Supreme Court Justice Ginsburg favors decriminalizing pedophilia and child sex trafficking

Please awaken the rest so I have brothers to help me fight them!

I don't want to coexist with evil. I don't want to debate them. I want to kill them.

Can you hear me now?

You don't get to warp reality and rape children. You get the final solution.

She must be in the advanced stages of Dementia!!!

The reckoning and final solution is almost here. We're done playing with that shit!

Unfortunately it is not bullshit. She has spouted this shit for years on public record.

Go tell all your masters!

I'm not a defenseless child!

two words... Mill Stone !

I'll burn this mother fucker to the ground trying to save my children! I don't know what the fuck you will do.

I'm no fan of hers, but the thread title is a total misrepresentation of what she wrote. ::waits for PEDO!!! screechers::

Oh, we're fully awake to the Communists and Despots that want to overtake this Nation. That's why they are so pissed.

She just thinks legal she should be 12. It is 12 in some countries.

It's always illegal to break someone's heart no matter what age. The older you are the greater chance your heart will literally break.

You're right, but my arguments are not backed up by me being nice, kind, caring, humane person. My Ideology/philosophy is logic, and not assuming one person is necessarily better because of a majority.

But looking back at the past, we don't hold same beliefs. We can all have opinions, but if you're lighting fields on fire and get burnt later then its only fair that we all equal moan and groan about it quite like plenty others have when we were busy making them criminals for smoking plants.

We all don't like it of course, but if we truly respect each other on an equal basis, then this should not be an issue.

If not, then admit that we do not have authority over each other, just be real and also say that you are superior than the other, enough so you may judge them.

Or come up with a logical argument that abides by your own rules minus opinion or bias, and prove me wrong.

I only want to realize the American Dream, equality and freedom

Last Edited by HolloH on 08/10/2018 10:57 AM

Wow.


Read it.


No words.

Did you actually read the article?


She wanted to lower the age of consent to 12 and do away with the Mann act (federal anti-child trafficking statute).

Oh really? Says you who thinks SHE can warp reality and throw in false accusations I never said.

Your word betray you, because you yourself won't bother to carry the weight of them.

Honestly I wouldn't wouldn't have a problem with you, I don't think you're evil, I just haven't seen you think

THEY ARE DEMONS! THIS IS A CORRECT TERM FOR SUCH EVIL BEINGS.

That comment about logic and not "necessarily better because of a majority" has a ring of trying to have it both ways, of sly garden-variety liberalism.

I'd need to know more details about your political background to determine if you're actually the type who'll say, "there's no difference between left and right." Or, "they're one and the same." The type who often turns out to be a closeted liberal.



.

This is going backwards to the Alabama of 1962, on which a girl of twelve could marry a man of any age, with parental or judicial consent.

Twelve year olds generally have secondary sexual characteristics, sexually attractive to people who are NOT pedophiles.

In the sleazy seventies, my friends and I, at the age of twelve, attracted male attention. I am unsure what laws prevented us from finding 41 year old boyfriends. Our American culture did not allow it and our fathers would certainly have prevented it.

Is this a "conservative" site? Since when do conservatives need the state to act like our daddies?

I didn't date because I was too weird, and have never been attracted to teenaged boys. Maybe a little to one guy who had a beard. I don't think my my friends were protected by statutory rape laws. I think those laws gave their parents unnatural power and control over daughters lives. Parents could always threaten a girl that if she didn't fly right they could report her boyfriend to the police and rhey might arrest him for rape. In other words, "go clean the kitchen now or we will jail your boyfriend."

Laws like that scare mothers of sons. Your son could go to jail, possibly prison, and your family could incur legal expenses and public embarrassment because some fifteen year old didn't clean her room right. Parents who treated their child as property to be protected (rather than a person taught to make wise choices) could jail your son. Other bad parents could six the cops on your kid in a childish fight with their daughter.

We now have immigrants who DO allow young teens to marry. They aren't pedophile. They are people who lived their lives expecting that their daughters would marry young and be provided for by husbands.

