Having said that, I wonder if the Democrats newfound concern for “underage” sexual relations (the boy was old enough to be married in Florida) will carry over to the rampant statutory rape problem in this country.

A well documented survey showed that “virtually all Planned Parenthood affiliates fail to report clear cases of statutory rape to authorities.” – http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=27804

The examples in question were calls from a 13 year old girl claiming to be pregnant by a 22 yr. old. I can’t recall any furor from the Democrats over this government funded entity. Check out the audio here – http://www.childpredators.com/Tapes.cfm. It is chilling.

This clearly deals with homosexuality, not pedophilia. If this is “pedophilia,” 31 states’ laws have legalized it, since the age of consent is 16 in those states, not mention other states where the age is 17. To call this pedophilia is an attempt to disconnect homosexual behavior from negative connotation even though the revelation that a homosexual man in a position of power making a homosexual pass doesn’t in and of itself necessarily condemn all homosexuals, so it’s interesting how the Left closes ranks and tries to change the subject at the slightest chance of a PR crisis. Would we be calling this pedophilia had Foley done this to a 17 year-old female page? I think not. Foley may have helped his cause had he pulled a Jimmy Mac. After all, the former governor of NJ seems to have been absolved of all the proclivity-related felonies he committed in office and the fact that he betrayed his wife and destroyed his family by holding a press conference declaring himself a “gay American.” For this he is called “brave.”

Seriously now…Yes, Foley abused his position by preying on teens, he has been properly condemned (his life is pretty much over folks) and there should be an investigation into who knew what when and if this problem is more widespread on the Hill. Whomever was party to a hush campaign or whomever witheld this information for use at a more “opportune” moment should be held accountable (if either/both of these scenarios turn out true of course).

What I meant on “not acting on it” was not clear. I meant there is no evidence of him ever actually making his desires into a physical sexual act. Any other person the left would scream freedom of speech along with the ACLU.

No evidence of actually acting on this perversion

That’s not true. My understanding of the allegations is that he had sexually explicit conversations with a child. This, in and of itself, is a crime in most jurisdictions. Sure, he could have acted on his desires to a greater extent, but it is false to say that he didn’t act on them at all.

It is important to remember, though, he is to be presumed innocent. I have zero firsthand knowledge of anything in this case, so I’m merely commenting on the allegations.

their advocation of legalizing child porn distribution and possession

C’mon Jay, do we have to go over this again? The ACLU’s position in New York v Ferber was that the kiddie-porn law was overly broad and that it should have a “decency standard”. They never advocated the legalization of distribution. At most, they advocate a tighter definition of what constitutes “illegal possession”.

The part where you’re equating gay with pedo.

Yet when Congressman Foley is revealed as a homosexual, the outrage vanishes and there seems to be no defence of him at all! What am I missing?

Foley can ***insert gay act here*** all he wants. Heck, he can make it part of his campaign platform. But he can’t hit on a kid. No one is going to defend him for that. Well, I’m sure someone will defend his rights from a legal standpoint, but if he’s guilty of a fraction of the allegations, the only support he’ll get will be from NAMBLA.