Liberal Elite perform mass child-rape

page: 22
45
<< 19  20  21    23 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 9 2011 @ 08:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by lucid eyes
You are comparing going to a Prostitute or having sex outside of marriage to child-rape?


Absolutely not. I am making the point that the divergent acts by a select few who happen to subscribe
to a certain brand of political ideologies exist across the board and can be used to make make broad sweeping generalizations as you have done.

I believe you are presenting a straw man argument mired in inference. (ergo: Do you still beat your wife?)



Child-rape is a whole other level. It is taking someone who is innocent and cannot defend him- or herself and commiting an act of violence that scars the child for life.


Agreed, please see a few of my thoughts on this subject regarding RCC. It is deplorable.

www.abovetopsecret.com...&mem=kinda+kurious




posted on Feb, 10 2011 @ 08:42 AM
link   
I have been following this thread since its inception, and have even brought up the point directly, but I still have yet to see a pragmatic suggestion as to any possible solution to this observation.

So, what action would you suggest could be undertaken to prevent any further abuse of children?

The root cause of liberalism must be considered:

1) Is one born liberal? Is it a sort of genetic defect that causes this abhorrent behavior?
or
2) Does being exposed to liberalism at a young age increase the likelihood of one mimicking such a belief upon reaching adulthood?

Again, and specifically, what action would you suggest could be undertaken to prevent any further abuse of children?

the Billmeister
edit on 10-2-2011 by Billmeister because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 18 2011 @ 05:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Billmeister
Again, and specifically, what action would you suggest could be undertaken to prevent any further abuse of children?


Education. Publication. For example, because of various articles in magazines and TV Reports, dozens of Kindergardens in Europe were closed in the 70s and 80s, thus preventing the wider abuse of children.



posted on Feb, 18 2011 @ 08:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by lucid eyes
Education. Publication.


Not really an answer there. What would you do about evil? Defeat it? How about bad stuff? You are against bad stuff too, right? The details are just so hard to grasp in this solution you have been working for dozens of pages to reach.


For example, because of various articles in magazines and TV Reports, dozens of Kindergardens in Europe were closed in the 70s and 80s, thus preventing the wider abuse of children.


Got some links? Not that I doubt anything you claim but I would like to educate myself about these schools and more importantly, understand how they were the result of the American Liberals you solely lay the blame on as the entire premise for your thread.

I may be way off but I am going to guess it relates in much the same way that someone from Yugoslavia supporting Roman Polanski is also the result of American Liberals. I look forward to some elaboration on your solutions to these problems.

"Education" is pretty vague. I am told that Bristol Palin was "educated" on the birds and bees as well as birth control and traditional family values. Just an example we can all understand. Maybe there was something lacking in the umbrella term "education" that could have helped someone like her make better choices? Then again, perhaps you believe the devil is all that is to be found in the details? I noticed a certain abhorrence for details that are based in facts and reality if they do not support the premise you proposed here.

You stated that the majority of Liberals in America supported Roman Polanski based on a list of 100 people, not even all from the US. When it was pointed out how this is less than 0.001% of the Liberal population in the US, that was dismissed as a pointless detail. Given this past performance, I am genuinely very curious to know what details are to be found within your solution of "education" and "publication."

Is this thread not supposed to be a publication and education? How is it working so far?



posted on Feb, 18 2011 @ 09:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by lucid eyes
reply to post by Sinnthia
 


Do you agree with Dr. Kinsey?


About what? I know he strongly believed that humans needed food and air to survive. I agree with him on that. I believe I agree with Obama and everyone that opposes him on that. I agree with Hitler on that. Maybe you need to ask me if I agree with specific ideas of his?


Do you also think Polanski should go free?


I believe his victim's wishes should be respected. She is an adult who has had plenty of time to mull the situation over in her head. I am not siding with an abused child clinging to their abuser but the adult resulting from childhood abuse. Maybe you do not value the victim in this case but I kind of do. The person I agree with on the issue of the Polanski rape, is the girl that was raped. I agree 100% with her feelings on that issue. Feel free to tear me apart for that as well.


Do you also believe the Pedophile author of that book mentioned earlier should not be punished?


Punished how and for what crime exactly? He is a US citizen who wrote this book in the US. I do believe that putting someone to death for writing any book is a bad bad idea. Your questions are really quite vague and seemed to be designed in a manner not so much to solicit a response to learn from but one that has a prepared attack waiting for it. I have spent more than enough time dealing with you on this issue to not only see quite clearly how you operate but also to see it coming a mile away. To that I can only offer this.

Bring it.


Do you believe that the events mentioned in the OP have nothing to do with "sexual liberation" ideology?


Do I believe I just dropped a glass because of gravity, centripital force, cosmic radiation, clumsiness, subcontious hatred for my glass? Why can't you just actually ask what it is you hope to learn? I can only answer such a general and faulty question with a general and admittedly faulty answer.

