Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Marriage with children used to be a normal thing. Children were viewed as property, chattel, and had no right to be protected. We're headed that way again, with the advent of legalized abortion, the ever increasing murmur that abortion should be legal far beyond birth (yes I know that isn't abortion..but that's the proposal), that being human isn't enough to be granted the rights of *personhood*...you have to be a human with certain, particular capabilities and be only at specific stages of development....and with the insistence that pedophilia is an alternate sexuality, and porn is GOOD for children......
Things are going to get much, much worse for kids...thanks progressives. You guys have always led the march to kill off children, and you're doing a stellar job!
No, it's here because it's sourced and it has legal implications, thanks to the progressive insistence that depraved sexuality be recognized as having the same social standing as marriage.
Marriage is a contract, rape is not. No one has suggested the rape of a child should have the same social standing as marriage EXCEPT for you, and maybe the set of partisan hacks and pedophiles.
In fact the marriage contract is broken whenever power and control of one is exercised over the other. It seems some conservative Republicans hold all marriage with the same esteem, which explains their support for DOMA and opposition to VAWA.
I simply don't understand threads like this. I realize there are people who are simply unhinged, like James Dobson, on homosexuality. They view accepting gay and lesbians as really no different than straights as opening the very gates of hell to bring in pedophiles bestiality incest polygamy ..... of course Abraham and Moses dipped their wicks along those lines in part, but let's give that a pass.
But the irony is that when you look down the line of groups (religious and medical/psychological) who argue for full inclusion, you have teh people who most strongly support child protection. So, if you assume people like Dobson or the posters here acutally BELIEVE this crap, then there's the obvious question of why they would. And, because it's irrational to think supporters of inclusion would ever support lessing protections of vulnerable children and adults placed into abusive situations, the answer to why people like Dobson and the posters believe the craptrap is either they're irrational or homophobes. or they could just be trolling with stinky bait. I'm hoping its that.
Marriage with children used to be a normal thing. Children were viewed as property, chattel, and had no right to be protected. We're headed that way again, with the advent of legalized abortion, the ever increasing murmur that abortion should be legal far beyond birth (yes I know that isn't abortion..but that's the proposal), that being human isn't enough to be granted the rights of *personhood*...you have to be a human with certain, particular capabilities and be only at specific stages of development....and with the insistence that pedophilia is an alternate sexuality, and porn is GOOD for children......
Things are going to get much, much worse for kids...thanks progressives. You guys have always led the march to kill off children, and you're doing a stellar job!
You really are a lying sack of shit. If anyone views children as property it is conservatives, not liberals or progressives. The typical 'strict father' or 'authoritarian' model of parenting is conservative. The nurturing model is liberal.
Progressives have taken another step toward legalization of pedophilia.
Judge orders morning-after pill available without prescription - CNN.com
Marriage is a contract, rape is not. No one has suggested the rape of a child should have the same social standing as marriage EXCEPT for you, and maybe the set of partisan hacks and pedophiles.
In fact the marriage contract is broken whenever power and control of one is exercised over the other. It seems some conservative Republicans hold all marriage with the same esteem, which explains their support for DOMA and opposition to VAWA.
I simply don't understand threads like this. I realize there are people who are simply unhinged, like James Dobson, on homosexuality. They view accepting gay and lesbians as really no different than straights as opening the very gates of hell to bring in pedophiles bestiality incest polygamy ..... of course Abraham and Moses dipped their wicks along those lines in part, but let's give that a pass.
But the irony is that when you look down the line of groups (religious and medical/psychological) who argue for full inclusion, you have teh people who most strongly support child protection. So, if you assume people like Dobson or the posters here acutally BELIEVE this crap, then there's the obvious question of why they would. And, because it's irrational to think supporters of inclusion would ever support lessing protections of vulnerable children and adults placed into abusive situations, the answer to why people like Dobson and the posters believe the craptrap is either they're irrational or homophobes. or they could just be trolling with stinky bait. I'm hoping its that.
