America's sexual deviation & decadence over the line

I don't think necrophilia is a crime. It's a misdemeanor. Also I dont think the reason it's against the law is because a corpse cannot give consent. I think it has to do with the fact that living people find this practice abhorrent.

I don't think it's illegal to have sex with animals. I could be wrong.

 

Misdemeanors are crimes

 

You shouldn't rely on external sources to do your thinking for you

 

Yes, I will give you that there are many laws that are put on the books because people find something abhorrent, but opinions change over time. So as long as something doesn't hurt anyone else, and it is consensual, I don't see why it should be against the law.

 

I specifically said that it's not good that liberals make excuses for gay pedophiles and you
turn around and make excuses for gay pedophiles. Excuse me if I don't bother to read the
link with the left-wing propaganda that says pedophiles aren't homosexual because I am
not gullible or stupid.

What does the alt right have to do with anything? Frankly, the term "alt right" has been so
many different interpretations to different people I don't even know what good it is anymore.
To me the term simply means an right leaning media sources alternative to the left-wing
media. I'm certainly not aware of any alt right media giving shelter to or making excuses
for any pedophiles.

Yes the Catholics have had a problem with pedophile priests. The public school system also
has had a problem with pedophile teachers that is ongoing and gets little press. You don't
mention that because it's not the pedophiles that bother you, it's the church.

 

You don't know me nor forum rules apparently. I am not very religious really, I don't attend
church. I don't think all gay people are pedophiles, I never said that. But the gays allowed
for many years NAMBLA to participate in their "Gay Pride Parades". Tell me I'm wrong.

To me, that shows a certain amount of acceptance and complacency with pedophilia.

The Nazi's were left-wing socialists. Kind of the opposite of "alt right". Glad I could educate you
since you seem to know so much that is not so.

 

I mostly agree with you. Question for you (slightly off-topic but what the heck): do you think government should make laws against the usage of hard, addictive drugs? Drugs like cocaine, heroin and things like that. When someone uses these drugs, he is not directly harming anybody. However, if/once he gets hooked on it, he might turn to behaviors that harm other people. So do you support these types of laws?

You shouldn't just give your (worthless) opinion. You are supposed to come up with a post with thought put into it and logic behind it.

 

You are certainly entitled to your worthless opinion of my "opinion", which in this case is also a fact.

Not interested in your worthless opinion of what I'm supposed to do, thanks anyway.

 

What you stated in that post of yours was not a fact at all. It was merely an opinion. But then again, I am not surprised that you have trouble telling facts and opinions apart.

1. You are copying my way of speaking. Lol.
2. You seem offended. Double-lol.

 

I'm afraid that's precisely what it is. That you evince no sense of embarassment at being the author of the imbecility that prompted it is ... well, shall we say, remarkable.

 

Any wrong a person can do on drugs is already against the law, and they will be charged for it.

That line of logic is right up there with arresting poor people, and people with mental health issues, as they are even more frequent indicators.
Charging people for a gun, as they might use it.

In order for logic to be true, it must be consistently right, no matter where applied.

A war on any substance is nothing more than a form of backhanded double jeopardy. The fact law enforcement is allowed to stack charges for one act, means that modern American criminal is actually facing triple jeopardy. (Drug possession, intent to distribute, firearm on you, bullets in the firearm, etc.)

Plea bargains are in the 90th percentile, everywhere. That means "guilty" in the 90th percentile. Do you honestly think history will look back on a system with a conviction rate in the 90th percentile as anything less than complete barbarism?

 

Since when has age ever been a concern with liberals and their hair brained agenda's?

 

I think that using hard drugs should be legal but selling them illegal.

 

Post limit thread closure.

Shangrila
Moderator