"Noting to do with" is such a loaded term. A man was shot last week near my home. I would be hard pressed to say that his shooting had "NOTHING to do with" the invention of gunpowder but at the same time, I find it just as hard to blame the invention of gun powder for this shooting.

So the short answer would be that it is easy to make that case that anything can be pinned down to having at least 'something to do with' something else. I would have thought that after almost two dozen pages of watching this house you have built sink like this, you might realize that building on sand like this only leads to such collapse. It is fun to watch though from the edge of your yard.


Simple questions which you havent even begun to answer.
edit on 9-2-2011 by lucid eyes because: (no reason given)


Are you trying to set me up as the leader of the American Liberals? Am I their spokesperson? Even if I were to come to this thread and PROMOTE child rape, I would still just be me speaking for me.

I find it flattering that you have decided that my answers to your questions basically make or break the argument for millions of other people. I do not believe my posts have such power.
edit on 18-2-2011 by Sinnthia because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 18 2011 @ 09:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by lucid eyes
We have produced tons of documented facts in this thread and you have yet to acknowledge a single piece of evidence.


I acknowledged and addressed it. Perhaps your memory is failing you. I also presented document facts in this thread and you blatantly told me they did not matter basically because they did not support your view. Go back about 20 pages or so and refresh yourself.


You have yet to declare your stance on any of them.


Not true at all. I have made my stance clear. You have, for some reason, appointed me spokesperson for all who do not agree with you and decided that my personal value judgements on random tidbits you toss my way has any actual meaning in the face of your premise that ALL of any groupd of anything are of one mind on something.

You are trying to put me in a position you do not want me in, trust me on this.


The only thing you are doing is attacking the messenger and defending the rights of child-rapists.


Not really. I began by offering evidence to suggest your premise had a HUGE blind spot in it. You made it clear that the evidence did not help you make YOUR case and thus was not relavent. Your court. Your ball. Your rules. Do not get mad at me for playing by the house rules and winning. You should have set up a better game. It seems to be faltering and stumbling more than anything with no facts or evidence to actually support the premise, you were left with random attacks and "examples" that took away from your entire point.

You blame American Liberals for something and back it up by using other countries as examples of what it leads to. You ignore AMERICAN cases of abuse on sex shop warehouse scales by conservatives to go on a rant about how the fact that a VERY TINY MINORITY of people support some guy proves the majority holds. You even went so far as to say that people in Hollywood, even in tiny numbers, clearly represent the rest of us because...well because you said so and that is that.

If all you have is page after page of examples from places NOT America or examples of things not done by American Liberals and this hodge podge of annecdotal evidence about one rapist from Europe, then how can you even begin to lash out at me for not making my personal feelings on such random issues as Kinsey more known? Kinsey does not represent me or my sexual ideals. Why should I even have to addres him? Does he represent American Liberals? It is not hard to find hoardes of American conservatives that help keep child rape a very profitible business just offshore in the Marianas. You do not care why American conservatives would be stopped coming back from there or going there with bottles of illegal viagara prescriptions though because that does not help you make your case.

Well, you have my answers. You have 22 pages of destroying your own case. I hope there is more to come.




posted on Feb, 23 2011 @ 05:34 AM
link   
The Wiki page on Age of Consent Reform shows that ALL the Governments pushing for lowering the "Age of Consent" to 14, 12, etc. are either left or far-left Governments.

Of course most of us already knew that. Its only a special few who pretend not to see.



posted on Feb, 23 2011 @ 05:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by lucid eyes
The Wiki page on Age of Consent Reform shows that ALL the Governments pushing for lowering the "Age of Consent" to 14, 12, etc. are either left or far-left Governments.

Of course most of us already knew that. Its only a special few who pretend not to see.


Really? I see one example from the US and it comes from a Republican majority.

What did I miss?



posted on Feb, 23 2011 @ 07:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by Sinnthia


Really? I see one example from the US and it comes from a Republican majority.

What did I miss?


Your deflection attempts are transparent. You cant hide the facts, anyone can read up on them.

ALL people involved in lowering the "age of consent" so that they can force their sexuality upon children, are liberals and leftists. No exceptions.



In 1979, the now-defunct Dutch Pacifist Socialist Party supported an unsuccessful petition to lower the age of consent to 12.[11




Sexual Morality and the Law in a book by Michel Foucault. The participants, including Foucault, play-writer/actor Jean Danet and novelist/gay activist Guy Hocquenghem had all signed the petition.




