4 votes

Model gay adoptive ‘fathers’ sexually abused 6-year-old for years: offered him to pedophile ring

SYDNEY, July 3, 2013 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Police in Australia have described as "depraved" the case of a six-year-old boy who was sexually abused by his adoptive homosexual "fathers" and other men who were part of an international child-porn syndicate known as the Boy Lovers network.

Authorities in Australia and the US worked together to arrest and charge the men after it emerged that the boy had been offered to men in Australia, the US, France and Germany for sexual exploitation and the production of child pornography from a very young age.

Last week one of the men, an American named Mark J. Newton, 42, was jailed in the U.S. for 40 years and ordered to pay $400,000 in restitution to the child, while the other, Peter Truong, 36, from New Zealand, awaits sentencing in his home country.

"None of these cases are very good," Detective Inspector Jon Rouse, who heads Australia’s Queensland Police Taskforce Argos, which investigates online child exploitation and abuse, told the AFP news agency.

"What's pretty sad about this one is the way this child came into their lives. It's just really a tragedy. It's extremely depraved."

According to reports, Newton and Truong, living in Cairns, Australia at the time, began looking for a surrogate mother to give birth to a child in 2002.

Read more here...

http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/model-gay-adoptive-fathers-...

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Disturbing

Evil

Evil..

lurks everywhere. I feel for the child.

I have gay friends and believe they would make awesome parents. Kids just need people to love and teach them. Sexual orientation is just part of life. To deny people are born gay is to deny Liberty itself.

It is terrible what happened to this child and I hope he can find some peace.

'Peace is a powerful message.' Ron Paul

Sorry, but this statement is ridiculous...

To deny people are born gay is to deny Liberty itself.

Christians should not be warmongers! http://www.lewrockwell.com/vance/vance87.html

Children are not meant to be guinea pigs...

"GAY ADOPTION IS CHILD ABUSE "
By far, the scariest and most insidious corollary to same-sex marriage is same-sex adoption (already legal in some jurisdictions). This is blatant child abuse. Children need a biological mother and father. We know this is not always possible, even in the context of opposite-sex marriage, but we don't solve the problem or alleviate the inconsistency by augmenting it. Children are not meant to be guinea pigs for social engineering experiments. Self-interested partisans will manufacture statistics to support their specious claims that children of gay marriages fare as well as those of traditional families. But the phenomenon of same-sex parenting doesn't have the longevity needed for such conclusive evidence, whereas the experience of single-parent families has not always, but often shown detriment to the development of the offspring.

http://henrymakow.com/2013/07/Gay-Activist-Silenced-by-Heter...

The law cannot make a wicked person virtuous…God’s grace alone can accomplish such a thing.
Ron Paul - The Revolution

Setting a good example is a far better way to spread ideals than through force of arms. Ron Paul

your argument is flawed...

This is a horrible story. However, I don't think this is a result of homosexuality, but rather sick abusive behavior. Do you think every gay man secretly want's to rape children? How do you explain that so much child abuse happens among "straight" people and children of either sex? I am heterosexual, but that is neither here nor there. NO... this is an issue of abusive behavior and it happens in all walks of life; gay, straight, wealthy, poor, religious, non-religious, prominent citizens, ordinary middle class people,whatever.

I also take offense at your speculation on single parent families... I have raised my son from 5 to 18 on my own. He is a well rounded young man and has never been in any trouble, besides little stuff that kids do... He is very kind and respectful of others. He has done well in school. I hate to disappoint you - but much of the population does not have a text book family structure and live in the perfect house with the white picket fence...

I'm with Liberty and Truth

100% although one does not need to be a Christian to be a communitarian. I agree that the concept of individualism as often expressed by libertine libertarians is a sham. There are no individuals - only individuals functioning as part of communities.

I believe Dr. Paul extended himself as part of his campaign to reach younger and more libertine voters. At his core, if you read what he has written, he is a social conservative.

@kevinkervick, I agree with you as well that

"one does not need to be a Christian to be a communitarian."

The communitarian dimension of humanity is rooted in the very essence of what human life is. It's good to see not everyone buys into the lie of radical individualism!

"To live without a steady struggle for the Truth, that is not living but merely existing" -Piere Giorgio Frassatti

To PaulDiggsJazz and my spin

Best post I have ever seen on Daily Paul. I penned this to a few friends:

I did a google search to see if I could validate it elsewhere and which outlets were covering it (gay pedophile story) . Only the usual suspects, WND, some Christian sources, but also Sky News. Nothing in the mainstream American press as far as I could see. Have any of you seen it?

