Male Dem won't be charged for public oral sex on teen man

LOL Spare us Jeb. No one cares what a medical website says about their opinion on what a pedo is. Common sense and basic morality knows that 56 on a 17 year old underage teenager is a pedophile.

That's why you will never understand.

 

I know. People don't want to read and understand things like math and science. They would prefer just to lash out with anger and ignorance. It takes effort to read, think, and reason. It's far easier to just go through life like a caveman yelling out simplistic statements.

 

Well, what OTHER "moral laws" should we all be aware of from the "Book of Tex"?

PS. And what age IS "underage" if its NOT the legally defined age of 16?

 

What is morality? Tell me one thing (aside from hating someone else) that is immoral.

 

Still the basic dishonesty cutting off the rest of my post

Common sense and basic morality knows that 56 on a 17 year old underage teenager is a pedophile. That's why you will never understand.


Typical Jeb

 

Since you can't even identify a 56 year old man taking advantage of a 17 year old boy is wrong there is nothing I can do for you Dave. NAMBLA I'm sure thanks you for your support.

How about the LEGAL age of an ADULT Dave? You know, 18? Are you just incapable of understanding basic facts? that child he took advantage of can't even vote!

Yet you come right out like the good little liberal and defend the dirty old pedophile. Is this personal experience?

 

Pedophile is a very specific term. It's specific for a reason. A 56 year old being attracted to a 17 year old is not a pathological condition. You may not like it... heck I don't like it but it is NOT pathological. And it is not pedophilia. Distasteful perhaps. But not pedophilia. If I caught a 56 year old guy trying to put the moves on my 17 year old daughter I would take a swing at him and gladly do the time. But I wouldn't call him a pedophile. I'm too educated.

 

"Psychobabble Today" is not a "medical website".

 

Leftists are REQUIRED to defend and cover for homosexual chicken hawks, at all times, or they must turn in their "I am a Soul-less monkey Spawn, who hates America" cards...

 

Of course you are correct. And if this had been a republican WE would have kicked his butt out and the liberals would be screaming pedo.

But we have standards. They don't.

 

Come on, we all know that dems and libs have poisoned supreme court and the entirely justice system.

 

I've been to San Francisco several times and have never seen that, however Key West is a different story. That city should be rated for mature audiences only.

 

True. I think it's telling that there isn't a national news article about this, only a local one. If this had been a Republican, it would be on Politico and covered on the news sites.

 

Mature? Just the opposite.

If you have to display your sexual acts in public "mature" is the last word to use.

 

This took 2 seconds to find on Google, believe, it happens there all the time. The video is from the annual gay pride parade, which is all about sex in the streets. Liberals bring their children to watch so they can be cultured into the San Francisco life style.

http://www.xtube.com/watch.php?v=OYaDq-C643-

 

So what law could he be charged with breaking? Did he hypocritically stand on a platform of chastity probity and "family" values? Is he married? Where's the beef, as they say?

 

THEY ADMITTED IT. Just how dense are you?

Have you considered actually READING the article? I'll say it again, THEY ADMITTED TO IT.

Next time just stop typing. Save yourself the embarrassment.

 

For the 4,342nd time. PUBLIC INDECENCY.

 

Well obviously the purpose of a gay pride parade is to shock the bourgeoisie. But I don't think that's an every day occurrence.

 

I must be on ignore here, because this thread is still going.

There's nothing this guy can be charged with. That's why he wasn't charged. Not because of some big conspiracy to keep a Democrat from getting in trouble. Not because "libs" let it slide. He's not being charged because HE DIDN'T BREAK ANY LAWS.

 

OP is nothing more than a flamebait, the title alone: "teen man" => LMAO! What's next "adult toddler"?

 

PUBLIC INDECENCY.

PUBLIC INDECENCY.

PUBLIC INDECENCY.

PUBLIC INDECENCY.

PUBLIC INDECENCY.

How many times does it have to be said before it sinks in Bull and Jan?

BTW, we love the fact that you guys can't even condemn what this sick freak was doing with an underage child

Shows you the extreme lack of morality liberals possess just as I said.

 

He was in violation of the statute on "Indecent or Lewd Acts" which is punishable by fines and/or up to 90 days in jail.

 

I actually quoted the law in that state on page 19.

Some liberals just don't have the honesty or integrity to address it.

 

Sorry, I didn't go too far back in the post history.