LEFT wing Professor caught trying to arrange rape of 7 yr old

SEXUAL INDOCTRINATION AT ITS FINEST FOLKS!
Not only was this guy trying to setup the rape of a 7 yr old (with an undercover FBI agent posing as a fellow creep) but he also admitted he had experience from an 11 year old boy he molested in the past.
Well at least we know he doesn't discriminate against gender! I guess thats a plus eh?

A left-wing college professor from California
https://ipatriot.com/lefty-calif-pr...nge-the-rape-of-a-7-yr-old-girl-in-fbi-sting/

Don't feel too bad about it! At least he was gonna hook her up with her favorite chocolate first!

When discussing plans to meet in Fresno, Githens said he would bring the girl “her favorite chocolate bar…and an Ariel doll.”

I guess its fitting that he would get her a disney doll though huh? That company and child indoctrination sort of go hand and hand, like Pizza and Pepperoni

Don't like ipatriot? Going to talk about the SOURCE instead of the issue?
Here it is from some other sites to squash that nonsense before you bring it here

Yahoo
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...b29ff67879df&usg=AOvVaw1l4GS74orqrD9rPMn-5iVf

ABC
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...b29ff67879df&usg=AOvVaw1l4GS74orqrD9rPMn-5iVf

Folks, when you try and normalize pedophilia, this is what happens. I bet this guy probably doesn't even think he did anything wrong. Perhaps an act of love?

What say you?

 

I heard he voted for Trump, twice.

 

I heard that even pedophiles don't like being broke

 

Obviously it's wrong. But I don't see why you think this is a left-wing thing. Right wingers molest kids too.

 

Sure they do, but they aren't the ones trying to pass legislation to NORMALIZE it. Big difference.

 

What legislation?

 

Its starts with this
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/tran...te lawmaker in,based on "sexual orientation."
but this isn't even anything new. The LEFT has been trying to normalize pedophilia forever now. They have even been trying to get the word "Pedophile" changed to "MAPS - "minor attracted persons"
Also, drag queen twerk lessons for minors in elementary schools. The left is protesting against legislation to protect kids from this stuff. (want to pretend that is fake also? you can find actual videos of such classes being conducted on youtube).
Ignorance might be bliss, but that doesn't mean stuff isn't happening.

 

Mark my words: pedophilia is on track to become the new black.

 

I see that republicans think this trans democrat is trying to make pedophiles a protected class, but that does not actually appear to be the intention, more like that pedophilia is covered elsewhere in the law and does not need to be explicitly included in a law on sexual orientation because it is not, according to the trans democrat, a sexual orientation in the first place. Seems like republicans trying to make something out of nothing.

"Nothing in the bill changes or weakens any crimes against children, or the state's ability to prosecute those who break the law," Finke said. "Of course, pedophilia is not a sexual orientation. The language never should have been included in the statutory definition in the first place. Crimes against children are located in Minnesota’s criminal statutes, and again, they remain unchanged."

 

I hope you are right.

 

The GOP supports child mariage. THAT kind of legislation.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/po...riage-u-s-you-might-be-surprised-who-n1050471

 

Nothing yet, but we know how Democrats push to turn every perversion into a new cultural norm that everyone is then required to affirm.

 

Morality needs to be defined by harm to others. With pedophilia being acted upon, there is clearly a wronged party. That makes it different from the trans rights movement (though again, with an exception on sports), and the gay rights movement, and a reason the slippery slope you worry of doesn't go there.

 

Morality is defined by living in righteous community with God and your brothers and sisters.

Trust in the Lord with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding. In all thy ways acknowledge Him, and He shall direct thy paths. Be not wise in thine own eyes: fear the Lord, and depart from evil. Proverbs 3:5-8​

 

There are some who do not view it as harm.
That's the problem with subjective morality. One might even try to rationalize it the form "my needs are greater than the harm it causes to others", or even "I am more important than other people".
Or "right and wrong don't really exist as absolutes anyway".

 

but surely not if you self identify....hmmm....surely its morally hunky dory for a kiddy fiddler to self identify as a 12 year old girl so he can have sleepovers and play dates and parties with other 12 year old girls....

 

They would be wrong. I do think there is data on child abuse causing major harm and it's not just a cultural norm issue. Morality is largely a function of logic. People can tell us if they feel they were harmed. Data can bear it out if it's more than just feelings.

Most people feel they're more important than everybody else, except maybe their own kids. It's human nature. But we are all humans and have inherent and obvious value as such by any logical evaluation.

First amendment. Fortunately, we are left with a secular and logical definition based upon harm.

No because it harms 12 year old girls.

 

Throughout history that is where subjective morality takes us.

 

The justification "Oh it's really not that bad, it doesn't really cause much harm."

When it's up to the individual to figure out on their own right from wrong, all sorts of mental gymnastics can be used.

 

The person with h3bephilia (apparently profanity filter thinks I'm saying something about jews, I'm not) may say that, but both liberal and conservative parents are not going to agree, and data on child abuse likely also would show it's significant harm.

 

Oh, so now you're saying morality is a consensus?

Most people do not look at pages of data when they form their opinions.

 

Not as a final word. Data and logic ought to be the final word. It's more illustrating how your slippery slope is just not realistic. It's not a part of the liberal agenda. It's just a few crazy/sick people who would advocate for such a thing.

 

In other words, you trust all individuals to use logic, to come to the right and proper moral position on every issue.

[heavy sarcasm, in case you couldn't tell]

 

Nope. And I don't know what your point is either.

 

My point was that if you expect people to try to come to the conclusion all on their own that this is totally wrong and terrible, it's not going to happen.

(by "people", I mean of course all individuals in the huge population, each individually applying thought & logic to determine their own ethical views on individual issues)

I bet you anything if you interview this guy, he's going to tell you he doesn't think what he did is "that bad".