Is this not a huge story? Where is the coverage? My theory - the NSA scandal is revealing what is probably part of a bigger picture. The press is being blackmailed by government and "progressive" sources who have the goods on a lot of these people in press positions of power. There are a lot of closeted gay and pedophile men out there with a lot to lose.

Sound conspiratorial? Maybe. But my gut tells me there are bigger forces at play than political correctness, which is powerful enough but would not be able to explain the blackout we see with some potential stories. J Edgar Hoover was famous for this.

This story conflates homosexuality with pedophilia and tarnishes the legitimacy of gay adoption. It would affect the preferred narrative. I do believe personally as I have stated before that this is a bigger factor than we want to admit. Many gay men have their first sexual experiences as boys at the hands of an older man.

This story cries out for an investigative journalist. We need a real press in America.

Ben Swann?

This is a lightning rod issue. I bet Ben could spell it out.

'Peace is a powerful message.' Ron Paul

thanks.

thanks.

Christians should not be warmongers! http://www.lewrockwell.com/vance/vance87.html

First sexual experience with a man.

Your right a lot of boys got raped by their priest. The sad thing the catholic church did every thing to protect the priest NOT THE Victim!

That is the point

The Catholic Church scandal was about gay men with primitive sexuality assaulting primarily preadolescent and early pubescant boys. There is aCenturies long legacy of this depraved gay behavior. The indoctrinate sensitive young boys who in turn become part of the gay cabal.

these guys being

"homosexual" has nothing to do with it.They are just POS people, regardless. Why dont we take a look at abuse at the hands of "Christian" parents? I wonder how many "model" Christians get caught abusing their children? Or how about "model " priests for that matter? Child abusers come in all shapes, sizes,orientations, and colors.

I'd rather have a bottle in front o' me than a frontal lobotomy
www.tattoosbypaul.com
www.bijoustudio-atx.com

I wouldn't say it has nothing to do with it, but I completely

agree that child abuse comes with many faces. My problem is that mainstream news WILL NOT cover stories like these, whereas if some 'christian' parents or priests or pastors are caught, it is worldwide scandal.

Christians should not be warmongers! http://www.lewrockwell.com/vance/vance87.html

Breaking News model straight

Breaking News model straight couple abuses their child and offers to a pedophile ring= we must outlaw straight marriages as well for the kids.

It has happened therefore we must assume straight couples are guilty as well as gay couples.

Pedophiles are generally straight folks but hey lets lump everyone together and ban humans for the kids of course.

Why are we posting this news? let me guess to try to make gays look bad?

Ron Paul 2016

Wow, civil libertarians prefer PC groupthink over discussion?

This article does bring up a serious problem where government agendas to promote politically correct group equality against reasonable caution and care for the individual rights of children to not be buggered.

Get a grip folks, and discuss the problem rationally. This isn't straights vs gays, Christians vs gays, or Buddhists vs gays. Every culture has prohibitions against buggering kids.

Not all gays are child molesters. Not all straights are child molesters. But it is a fact that boys and girls are molested in roughly equal numbers, and men account for the vast majority of pedophiles. That means that all males, being 49 % of the population, account for about 90% of all pedophilia. And homosexual males being 2-4% (depending on who you ask)account for about 40-45% of all pedophilia. Homosexual assaults against children are disproportionately represented.

Maybe more gay men are inclined to bugger kids, or maybe the same percentage of gay men as straight are inclined to pedophilia - but are very busy buggering as many kids as they can. No one has studied this because it is politically incorrect to acknowledge reality.

This does not mean that every gay man should be suspect. It does mean that sexuality is a complex affair of instinctive and genetic adaptation vs cultural adaptation with a lot of individual environmental responses to both good and bad events that happened in everyone's lives. It does not fit into nice neat and equal protected classes because we are not made up of nice neat equal groups. We are all individuals, and most of us are both good and screwed up. But we must be responsible for our actions.

Promoting adoption to gay couples as a politically correct equality issue, without acknowledging these risks, makes as much sense as the TSA strip searching 3 year olds and groping grandma to catch the jihadist terrorists.

But we have folks like Ric.850 here,

saying things like: "The child of a gay person WILL have a mother and a father. I defy ANYONE to prove otherwise."

How the hell does one rationally respond to that??

"To live without a steady struggle for the Truth, that is not living but merely existing" -Piere Giorgio Frassatti

People trying to make the whole

"Gays are awful terrible demonds hell bent on molesting kids and destroying everything" argument are so weak and pathetic that's it's actually pretty funny. I mean, I wouldn't really mind them (I may even find them interesting) if they we'rent so foolishly outspoken. But they are always so proud to express thier pathetically weak mind (or lackthereof either, whichever applies) that I feel like I HAVE to comment about it. Sadly, I can only express my true reaction when these people are in front of me so I can laugh in their faces.