The fact that haters bring up bestiality and pedophilia every time consenting adult gay relationships are discussed tells me they think WAY too much about bestiality and pedophilia.
Progressives have taken another step toward legalization of pedophilia.
Judge orders morning-after pill available without prescription - CNN.com
Katz how is this another step closer to legalizing pedophilia? I don't see it.
No, it's here because it's sourced and it has legal implications, thanks to the progressive insistence that depraved sexuality be recognized as having the same social standing as marriage.
Marriage is a contract, rape is not. No one has suggested the rape of a child should have the same social standing as marriage EXCEPT for you, and maybe the set of partisan hacks and pedophiles.
In fact the marriage contract is broken whenever power and control of one is exercised over the other. It seems some conservative Republicans hold all marriage with the same esteem, which explains their support for DOMA and opposition to VAWA.
I simply don't understand threads like this. I realize there are people who are simply unhinged, like James Dobson, on homosexuality. They view accepting gay and lesbians as really no different than straights as opening the very gates of hell to bring in pedophiles bestiality incest polygamy ..... of course Abraham and Moses dipped their wicks along those lines in part, but let's give that a pass.
But the irony is that when you look down the line of groups (religious and medical/psychological) who argue for full inclusion, you have teh people who most strongly support child protection. So, if you assume people like Dobson or the posters here acutally BELIEVE this crap, then there's the obvious question of why they would. And, because it's irrational to think supporters of inclusion would ever support lessing protections of vulnerable children and adults placed into abusive situations, the answer to why people like Dobson and the posters believe the craptrap is either they're irrational or homophobes. or they could just be trolling with stinky bait. I'm hoping its that.
I simply don't understand threads like this. I realize there are people who are simply unhinged, like James Dobson, on homosexuality. They view accepting gay and lesbians as really no different than straights as opening the very gates of hell to bring in pedophiles bestiality incest polygamy ..... of course Abraham and Moses dipped their wicks along those lines in part, but let's give that a pass.
But the irony is that when you look down the line of groups (religious and medical/psychological) who argue for full inclusion, you have teh people who most strongly support child protection. So, if you assume people like Dobson or the posters here acutally BELIEVE this crap, then there's the obvious question of why they would. And, because it's irrational to think supporters of inclusion would ever support lessing protections of vulnerable children and adults placed into abusive situations, the answer to why people like Dobson and the posters believe the craptrap is either they're irrational or homophobes. or they could just be trolling with stinky bait. I'm hoping its that.
The fact that haters bring up bestiality and pedophilia every time consenting adult gay relationships are discussed tells me they think WAY too much about bestiality and pedophilia.
I disagree. I think it's simply the "ick factor." Having run out of irrational reasons to think people of differeing orientations who do not hurt anyone, they're reduced to irrational reasons.
However, if a hetero person thinks "gay marriage" makes their marriage into something it is not, I think that is rational. But, imo, over time it will become a distinction w/o a difference simply because I don't see any real difference in same sex marriages. Sure, there's a social role gender issue thing which may or may not change. I doubt it will. And, even with same sex folks, there are nurture/provider roles and issues that are not "one size fits all."
I simply don't understand threads like this. I realize there are people who are simply unhinged, like James Dobson, on homosexuality. They view accepting gay and lesbians as really no different than straights as opening the very gates of hell to bring in pedophiles bestiality incest polygamy ..... of course Abraham and Moses dipped their wicks along those lines in part, but let's give that a pass.
But the irony is that when you look down the line of groups (religious and medical/psychological) who argue for full inclusion, you have teh people who most strongly support child protection. So, if you assume people like Dobson or the posters here acutally BELIEVE this crap, then there's the obvious question of why they would. And, because it's irrational to think supporters of inclusion would ever support lessing protections of vulnerable children and adults placed into abusive situations, the answer to why people like Dobson and the posters believe the craptrap is either they're irrational or homophobes. or they could just be trolling with stinky bait. I'm hoping its that.
