pedophiles going public

Oh, I thought this was a thread about Catholic priests.

 

Mischaracterization is a great way to deride someone's point without understanding it, something you of all people are adept at. See, the original point of those statements was that I assumed Zionism was little more than a victim until I did my research, and that the research started by understanding the significance of the number 6,000,000. As far as your research is concerned, I'll consider you an authority on the subject once you link your dissertation. Until you've done so, you're no different than anyone else, and all I have to go on is the merits in which you post. They are lacking, substantially.

As far as pedophilia being a Zionist plot? No, that would be ridiculous, as pedophilia has existed for millennia. Would it be possible however, for a group to utilize degeneracy to pilot the downfall of a nation to move their people into a power structure? Certainly not that either. It's not like Bolsheviks were Jewish.

 

Its a bold stategery for democrats to pursue the pedophile vote. I doubt this will sit well with the american people, but democrats need every vote they can get.

 

Well clearly you need to say whether it was part of the left agenda that put a stop to paedophilia or the right, unless you tell us your opinion we cannot understand whether your theory is correct.

 

So if I say.... have a tendency to break in to the house of people named Sampson Simpon and steal everything I find and leave everyone tied up while I set the house on fire.....

I just have an attraction to doing this? I cant help it? Actions are solely biological and not consciously controlled, isn't that right?

I cannot control my actions....

What is your address again?

 

I never addressed skepticism. It was predicted, and this is a news story. If you want to take issue with its accuracy - I mean, other than the usual empty wailing from the left that doesn't actually offer refutation - do so.

This story's existence doesn't indicate 'zero evidence'. It indicates some movement in a direction that was, indeed (as you admitted) predicted.

 

Ah. Now that it's a thread about pedophilia activities engaged in by a group or groups with which you approve, you don't have any steam left in your objection?

 

Why is every forum full of people who lack basic reading comprehension and make such incredibly stupid posts. Where did I anywhere defend pedophilia? Christ almighty

 

Um...pedophilia is a sickness in the adult. You, therefore, cannot blame its incidence on "continuing poverty and 'as usual' the exploitation of the working class'".

That's asinine. Or leftist. You pick: they're synonyms.

Um...wut? Wha? Huh?

No, you just said it is 'far from being anything to do with the left'. What you're posting is LWNuttery.

Ah. You mean the place where Bill Clinton and his flyboy lefty buddy jaunted off to on numerous occasions.

 

Show proof that I approve of whatever "group " you're talking about or admit you are a liar.

 

Perhaps you might want to review the conversation I was having and edit your post accordingly.

 

The thing about science is it tries to find an unbiased truth in nature. Data seems to suggest that these are not choices, it literally is who they are. This is not my belief. There's a difference. And my understanding is not required with idiocy.

Like I said, welcome to planet Earth. You think they're degenerates, congratulations. Want a cookie? Yours is the lazy man's take on these problem, and will result in more children being harmed.

You know what? Should just cut the BS. Euthanize them, right? Would you? What if a pedophile comes to you pleading and hasn't hurt a child yet? Is that person still garbage? Turn them away because they're degenerate scumbags? What would you do, off that moral high horse that's kiddie compatible.

 

Yes, that is what they do or have to do. There must be justice for everyone, with no exception. I don't know would such relationships ever be legal, but I completely sure they must be.

 

Would you like to argue with me in my thread where I defend removing age limits for sexual relationships? Because it seems everyone loose in a dispute with me, or simply don't want to argue anymore.

 

Because you don't need to be wrong.

 

Why do you think you can decide such matters? It is not your life, you cannot decide other people's lives, and how the have to live.

 

Why they have to have control, and not you have to change laws?

 

People's actions can change other people's lives. That's why it matters. Children are too young to make decisions and consciously understand the consequences of them.

 

Even if they tell?

 

Child cannot decide what he wants for dinner? Even if his mother will ask him?

 

There is a distinct difference between 'being mainstreamed' and 'mainstream'. The links provided disagree with you.

 

Not always, no. And why are you talking about dinner? We're talking about actions that can traumatize children. Not supper.

 

Derp.

You seemed bummed that it wasn't about Catholic Priests, and not upset that it involves Progressives attempting to normalize pedophilia.

One concludes that you'd rather defend Progressivism than condemn pedophilia.

And I don't like you.

 

We all knew Loving vs Virginia would come to this. They predicted it way back then.

 

Why do you imply that sex with child is always hurtful?