing the 'Dish' about pedophilia
Message Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Sincerely,
Vice President for Political Affairs
Gay and Lesbian Activists Alliance of Washington, DC
Washington