"When I say liberty I do not simply mean what is referred to as 'free enterprise.' I mean liberty of the individual to think his own thoughts and live his own life as he desires to think and to live..." - Robert A. Taft

@ric.850,

here is the anti-gay argument from a gay man. Are you going to classify his argument as 'weak and pathetic' too? http://youtu.be/V-g8NvHHmfM

"To live without a steady struggle for the Truth, that is not living but merely existing" -Piere Giorgio Frassatti

YES Absolutelty!

It would take me forever to explain all the ways in which he was wrong and this poster is wrong, but I'll try:

1. WHy your question is off base, my comment is not directed toward people who personally believe that gay marriage is wrong. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and I am OK with that. However, This poster CLEARLY implys that gay people are going around molesting kids (As though this is indicative of GAYS specifically) as do many others (albeit not so bluntly) who insist that Gay marriage will somehow destroy society and the country. These are the people I am speaking of.

2. The child of a gay person WILL have a mother and a father. I defy ANYONE to prove otherwise. The notion that more Gay couples being married will somehow produce more gay parents is beyond nonsensical. God has done this work for you (Gays don't make babies together), so there is no need to worry about it being corrupted by a silly marriage certificate.

3. If you are of the opinion that the State (Governments) and State Managed foster care programs do a BETTER job of raising children then a Gay couple would, then you are hopeless and are CERTAINLY not libertarian. Of course, we would also have to assume that simply allowing gays to marry would make more of them want to go run out and adopt kids more than they otherwise would (I don't think it would) and that Gay couples now (without a marriage license) simply do not have the means or knowhow to get kids (they can and they do).

Man, I could go on and on. There are SO many faulty assumptions and flawed premises in their agreement that it's hard to know where to begin...or to end.

"When I say liberty I do not simply mean what is referred to as 'free enterprise.' I mean liberty of the individual to think his own thoughts and live his own life as he desires to think and to live..." - Robert A. Taft

Obviously. their bureaucratic

Obviously. their bureaucratic definition of "model gay" needs redefining. This situation is a tragedy in more ways than one and probably more prevalent than known. Homosexuals should NOT under ANY circumstances be allowed to become the legal guardians of children. However, this restriction must remain at the lowest level of government possible, preferably county. Are the officials involved in this tragic adoption being sued as well?

Enough is Enough

I am not sure why these people are intent on bashing people then acting like they are some sort of victim. You people already have a party of oppression and it's called the republican party. You are the people who stole the tea party from the Ron Paul people and corrupted it to be just another republican get together. I am sorry but I am not going to stand for you guys ruining the Daily Paul any more. If you want to legislate how people live their private lives you are an enemy of everything the Daily Paul once stood for. We do not need your morals guiding us. We do not need your hateful propaganda. We are not going to buy into your hateful lies anymore. Ron Paul woke us up and we are NEVER going back to sleep. Its time for you to move on with the rest of your sheep.

Amen...

I am also sick of these Nazi Republicans trying to pervert Dr Paul's message!

Do we need morals?

@Camaro, regarding your statement about "morals," do you disagree that we need morals [transcendent to state and federal legislation] to guide the way that we live as a nation?

What are your thoughts on the following quote from a person of high repute at the DailyPaul:

“Because we no longer have a moral compass to guide our political system, we now face the prospect of economic and social upheaval. Without a moral foundation to our political system it’s a free for all”
(Liberty Defined, pg. 251).

P.S. My "free-speech" position (not "hate speech") is that the true victims in this discussion are the children who will be deprived of growing up without a mother and a father.

"To live without a steady struggle for the Truth, that is not living but merely existing" -Piere Giorgio Frassatti

absolutely correct

Libertarianism places a higher premium on morality by necessity than conservatism. Ron Paul is correct and I wish he would speak out more in this vein. If you believe in liberty you must also promote virtue.

The movement loses a lot of libertines and that is fine. They go back to the Democratic Party where they belong.

yes i down voted you . and if

yes i down voted you . and if you have to ask? why? Then there is no point in telling you.

Ron Paul 2016

I will just throw a quote back at you

"You can't legislate morality" - Ron Paul

To answer your question we need morals but we do not need the restrictive ones thrown around by some. Morality can easily come from individuals and does not need to come from the government.

I will stand by my original post as well. I look at the join dates of the people filling up the Daily Paul with filth like this and a majority of them have been here one or two years tops.