The fact that haters bring up bestiality and pedophilia every time consenting adult gay relationships are discussed tells me they think WAY too much about bestiality and pedophilia.
I disagree. I think it's simply the "ick factor." Having run out of irrational reasons to think people of differeing orientations who do not hurt anyone, they're reduced to irrational reasons.
However, if a hetero person thinks "gay marriage" makes their marriage into something it is not, I think that is rational. But, imo, over time it will become a distinction w/o a difference simply because I don't see any real difference in same sex marriages. Sure, there's a social role gender issue thing which may or may not change. I doubt it will. And, even with same sex folks, there are nurture/provider roles and issues that are not "one size fits all."
Shouldn't we just follow the model of the greatest of all Christian churches, Catholicism?
When we catch a pedophile, we move him to another town...
Why is it that the guilty priests almost exclusively molested boys?
Any ideas?
Nah, they just couldn't have been homosexuals, right?
Nah, just couldn't be.
Yes. They molested choir boys because those were the children most available to them. It doesn't mean pedophiles are homosexual. Just a many girls are sexually abused as boys, possibly more.
The fact that haters bring up bestiality and pedophilia every time consenting adult gay relationships are discussed tells me they think WAY too much about bestiality and pedophilia.
I disagree. I think it's simply the "ick factor." Having run out of irrational reasons to think people of differeing orientations who do not hurt anyone, they're reduced to irrational reasons.
However, if a hetero person thinks "gay marriage" makes their marriage into something it is not, I think that is rational. But, imo, over time it will become a distinction w/o a difference simply because I don't see any real difference in same sex marriages. Sure, there's a social role gender issue thing which may or may not change. I doubt it will. And, even with same sex folks, there are nurture/provider roles and issues that are not "one size fits all."
Tell me about the ick factor kid....
Glad to meet you. Let's dance I cant wait child.
Marriage with children used to be a normal thing. Children were viewed as property, chattel, and had no right to be protected. We're headed that way again, with the advent of legalized abortion, the ever increasing murmur that abortion should be legal far beyond birth (yes I know that isn't abortion..but that's the proposal), that being human isn't enough to be granted the rights of *personhood*...you have to be a human with certain, particular capabilities and be only at specific stages of development....and with the insistence that pedophilia is an alternate sexuality, and porn is GOOD for children......
Things are going to get much, much worse for kids...thanks progressives. You guys have always led the march to kill off children, and you're doing a stellar job!
You really are a lying sack of shit. If anyone views children as property it is conservatives, not liberals or progressives. The typical 'strict father' or 'authoritarian' model of parenting is conservative. The nurturing model is liberal.
Having sex with kids isn't *nurturing*.
Just so ya know.
Imo but the priests are sort of a unique subset. As I understand the psychologal literature, pedos are really neither straight nor gay. Some may stick with boys, or girls, but that's more the result of thier pathology as opposed to orientation. And some even can have adult relationships of some kind. So, it's not a one size fits all thing.Why is it that the guilty priests almost exclusively molested boys?
Any ideas?
Nah, they just couldn't have been homosexuals, right?
Nah, just couldn't be.
Yes. They molested choir boys because those were the children most available to them. It doesn't mean pedophiles are homosexual. Just a many girls are sexually abused as boys, possibly more.
Nonsense. Don't make excuses for therm.
Why is it that the guilty priests almost exclusively molested boys?
Any ideas?
Nah, they just couldn't have been homosexuals, right?
Nah, just couldn't be.
Yes. They molested choir boys because those were the children most available to them. It doesn't mean pedophiles are homosexual. Just a many girls are sexually abused as boys, possibly more.
Nonsense. Don't make excuses for therm.
it was definitely the wierd of the weird
Sex Abuse in the Church: Girls Also Victimized - Newsweek and The Daily Beast
