  Dmcq, I am having trouble comprehending your position.  We have a source in which the FRC itself advocates the view that homosexuality and paedophilia are linked.  We have impecable mainstream sources stating that empirical research does not show any such link.  Given these facts, would you agree that there is a POV issue with simply stating the FRC view without any caveat?  If you do agree, what do you think we need to support a caveat and what caveat would you propose?  If you do not agree, please explain why an uncontested statement of a view that is falsified by RS is appropriate for an encyclopedia?    