@Camaro,

that does not contradict Ron Paul's recognition of the need for a moral foundation which transcends government legislation. If we follow your misconstruing of Ron Paul's reasoning, we might as well abandon trying to legislate the practice of rape and murder... Ron Paul is not a moral relativist, he actually holds and defends certain fundamental moral principles (e.g. that human life begins at conception, therefore abortion is murder). RP did not hide his moral view on Gay 'marriage' either:

In 2004, Paul said on the House floor, “I oppose federal efforts to redefine marriage as something other than a union between one man and one woman.” In August of 2004, Paul repeated, “I think that marriages should be between a single man and a single woman."

According to your statements, Camaro, Ron Paul himself was spreading hate-speech and ought to be banned from this site. How ironic! And what difference does it make if I (or anyone else) have been a member here for under two years? That does not make us incorrect in promoting authentic moral values and admonishing those complicit in evil. This is not hate speech, it is Truth my friend, Truth is greater than any government legislation or subjective opinion insofar as it transcends it.

"To live without a steady struggle for the Truth, that is not living but merely existing" -Piere Giorgio Frassatti

Ok let me throw another quote back at you

in 2007 Ron Paul was asked should gays be able to marry and he responded

"Sure they can do whatever they want and call it whatever they want"

In the presidential debate he also stated this about marriage

"I have my standards but I should not have to impose my standards on others. Others have standards and they should not be able to impose them on me"

Yes Ron Paul favors the traditional marriage but he understands as a libertarian that it's not ok for him to force his views on others. That is where he differs from many here. He understands his views are his alone and he should not be able to force them on others.

So as far as him saying he does not want the federal government to define what marriage is I am 100% behind him. The constitution clearly states that this power falls to the state so I am not sure how this is "hate-speech" What is hate speech is when you show one example of a gay person molesting a child and then going off the hinge saying all gays are child molesters.

@Camaro, You got me!

As a final response to our exchange, I am giving you a modified excerpt of a note that I've written elsewhere as a criticism to the core tenet of libertarian philosophy...

While I admire Ron Paul's adherence to the original just laws that our country was founded on (i.e. the Constitution), I do not follow the modern philosophical Libertarian principle of 'individualism' to its very end as he does. The public policies created by the government, or else the individual preferences of any 'individual' conscience, are not the sum of Truth itself. A political system that does not root itself in the sum of Truth itself (that is, the unchanging metaphysical Truths inherent to reality as such), cannot lead to fulfillment and happiness, since real happiness demands love, and love demands a 'true' or 'authentic' criterion for action.

A spouse, an employee, a citizen- any member within a given community- transcends the bounds of 'individual' freedom when they participate in the common pursuit of happiness. I mean this in a very pragmatic sense: think of the cooperation that it took for you to be able to put gas into your vehicle, or to buy food from the grocery store. There is not one stage of life in the development of a person that does not involve some kind of dependence upon others. The human person, by the very essence of what he is, needs a community in order to flourish and to be happy. As Karol Wojtyla put it: “To be a person means to be capable of participation.”

The so called “moral principle of individualism” is for the most part, a sham, and a dangerous one at that. It is not the splinter of truth that it contains that makes it so, it is what it doesn't give an account for that renders it a potentially volatile and destructive force against the real good of human life, of marriage and family, and therefore of society at large. The intelligible order of creation ordained by God enjoys no place of particular importance in a society of individuals functioning under a criterionless morality that exalts the subjective choice. Taken on its own terms, the modern ‘individualistic’ conception of freedom is doomed to failure because it guts personal liberty of the metaphysical, ethical, and communitarian rationale for authentic self actualization and development (as ordained by God in the eternal order of his plan).

Not even Ron Paul’s version of individualism is moderated enough to address the deepest needs of human freedom, much less to be able to restore order in society. As he says himself in his recent book, Liberty Defined: “Because we no longer have a moral compass to guide our political system, we now face the prospect of economic and social upheaval. Without a moral foundation to our political system it’s a free for all.”

Government legislation and the preference of an 'individual' is not enough. Ron Paul didn't say it, but I think he was alluding to the fact that a nation needs the transcendent Truth of God permeating the hearts and minds of its citizens- more specifically- it needs the LIGHT of CHRIST affecting our judgement on the moral issues of same sex 'marriage,' abortion, euthanasia, etc. He is a Christian (as am I), after all. I think deep down he is more Christian than he is Libertarian, that is why he is pro-life ;)

"To live without a steady struggle for the Truth, that is not living but merely existing" -Piere Giorgio Frassatti