No. I accept the large body of evidence that points out that homosexuals are no more likely to molest children than heterosexuals. I am unable to find one study that suggests otherwise that has not been widely discredited (admittedly I've only been looking for the last 45 min or so) Link me to research that suggests otherwise and I'll gladly look at it, and take into consideration what it reflects. However, suggesting that any research that disagrees with you is "PC" is flat out ridiculous and the height of confirmation bias. You're basically saying that anyone who disagrees with you is wrong, even if almost expert disagrees with you.

I think you mean the parents. From the study: Among general population teens and Boy Scouts and Venturers alike, a majority oppose the current Boy Scouts of America membership policy. A majority of Boy Scouts and Venturers oppose allowing chartered organizations to follow their own beliefs if that means there will be different standards from one organization to the next. According to a majority of current Boy Scouts and Venturers, the current policy does not represent a core value of Scouting. Looks like the "rank and file", namely the Scouts themselves are very supportive of changing the policy.

Bottom of the first link. Under additional information.

Well the four used by the BSA are David Finkelhor, Ph.D. W. Walter Menninger, M.D., psychiatry Charol Shakeshaft, Ph.D. Victor Vieth, J.D.

You say "their exposure through PC outlets" but when looking for information on studies that suggest homosexuality is linked to child molestation, all of them are coming from right wing sources and groups like the FRC. Furthermore, most of the studies are widely discredited. It seems to me that in your need to avoid "PC" sources, you're basically confirming your bias by only agreeing with research that has the conclusions you like, rather than what the body of evidence as a whole suggests.

Links to the non-PC experts? So what you're saying if 100 experts, each with their own study and evidence on sexual abuse lined up and 99 of them showed that their research showed that homosexuals were no more likely to commit sexual abuse than heterosexuals, and 1 showed they were, you're going with the one guy?

On one hand, the Marketplace Fairness Act is pretty terrible legislation that doesn't do a great job of addressing the problem. I don't support it. On the other hand, paying sales tax on internet purchases, as much as I don't want to, may be a necessary step. As more and more consumers make purchases online it would be a huge dent in states revenue not to collect sales tax on those purchases.

DCM, what you're saying is that we should only listen to experts when they agree with us?

From the study: The nearly universal opinion among sexual abuse authorities is that same-sex sexual interest or same-sex sexual experience, either in adults or youth, is NOT a risk factor for sexually abusing children." In regard to role modeling: "Most of the research on the effect on children of associating with self-identified homosexual adults has been done about homosexual parents. The clear conclusion from this research is that there appear to be no effects on children's adjustment, mental health or sexual orientation."

You know what bugs me? In the age of the Internet columnists keep forgetting that they can link to their sources. A link to the survey that this article is based around would have been very helpful. The survey results are here http://www.scouting.org/sitecore/content/MembershipStandards/Resolution/Summary.aspx And the actual survey questions are here http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2013/images/03/13/bsaq.pdf

It's not that I don't understand why we have Gitmo. I do. I don't agree with it, and I think that torture is not near as effective as we believe it to be. The evidence in The Constitution Projects Report on detainee treatment backs me up. But lets say that it does work. That lives are saved by torture. Why do we have to do it in public? If we're willing to violate our principles by torturing suspects for information why can't we just do it in secret, ferreting these prisoners away to secret facilities where they will still be subject to all the awful things that they are in GITMO, but at least it won't be public. Leaving GITMO open just makes America look bad. It makes us look like hypocrites.