How would YOU like to be told that in a strange country YOUR marriage could not be recognised, you were forbidden to live with your husband, but must be celibate for four more years, that he was now free to marry another and you were to be supported by your parents or placed in foster care? That your parents could be required to pay child support and if they could not lose their guardianship of you?

State control over our bodies and sexuality can't be a good thing. We don't belong to the government.

Why do we need more laws undermining marriage and family!


Do you see how these laws undermine personal wealth? Cultures that promote arranged marriages usually marry cousins, keeping grandfathers wealth consilidated. If grandfather leaves an estate that passes to his grandchildren and their spouses and all the spouses are his grandchildrenbrhe great grandchildren of two grandchildren receive more than the great grandchildren born to one heir and one outsider.

Force these girls to delay marriage until they are 18 and you wreck their families. The girls may not wait for the back home cousin but fall in love with some other boy. It's all very romantic, but it causes problems because of everyone did that everyone's wealth would be halved. Important family alliances are based on arranged marriages. Uncle Engineer pays for nephews dentistry college with the understanding that nephew will marry one of his daughters and provide for her. He supports his daughter by paying for his nephews education. Long and complicated chains of obligation can arise and there's always the chaos of one couple meeting and being absolutely opposed to one another or wrong combinations of second cousins falling in love.

it's very capitalistic. These are working people who are able to manage their lives with as much happiness as dating teens and mid thirties marriages but also manage to acquire and preserve greater family wealth.

So do you want family and personal wealth or do you want the state to aggressively splinter every last shred of organic social organization and make us all state dependent?

These marriages considered wealth and wealth and inheritance strengthen family bonds. These folks have more family support in working through their difficulties and are less likely to divorce and remarry because someone else is cuter than the current spouse or because the moms with an ex, paying supper, a current paying the bills and an extra baby daddy also paying support can afford nicer things than a mom with only one man providing for all her children.

We might also ask what it does to girls when at a time their back home cousins are married mothers they are dependents in their parents home?

What typically happens is that educated fathers educate their daughters who naturally delay marriage. Plenty of US women doctors are only fifteen to twenty years younger than their immigrant mothers.

:

The Mann act said it's illegal to transport a female across state lines for immoral sexual purposes.

If you can't rent a room with your honey in Itah because Mormons decide you must be married, Mann Act says it's a federal crime to take her to Nevada.

That's just dumb. It may be used to pile onto child traffickers but it's also going to wreck a lot of happy spring break road trips.

It should be a FEDERAL OFFENSE for sixteen year olds to take their summer earnings to go to Colorado if oh dear god no someone has consensual sexual contact?

Interesting that you said NOTHING about lowering the age of consent to 12.


Hmmmmm...

"We the people" need our own deep state black ops thats entire purpose is to track and eliminate these sick fuckers.

If true that’s enough to impeach

But surely she didn’t say that I would not think her that stupid

EVIL PEOPLE IN HIGH POSITIONS MEANT TO CHANGE THE WAY THIS WORLD VIEWS SIN AND LAWLESSNESS.....

Again, another point to change how we understand the demoncrap party. Pure evil is the only way to label them all.

Need to take back all the court systems or get ready for some of the worst evil times in our history.

Last Edited by 1guynAz on 08/10/2018 12:17 PM

Stop with the rationalizations and back-breaking excuse-making. You'd have a bit more credence if modern culture were dominated by what was common over 60 years ago.

In the 1950s, even Hollywood - yep, Hollywood - ostracized a famous actress (Ingrid Bergman) for having a child with a guy who wasn't her husband.

In 2018, the ethos of Hollywood liberalism would just about mandate that actresses have children with guys who aren't their husbands. Or, more likely, demand that they not be married to the guy they're having kids with.

Sarcasm today has a way of becoming reality tomorrow. Even more so since the legal profession is dominated by tricky liberals/liberalism, with the government and corporate world pulling up the rear.


.

Sick is as sick does.