Slope Gettin' Slipper
- Thread starter wvkeeper(HN)
- Start date
So I guess that means you are supportive of adult-child sex acts
The original poster and these other two morons clearly didn't read the actual documents.
Preacher, how many times do I have to call you and Middle Class Murox out for basing arguments and pushing off "alternative facts" taken from bogus Twitter posts? Read the fvcking actual document you morons.
No chance Rifle read the actual March 8 statements.
Plus this is hilariously backwards.
"When sex work is criminalized it sends the message that sex workers can be abused...We are human beings and sex workers are entitled to all human rights."
Plus this is hilariously backwards.
"When sex work is criminalized it sends the message that sex workers can be abused...We are human beings and sex workers are entitled to all human rights."
If you read them there is no chance you understand them.
It's hilarious you think it's hilariously backwards. Why shouldn't people have the right to consensually engage in sex work without it being criminalized?
Old Herdman called it. Remember years ago? I said they are going downt his road and they. Just watch the news every day. They are going to try to normalize pedos.
They are also brainwashing children and abusing them with all this transgendre stuff. Any parent or doctor that does that stuff to children is a child abuser.
Their side is supporting chid abuse.
They are also brainwashing children and abusing them with all this transgendre stuff. Any parent or doctor that does that stuff to children is a child abuser.
Their side is supporting chid abuse.
I was sitting here contemplating what will be the last social taboo to fall. I’m predicting rape. Some group will protest to normalize it.
Leaden to read, stop trusting random tweets as factual, stop doing your adult son’s taxes, and then come back and explain why anything in this thread would lead you to ask that question.
If you support minors going through gender transition, you support child abuse. Plain and simple. Sex with younger children and sex trafficking is child abuse.
We only fully banned rape in the 80s and 90s.
I went through and skimmed/read the UN thing. I agree with the majority of it but they way they’re talking about age of consent laws naturally leads to the questions herdman and keeper are asking. If they have some other intention they ought to make that clear.
Wait ..... so how do you make that leap from gender transition to "sex with younger children" and "sex trafficking"? So I guess every time a woman undergoes an OB-GYN exam, she's having sex? Interesting how the WV lawmakers with an "M.D." after their names, opposed legislation that was based apparently on your mindset. I guess we otherwise have a lot of pedos out there practicing medicine.
were you trying to 'one up' 429 on being the forum moron last night?
No, you made the claim that we live in "an evil, sick world" based on that article. So explain why anything in that publication would lead you to make that claiim.
That's what I figured, but I'll bite.
The language of the proposal concerning age of consent (proposal #16) is drafted to be intentionally vague and confusing, leaving it open to interpretation. None of the other proposals are this poorly written. The people drafting these are lawyers, politicians, and academics - supposed wordsmiths. Ask yourself then, why is this one so poorly worded? Because it's meant to be. You leave wiggle room for the slight expansion of this proposition - that children are capable of consenting to sex - which allows for gradual expansion of the concept. That's the way the perverts work and have always worked. It's like Keep said initially - the proverbial slippery slope. I said years ago on here that the next expansion of the pervert agenda is to normalize and accept pedophilia. Surprise, surprise. Look where the powers that be are headed.
Even H&H, the family porn night guy, admitted this. But Harvey Weinstein Jr can’t see it.
From what you whiners say, grunts don't make any income, so you shouldn't have to worry about taxes.
Let me dumb this down and explain some real-world realities to help you understand since you aren't very worldly.
In some areas, it is completely legal for an 18 year old male to have sex with a 17 year old female, but it is illegal for an 18 year old male to have sex with a 17 year old male. It isn't making the homosexual act illegal technically, but the law protects heteros and not homos.
In some areas, it is legal for a 20 year old male to have sex with a 16 year old female, but in other areas, it is illegal for an 18 year old female to have sex with a 17 year old male. Why? Because in many states, the age of consent is different for males vs. females.
In other areas, it's illegal for a 13 year old 7th grader to engage in sexual acts with a 12 year old 8th grader (the 7th grader would be at fault), yet it's legal for a 16 year old junior in high school to engage in sex acts with the 13 year old 7th grader.
And if you have a problem with minors consenting to sex, then you have a problem with almost every state in the country. Almost all states allow minors to consent to sex. California is one of the few that has an age of consent of 18 with no exceptions.
what is so hard to figure out? Doctors and parent who perform transgender type treatments on minors are sick and frankly, are child abusers. 45 year olds who have sex or harm 12 year olds(you get the message and the age can go back and forth) are abusing children.
You can try to split hairs and say well an 20 year and a 17 year old or and 18 year old and a 17 year old. But, there is right and wrong. Stop perfomring gender changes on minors and old people don't need to have sex with children.
What is wrong with some of you people? There is right and wrong. Some of the radical left is promoting sick and twisted actions and behavior. If some adult wants to have a sex change, whatever. Sick and weird, but leave the damn kids alone. Grown ass men don't need to be havng sex with young children.
Let’s just go back to the time period where there was no sex work and see how that worked out.
I mean, I think you have to go back before the first primates evolved, but sure, let’s try it out.
1) You're arguing something that nobody is talking about
2) The part you're arguing about that is relevant is exactly the point of part of that document: the splitting hairs shouldn't be a legal issue, but it currently is. In other words, you're agreeing with what that document is trying to argue.
The question has to be why?
It makes no sense to discuss concepts with toddlers that they simply don’t have the capacity to understand. Well, unless you want to make sure you shape their view and understanding of the concept.
And that’s the problem. It is solely the parent’s responsibility to shape those views, not some purple haired tranny that went into early childhood education because they couldn’t handle tougher classes.
Part of this is to normalize transexuality and have children think it's fine to explore your own sexuality, a concept clearly no child can understand.
