• Source: WV House Democrats/Facebook
  • Watch: Lawmaker Says If Gays Are Allowed Nondiscrimination Protections Pedophiles Will Get Them Too

    West Virginia State Lawmaker Tom Fast Argues Against LGBT Nondiscrimination Protections


    Del Fast (R32-Fayette Co) comparing homosexuals to pedophiles during floor debate on ride-sharing amendment today. (We had some technical difficulties with previous version. This is a re-post.)

    Posted by WV House Democrats on Friday, February 12, 2016

    Claiming that being LGBT is a "sexual practice," Republican State Delegate Tom Fast of West Virginia on Friday argued against allowing a nondiscrimination amendment to pass in the House. He also claimed being LGBT is a choice, and warned it is "dangerous" and "harmful" to offer LGBT people protections.

    Fast, an attorney with a degree from Regent University, argued that if "homosexual, bisexual and transgender behavior is elevated to a protected status, there is nothing to stop bigamy, pedophilia or any other sexual practice from receiving the same protection."

    Reading from prepared remarks during a session of the West Virginia House of Delegates, Fast told his fellow lawmakers that sexual orientation is "a changeable characteristic" that is a "moving target, one that can change from day to day." 

    He warned against allowing sexual orientation to be a protected class, adding that "according sexual orientation special status will also create social division," and called it "insanity" to giving sexual orientation "special civil rights protections."

    Del. Fast also claimed that if LGBT people are allowed civil rights protections, others will automatically "lose protection."

    "If sexual orientation laws become commonplace," Fast went on to say, "then any person who speaks against sexual practice will be vilified. Their rights will be thwarted, and their freedom of religion of conscience will be crushed."

    The amendment itself would have mandated that companies like Uber "adopt a policy of nondiscrimination on the basis of destination, race, color, national origin, religious belief or affiliation, sex, disability, age, sexual orientation or gender identity with respect to passengers and potential passengers and notify transportation network drivers of the policy." 

    It failed.


    Image via Facebook
    Hat tip: Huffington Post

    Video via WV House Democrats/Facebook

    Get weekly news & updates
    Support our work DONATE

    Register to VOTE

    Showing 9 comments

    Please check your e-mail for a link to activate your account.

    • commented 2016-02-14 00:05:37 -0500
      Someone seems entirely too concerned with pedophiles getting special rights and is using a completely unrelated group to promote it.

      Mr. Fast, is there something you should be telling your neighbors?

    • commented 2016-02-13 18:51:35 -0500
      Pedophiles. Aren’t those people who like feet? What’s wrong with that?

    • commented 2016-02-13 15:48:17 -0500

      Those described in the paper you cite who had intergenerational relationships that they found positive are exceedingly unlikely to report the older party to police,, especially when the relationship was one that they themselves initiated.

      Clearly there are cusp situations where for example, an 18 year old man who has a consensual relationship with a boy aged 17 years 11 months, is technically deemed a pedophile because 17 is below the (USA) age of consent, even when the 17yo initiates the affair and will be 18 in a matter of days.

      Hardline parental and prosecution at law place this 17yo who may not even yet have come out to his parents in the impossible position of either admitting he initiated the relationship or at least consented to it, or otherwise feeling obligated to accuse the young man he actually loves as having “force him into it”.

      It is difficult to see anything constructive for either party arising from criminalising what is in this case nothing more than a teen romance. This is a problem with arbitrary ages of consent, that do not take into account any difference in ages, such as for example where a 70 year old might do the same thing and be the one who initiates the relationship, which would be perfectly legal in a few months when the boy is 18, albeit frowned upon.

      Except in the cases of coercion, I am generally opposed to criminalising the sexual behaviour of children with others very close to their own age, since the court case and all that connotes are demonstrably more harmful to the children involved than the consensual (and probably experimental) activity that led to prosecution in the first place.

      But there are many children of far younger years for whom the experience was irreparably life changing, even when they may have consented at the time. A child may appear to consent, when in reality they may be merely obeying the authority figure of the adult. They may even manifest involuntary erectile response, that could be mistaken for willing engagement. I think there has to be a line drawn in the sand somewhere, and one that places the responsibility fair and square with the adult.

      Are you proposing that there should be no age of consent, and no regulation of interactions between children and adults? How do you say we should protect children in these situations?

    • commented 2016-02-13 15:44:48 -0500
      This bubble gum machine lawyer is a joke…his mind is list in the gutter just like all of the others that believe two consenting adults having sex is the same as pedophilia…these Lunatics should turn themselves in for their unclean thoughts and their over the moon outrageous ideas! The more stories I read the more disgusted I get and I’m at the point where I’m begining to get heterophobic!
      Stop this crazy train I wanna get off!!!

    • commented 2016-02-13 14:46:07 -0500
      Scientific studies based on legitimate empirical evidence do not support the mass hysteria and moral panic that currently surrounds all sexually expressed child/older person relationships, which are invariably cast as “child molestation/child sex abuse/pedophilia.” As masturbation and homosexuality were demonized in the past, these irrational emotional responses are based on ignorance and fear, and are promoted by agenda-driven “victimological” academics who argue that all such relationships are intrinsically pervasively harmful. But is this supposed harm intrinsic to the interaction, or does it instead result from the social hysteria that occurs when such a relationship is discovered? Also, there are no legitimate data supporting intrinsic harmfulness, and no credible pathway or mechanism for such harm has been demonstrated. For further discussion, see http://www.shfri.net/mech/mech.cgi

      There are indeed some people who trick or force children into unwanted sexual interactions. But there are vast differences between consensual sexually expressed child/older person relationships and unilateral “child sexual abuse” by an older person. For a scientific journal discussion of these distinctions as they apply to boys, go to http://www.boyandro.info

      For more discussion of “pedophilia” in a scientific journal, go to http://www.shfri.net/ppp/ppp.cgi

      For an even more in-depth discussion of these issues, go to http://www.shfri.net/myths/myths.cgi

    • commented 2016-02-13 08:39:57 -0500
      Obviously wishful thinking on the part of this straight, Rethuglican pedophile.

    • commented 2016-02-13 05:48:03 -0500
      Another ass hat that doesn’t know what the hell he’s talking about.

    • commented 2016-02-12 23:31:29 -0500
      Me thinks, the lady doth protest too much!

    • commented 2016-02-12 22:48:30 -0500
      It is beyond disturbing that certain elected officials think adult relationships are the same as abusing a child.

    Your rights, your movement.
    Join today:
    Your rights, your movement.
    Join today: