And here we go: Pedophilia is being normalized.

[Syriusly]

The Civil Rights Act was proposed by Democrat- and Liberal- President Kennedy- and it was signed by Democrat- and Liberal- President Johnston.

It passed with the majority of Democrats- and the majority of Republicans voting in favor of the CRA.
More Democrats than Republicans voted in favor.
Virtually every Southern lawmaker- of both parties- voted against the CRA.
And Southern Democrats led the opposition to the CRA.

The fact of the matter is, that Democrats passed the CRA- with assistance from Republicans.

The CRA of 1964 was proposed by true liberal, President Kennedy, and signed into law by southern Democrat and racist, President Johnson (not Johnston).

The CRA of 1964 is resemblance of CRA of 1957 proposed by Republican President Eisenhower, and was opposed by Democrats. Not just southern Democrats, not conservative Democrats, but all were (southern manifesto) Democrats. By voting for CRA of 1964, Democrats bought the black vote (for next 200 years) and officially stopped being racist (in public).

It's true, more Democrats then Republicans voted in favor of CRA of 1964 because there were more Democrats then Republicans in Congress. Only Goldwater Republicans voted against it. Note the percentage.

The fact of the matter is that if not for Republicans, south would still be in the hands of Democrat slave owners or segregated or without civil rights.

Get your "facts" straight.

Every fact that I cited- other than the spelling of President Johnson's name- is correct.

Despite the attempts of revisionists to make it appear that the CRA was an entirely Republican affair- as I said

• The CRA was proposed by Democrat and Liberal President Kennedy
• The CRA was voted by a majority of Democrats- and Republicans
• More Democrats than Republicans voted for the CRA

The Senate version:[20]

• Democratic Party: 46–21 (69–31%)
• Republican Party: 27–6 (82–18%)

The Senate version, voted on by the House:[20]

• Democratic Party: 153–91 (63–37%)
• Republican Party: 136–35 (80–20%)
• 
  
• The opposition to the CRA was entirely regional
• The original House version:
  • Southern Democrats: 7–87 (7–93%)
  • Southern Republicans: 0–10 (0–100%)
  • Northern Democrats: 145–9 (94–6%)
  • Northern Republicans: 138–24 (85–15%)
  The Senate version:
  • Southern Democrats: 1–20 (5–95%) (only Ralph Yarborough of Texas voted in favor)
  • Southern Republicans: 0–1 (0–100%) (John Tower of Texas)
  • Northern Democrats: 45–1 (98–2%) (only Robert Byrd of West Virginia voted against)
  • Northern Republicans: 27–5 (84–16%)

And where am I denying that? You're talking about CRA of 1964 only..

Since the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is the Civil Rights Act we are speaking of- you know the one that actually changed things- yes that is the Civil Rights Act of 1964-

The one proposed by a Democratic President- and passed with the majority of Democrat- and Republican votes.

Opposed by Southern Conservatives- both Republican and Democrat.

 

[Skylar]

The Bible doesn't condemn abortion, or female homosexuality or same sex marraige, or S&M or child molestation or polygamy.

Indeed- within the Bible we learn of King David and his many wives- we learn about a God who commands Jews to kill entire cities- taking the young girls to be slaves.

These are the lessons that belief in God can teach.

Take the whole bible in context, that is learned in grade school aged kids. Dolt

So what's the context of killing infants in their cribs?

It's a Sovereignty thing you wouldn't understand...

Killing children and infants in their cribs is about 'sovereignty'?

I don't think that works means what you think it means.

God is sovereign, the bible is gods word. You can't be that dense...

So killing infants and children is righteous....because god told them to do it?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Yep, above, that's what our GOP looked like in 1957. Your fallacies of false equivalency are ludicrous. The proposed legislation that could not pass in 1957 because both parties were not ready for it passed in 1964 because Presidents Kennedy and Johnson and the Democrats and Republicans of the north and west were able to suppress their peers in the South.

More Democrats in numbers voted for it than Republicans.

Southern Democrats voted for the CRA more than Southern Republicans.

It is so easy to explode American revisionism.

Below is a recent image of Americano and friend.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The Bible doesn't condemn abortion, or female homosexuality or same sex marraige, or S&M or child molestation or polygamy.

Indeed- within the Bible we learn of King David and his many wives- we learn about a God who commands Jews to kill entire cities- taking the young girls to be slaves.

These are the lessons that belief in God can teach.

Take the whole bible in context, that is learned in grade school aged kids. Dolt

So what's the context of killing infants in their cribs?

It's a Sovereignty thing you wouldn't understand...

Killing children and infants in their cribs is about 'sovereignty'?

I don't think that works means what you think it means.

God is sovereign, the bible is gods word. You can't be that dense...

It is the word of men. Jesus does not condone the killing of the children either by Jehovah or by Herod.

 

[Syriusly]

Without belief in God, there are no rules, and there is no logical argument against abortion, homosexuality, same-sex marriage, S&M, child molestation, incest, polyamoury, etc.

Liberals are on this road down the path towards destruction, but they are blind to the peril they are in.

Only a spiritual reawakening can save our nation.

The Bible doesn't condemn abortion, or female homosexuality or same sex marraige, or S&M or child molestation or polygamy.

Indeed- within the Bible we learn of King David and his many wives- we learn about a God who commands Jews to kill entire cities- taking the young girls to be slaves.

These are the lessons that belief in God can teach.

Take the whole bible in context, that is learned in grade school aged kids. Dolt

So what's the context of killing infants in their cribs?

It's a Sovereignty thing you wouldn't understand...

As an atheist I really don't feel any need to attack Christianity- BUT when a self proclaimed Christian like Blackrook wraps himself up in the Bible and proclaims that makes him a moral authority, I then am more inclined to point out the parts of the Bible- and God that Conservatives who want to proclaim all about morality don't want to talk about.

Aside from the Flood- killing virtually the entire population of humans- including perhaps millions of infants- there are the instances where God specifically instructs his followers to do what I would consider despicable acts- what about you?

Numbers 31
31 The Lord said to Moses, 2 “Take vengeance on the Midianites for the Israelites. After that, you will be gathered to your people.”...

15 “Have you allowed all the women to live?” he asked them. 16 “They were the ones who followed Balaam’s advice and enticed the Israelites to be unfaithful to the Lord in the Peor incident, so that a plague struck the Lord’s people. 17 Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, 18 but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.

32 The plunder remaining from the spoils that the soldiers took was 675,000 sheep, 33 72,000 cattle, 34 61,000 donkeys 35 and 32,000 women who had never slept with a man.

 

[Rustic]

Without belief in God, there are no rules, and there is no logical argument against abortion, homosexuality, same-sex marriage, S&M, child molestation, incest, polyamoury, etc.

Liberals are on this road down the path towards destruction, but they are blind to the peril they are in.

Only a spiritual reawakening can save our nation.

The Bible doesn't condemn abortion, or female homosexuality or same sex marraige, or S&M or child molestation or polygamy.

Indeed- within the Bible we learn of King David and his many wives- we learn about a God who commands Jews to kill entire cities- taking the young girls to be slaves.

These are the lessons that belief in God can teach.

Take the whole bible in context, that is learned in grade school aged kids. Dolt

So what's the context of killing infants in their cribs?

It's a Sovereignty thing you wouldn't understand...

As an atheist I really don't feel any need to attack Christianity- BUT when a self proclaimed Christian like Blackrook wraps himself up in the Bible and proclaims that makes him a moral authority, I then am more inclined to point out the parts of the Bible- and God that Conservatives who want to proclaim all about morality don't want to talk about.

Aside from the Flood- killing virtually the entire population of humans- including perhaps millions of infants- there are the instances where God specifically instructs his followers to do what I would consider despicable acts- what about you?

Numbers 31
31 The Lord said to Moses, 2 “Take vengeance on the Midianites for the Israelites. After that, you will be gathered to your people.”...

15 “Have you allowed all the women to live?” he asked them. 16 “They were the ones who followed Balaam’s advice and enticed the Israelites to be unfaithful to the Lord in the Peor incident, so that a plague struck the Lord’s people. 17 Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, 18 but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.

32 The plunder remaining from the spoils that the soldiers took was 675,000 sheep, 33 72,000 cattle, 34 61,000 donkeys 35 and 32,000 women who had never slept with a man.

What people fail to do is take the entire Bible InContext, the whole Bible or nothing, anyone fool can cherry pick any little piece of it here and there for their purposes, that means nothing.
There are many parts of the Bible that are beyond our understanding...

 

[Skylar]

The Bible doesn't condemn abortion, or female homosexuality or same sex marraige, or S&M or child molestation or polygamy.

Indeed- within the Bible we learn of King David and his many wives- we learn about a God who commands Jews to kill entire cities- taking the young girls to be slaves.

These are the lessons that belief in God can teach.

Take the whole bible in context, that is learned in grade school aged kids. Dolt

So what's the context of killing infants in their cribs?

It's a Sovereignty thing you wouldn't understand...

As an atheist I really don't feel any need to attack Christianity- BUT when a self proclaimed Christian like Blackrook wraps himself up in the Bible and proclaims that makes him a moral authority, I then am more inclined to point out the parts of the Bible- and God that Conservatives who want to proclaim all about morality don't want to talk about.

Aside from the Flood- killing virtually the entire population of humans- including perhaps millions of infants- there are the instances where God specifically instructs his followers to do what I would consider despicable acts- what about you?

Numbers 31
31 The Lord said to Moses, 2 “Take vengeance on the Midianites for the Israelites. After that, you will be gathered to your people.”...

15 “Have you allowed all the women to live?” he asked them. 16 “They were the ones who followed Balaam’s advice and enticed the Israelites to be unfaithful to the Lord in the Peor incident, so that a plague struck the Lord’s people. 17 Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, 18 but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.

32 The plunder remaining from the spoils that the soldiers took was 675,000 sheep, 33 72,000 cattle, 34 61,000 donkeys 35 and 32,000 women who had never slept with a man.

What people fail to do is take the entire Bible InContext, the whole Bible or nothing, anyone fool can cherry pick any little piece of it here and there for their purposes, that means nothing.
There are many parts of the Bible that are beyond our understanding...

Does that include the parts where god commanded people to kill infants?

That's one of the parts of religion I find truly terrifying: the way it can convince thinking, moral people to abdicate their own beliefs and their own capacity to morally reason....and accept the most heinous things as valid, right and righteous.

Even slaughtering toddlers.

 

[Rustic]

Take the whole bible in context, that is learned in grade school aged kids. Dolt

So what's the context of killing infants in their cribs?

It's a Sovereignty thing you wouldn't understand...

As an atheist I really don't feel any need to attack Christianity- BUT when a self proclaimed Christian like Blackrook wraps himself up in the Bible and proclaims that makes him a moral authority, I then am more inclined to point out the parts of the Bible- and God that Conservatives who want to proclaim all about morality don't want to talk about.

Aside from the Flood- killing virtually the entire population of humans- including perhaps millions of infants- there are the instances where God specifically instructs his followers to do what I would consider despicable acts- what about you?

Numbers 31
31 The Lord said to Moses, 2 “Take vengeance on the Midianites for the Israelites. After that, you will be gathered to your people.”...

15 “Have you allowed all the women to live?” he asked them. 16 “They were the ones who followed Balaam’s advice and enticed the Israelites to be unfaithful to the Lord in the Peor incident, so that a plague struck the Lord’s people. 17 Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, 18 but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.

32 The plunder remaining from the spoils that the soldiers took was 675,000 sheep, 33 72,000 cattle, 34 61,000 donkeys 35 and 32,000 women who had never slept with a man.

What people fail to do is take the entire Bible InContext, the whole Bible or nothing, anyone fool can cherry pick any little piece of it here and there for their purposes, that means nothing.
There are many parts of the Bible that are beyond our understanding...

Does that include the parts where god commanded people to kill infants?

That's one of the parts of religion I find truly terrifying: the way it can convince thinking, moral people to abdicate their own beliefs and their own capacity to morally reason....and accept the most heinous things as valid, right and righteous.

Even slaughtering toddlers.

It's not for you to decide... God uses everything for his purposes... we can't understand The scale and scope of things.

 

[Ame®icano]

And who among the 'lefties' is advocating the legalization of incest.....or pedophilia? You keep insisting its a 'slippery slope', but can't show anyone here backing any part of it.

Oh boy, where to begin... ah, lets start with Salon.

Since lefties don't read much further then headlines, I'll keep it as short is possible.
Recently Salon wanted to know their readers, no need to guess who they are, that pedophilia is perfectly normal. The article was released shortly after APA removed pedophilia from the mental disorder list. Coincidence? Nope.

I’m a pedophile, but not a monster - I'm attracted to children but unwilling to act on it.

Who from Salon thought this would be an okay article to print? What's more, they presented it as something that's totally legit and deserving of sympathy.

I hope this is not too much information for lefties to process, but I'll give it a shot and present some more.

This doesn't have anything to do with incest or pedophilia, but can help you lefties get a clue where I am going with this. So, at first there was transgenderism. Perfectly normal, right? Then with Rachel Dolezal came transracialism. Nothing wrong with that, ok? Then, there is also new thing called transableism where perfectly healthy and able-bodied people, want to become disabled so someone will care for them. Whatever rocks your boat, man... Oh, there is a new thing called "otherkin" or should we call it transanimals? But wait, there is more! Have you ever heard of transageism?

All those things I just listed are "new normal". Where does it end? Well, it doesn't. Just as that pedophile story above, there is another story, this time from Vice.

Talking to a Man Who's Been in Love with His Sister for 20 Years

Nice story, bro. Very touchy and heartbreaking. Only better thing than the story itself are comments. Fucking sick. Lets finish this post with article from Slate where they asking the following question.

Should We Lower the Age of Consent to Protect Teenagers?

Someone explain please, if the state outlaws sex between a 25 year old and a 14 year old, is the intention to protect the 14 year old against something, or to punish the 25 year old for something? If the intent is to protect, then what exactly is the 14 year old being protected against?

So Skylar what was your question?

 

[JakeStarkey]

[QUOTE="Rustic, post: 13618872, member: 55848"What people fail to do is take the entire Bible InContext, the whole Bible or nothing, anyone fool can cherry pick any little piece of it here and there for their purposes, that means nothing. There are many parts of the Bible that are beyond our understanding...

Then you have condemned yourself by your owns standards.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Without belief in God, there are no rules, and there is no logical argument against abortion, homosexuality, same-sex marriage, S&M, child molestation, incest, polyamoury, etc.

Liberals are on this road down the path towards destruction, but they are blind to the peril they are in.

Only a spiritual reawakening can save our nation.

The Bible doesn't condemn abortion, or female homosexuality or same sex marraige, or S&M or child molestation or polygamy.

Indeed- within the Bible we learn of King David and his many wives- we learn about a God who commands Jews to kill entire cities- taking the young girls to be slaves.

These are the lessons that belief in God can teach.

If you're not a Christian then you do not have any clue what Christianity is and you have no idea what the Bible stands for.

I am a Christian all of my life. I have read Holy Scripture every day and prayed every day from older childhood on. Syriusly does confuse the NT with the OT. Other than that his comments are very valid.

 

[Rustic]

Without belief in God, there are no rules, and there is no logical argument against abortion, homosexuality, same-sex marriage, S&M, child molestation, incest, polyamoury, etc.

Liberals are on this road down the path towards destruction, but they are blind to the peril they are in.

Only a spiritual reawakening can save our nation.

The Bible doesn't condemn abortion, or female homosexuality or same sex marraige, or S&M or child molestation or polygamy.

Indeed- within the Bible we learn of King David and his many wives- we learn about a God who commands Jews to kill entire cities- taking the young girls to be slaves.

These are the lessons that belief in God can teach.

If you're not a Christian then you do not have any clue what Christianity is and you have no idea what the Bible stands for.

I am a Christian all of my life. I have read Holy Scripture every day and prayed every day from older childhood on. Syriusly does confuse the NT with the OT. Other than that his comments are very valid.

Then,
As a Christian you would know that you take the Bible as a whole the New Testament and Old Testament are meaningless without each other…

 

[Ame®icano]

And who among the 'lefties' is advocating the legalization of incest.....or pedophilia? You keep insisting its a 'slippery slope', but can't show anyone here backing any part of it.

Shall we continue?

We may argue if one article in any of those magazines is enough to say they're advocating for anything. But it's not one article and it's not suddenly out of nowhere. They're all pushing the agenda.

Twenty or even ten years ago, we used to call those examples from previous post abnormal, mentally ill. Today we are lectured and almost forced to say they're "normal" and are just supposed to accept it all as such. And if we don't we're a bigots. The next generation is being raised and educated with people like those all around them and was being told this behavior is perfectly normal. And also, we're being told that's not going to affect their own mental state. Google term "behavioral sink".

This is from Huffington Post.

Embracing Teenage Sexuality: Let's Rethink the Age of Consent

Let's rethink?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Without belief in God, there are no rules, and there is no logical argument against abortion, homosexuality, same-sex marriage, S&M, child molestation, incest, polyamoury, etc.

Liberals are on this road down the path towards destruction, but they are blind to the peril they are in.

Only a spiritual reawakening can save our nation.

The Bible doesn't condemn abortion, or female homosexuality or same sex marraige, or S&M or child molestation or polygamy.

Indeed- within the Bible we learn of King David and his many wives- we learn about a God who commands Jews to kill entire cities- taking the young girls to be slaves.

These are the lessons that belief in God can teach.

If you're not a Christian then you do not have any clue what Christianity is and you have no idea what the Bible stands for.

I am a Christian all of my life. I have read Holy Scripture every day and prayed every day from older childhood on. Syriusly does confuse the NT with the OT. Other than that his comments are very valid.

Then,
As a Christian you would know that you take the Bible as a whole the New Testament and Old Testament are meaningless without each other…

Not as a literal document, no. Any more than moral LDS accept Nephi's destruction of Laban.

 

[JakeStarkey]

This statement is false, it is merely unfounded opinion: "Today we are lectured and almost forced to say they're "normal" and are just supposed to accept it all as such."

No one in my personal, familial, or professional circles lecture or preach or force any such thing.

 

[Syriusly]

The Bible doesn't condemn abortion, or female homosexuality or same sex marraige, or S&M or child molestation or polygamy.

Indeed- within the Bible we learn of King David and his many wives- we learn about a God who commands Jews to kill entire cities- taking the young girls to be slaves.

These are the lessons that belief in God can teach.

Take the whole bible in context, that is learned in grade school aged kids. Dolt

So what's the context of killing infants in their cribs?

It's a Sovereignty thing you wouldn't understand...

As an atheist I really don't feel any need to attack Christianity- BUT when a self proclaimed Christian like Blackrook wraps himself up in the Bible and proclaims that makes him a moral authority, I then am more inclined to point out the parts of the Bible- and God that Conservatives who want to proclaim all about morality don't want to talk about.

Aside from the Flood- killing virtually the entire population of humans- including perhaps millions of infants- there are the instances where God specifically instructs his followers to do what I would consider despicable acts- what about you?

Numbers 31
31 The Lord said to Moses, 2 “Take vengeance on the Midianites for the Israelites. After that, you will be gathered to your people.”...

15 “Have you allowed all the women to live?” he asked them. 16 “They were the ones who followed Balaam’s advice and enticed the Israelites to be unfaithful to the Lord in the Peor incident, so that a plague struck the Lord’s people. 17 Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, 18 but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.

32 The plunder remaining from the spoils that the soldiers took was 675,000 sheep, 33 72,000 cattle, 34 61,000 donkeys 35 and 32,000 women who had never slept with a man.

What people fail to do is take the entire Bible InContext, the whole Bible or nothing, anyone fool can cherry pick any little piece of it here and there for their purposes, that means nothing.
There are many parts of the Bible that are beyond our understanding...

I could as easily say that the actions of Hitler are 'beyond our understanding'- since frankly God ordering the Jews to kill every man, every boy, every non-virgin woman- and to take the girls into sexual slavery is just as appalling as Hitler ordering his troops to kill entire villages of Poles.

As long as Christians are not using the Bible to tell me that the Bible provides me with my moral guidance- I don't have any need to point out that the Bible also is full of God doing- and commanding acts that we would condemn when done by anyone else.

 

[Syriusly]

And who among the 'lefties' is advocating the legalization of incest.....or pedophilia? You keep insisting its a 'slippery slope', but can't show anyone here backing any part of it.

Oh boy, where to begin... ah, lets start with Salon.

Since lefties don't read much further then headlines, I'll keep it as short is possible.
Recently Salon wanted to know their readers, no need to guess who they are, that pedophilia is perfectly normal. The article was released shortly after APA removed pedophilia from the mental disorder list. Coincidence? Nope.

I’m a pedophile, but not a monster - I'm attracted to children but unwilling to act on it.

Who from Salon thought this would be an okay article to print? What's more, they presented it as something that's totally legit and deserving of sympathy.

Why is it not okay to publish such an article?

Why exactly do Conservatives like yourself always promote censorship.

The man in this article- and yes I read it- did not promote any illegal activity- nor did he suggest changing laws so that he could act on his impulses.

Clearly you believe that Liberals should censor publications so that a point of view such as that cannot be read by anyone.

Liberals don't believe in that kind of censorship.

 

[JakeStarkey]

As long as you are told to follow the teachings of Jesus, which are encapsulated into the Two Great Commandments, Syriusly, get over yourself and don't worry Rustic and the other drone bots.

 

[Syriusly]

[
Should We Lower the Age of Consent to Protect Teenagers?

Someone explain please, if the state outlaws sex between a 25 year old and a 14 year old, is the intention to protect the 14 year old against something, or to punish the 25 year old for something? If the intent is to protect, then what exactly is the 14 year old being protected against?

Again with your call to censorship.

The age of consent varies across the United States- and across the Western world. Personally, I am not in favor of lowering the age of consent- since the trend for the last 100 years has been to raise the age of consent.

What did the article suggest? (did you even read it?)
Lowering the age of consent to 15 (where it stands in Sweden) or 14 (where it’s set in Germany and Italy) would “take these enormous pressures off children and young people” who feel they need to hide their sexual activity, said John Ashton, president of the UK Faculty of Public Health

But lowering the age of consent wouldn't prevent the U.K. from prohibiting sexual contact between people of considerable age differences. Communicating an acceptance of sex between two 14-year-olds is much, much different than legitimizing contact between a 14-year-old and a predatory adult. Maybe the law should reflect that distinction—in the U.K. and here.

Hmmm pretty scarey stuff eh?
Canada raised its age of consent from 14 to 16 just 7 years ago......but 14 year olds can have consent to have sex with someone up to 5 years older than them.

Which is the same as Hawaii- exactly- 16, but with close in age exemptions.

States age of consent range from 18-16- with most States having a provision for 14-16 year olds being able to consent to someone close to their age.

Exactly as the article that so appalled you suggests.

What really seems to appall you though is that people are actually discussing these issues. Apparently you would prefer censorship so that adults cannot discuss very real issues.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Age of Consent in America, imo, should be 17.

I personally don't think a younger teenager should have more than a two year difference from an older teenage boinker.