According to sociologist Matthew Waites, in the 1970s, a number of grass-roots political actions took place in Britain in favor of lowering the age of consent, that he described as based on claims of children's rights, gay liberation, or, as a way to avoid unwanted pregnancies or sexually-transmitted diseases.[13] In May 1974, the Campaign for Homosexual Equality suggested a basic age of consent of 16, but 12 "in cases where a defendant could prove the existence of meaningful consent".[14][15] In September 1974, the Sexual Law Reform Society proposed lowering the age of consent to 14, with the requirement that below the age of 18 the burden of proof that consent for sexual activities between the parties existed would be the responsibility of the older participant.[16] In 1976, the British political pressure group Liberty published a proposal advocating reducing the age of consent laws to 10 years of age, only when both individuals are younger than 14, with a close-in-age exemption of two years if one of the involved individuals is older than 14 but younger than 16.[17] The modern Communist Party of Great Britain lists abolition of age-of-consent laws among its immediate demands, with the added provision that there be alternate legal methods to protect children from sexual abuse.[18



posted on Feb, 23 2011 @ 11:30 AM
link   
It reminds me of the book "Brave New World" - from a young age, children are forced to obey the government, and are conditioned. In terms of recreation, the children are allowed to play with each other sexually, and participate in sexual games. Most kids naturally interfere with each other when young, and it is natural for parents to play and fondle with their children, and often, children like to play games and interfere with their parents.

However, things take a negative spin when you throw a bunch of perverts into the mix (children who were sexually oppressed), or parents who are envious of thier children (the origin of paedophillia). Eitherway, manipulating children is the prime cause of retardation, in essence, a form of "devolution" as emotionally scarred children have a reduced tendency to create offspring of thier own, and many adults who are "broken" become highly envious of children who have not "fallen".

Children who were manipulated by thier mothers will show interest to thier fathers, and, children manipulated by thier fathers will show interest to their mothers. Children manipulated by both thier mothers and their fathers are usually the ones to suffer from "neuroses". Although at the primitive level there is a physical scenario, on the mental and emotional levels, essentially, the same things go on in most households. That is, if you took an average household, and brought them to a primitive level, indeed, they would be doing a lot of strange things with each other. Its with this perspective that I understand how crazy the world is today.

For example, male individuals who are incredibly "scientific" and obsessed with the world of "proof" have lost that part of them that imagines, as they know that there is just going to be a hand that comes down and makes them tell the truth. Female Individuals who are overly obsessed with the world of the spiritual are caught in a world of wonderment as they fear a strong force is going to come down and show them the "truth". On the flipside to this equation, are psudeo-scientists, and "gurus". The funny part, is that the psuedo-scientists often generate the ideas that mainstream science attempt to prove, and that gurus really just compile thier knowledge from the incoherent babble of thier followers.
edit on 23-2-2011 by SystemResistor because: (no reason given)
edit on 23-2-2011 by SystemResistor because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 23 2011 @ 11:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by lucid eyes
Your deflection attempts are transparent. You cant hide the facts, anyone can read up on them.

ALL people involved in lowering the "age of consent" so that they can force their sexuality upon children, are liberals and leftists. No exceptions.



In 1979, the now-defunct Dutch Pacifist Socialist Party supported an unsuccessful petition to lower the age of consent to 12.[11



You are not even pretending to try anymore. One group from Holland proves your case about American Liberals and is your evidence of ALLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL THESE crazy child rapin' lefties?

Call me unimpressed with your "evidence."

The only one doing any deflecting here seems to be you, from your own case.



posted on Feb, 26 2011 @ 03:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Sinnthia
 


Show me some conservatives that campaign for lowering the age of consent or campaign for pedophiles or campaign for "sexually liberating" children. You cant.

The comparison to conservative child-abusers is a false comparison because it has nothing to do with their politics and all to do with their criminal intent to abuse children.

Look at whats become of your mind thanks to liberalism. You cant even tell the difference between pedophilia-advocacy and child abuse.



posted on Feb, 26 2011 @ 03:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by lucid eyes
reply to post by Sinnthia
 


Show me some conservatives that campaign for lowering the age of consent or campaign for pedophiles or campaign for "sexually liberating" children. You cant.


Why should I show you anyone trying to lower the age of consent? I have shown you more than enough "conservatives" just plain old RAPING children. The age of consent specific argument is quite the canard.
Conservatives that rape children do not count to you unless they also advocate a lower age of consent?

You still refuse to research the Marianas. Why is that? It is a place where conservatives go for underage sex. You want to see them trying to lower the age of consent while you turn a blind eye to them just RAPING CHILDREN.

Where do you get such fancy blinders?



The comparison to conservative child-abusers is a false comparison because it has nothing to do with their politics and all to do with their criminal intent to abuse children.


I am sure you can back that up too! I know this thread has been a rousing success of proof for you so far.

Start that thread. I cannot wait to see you make that case instead of just stating it.

Of course, you do realize now you will also need that third thread to explain why politically motivated abuse of children is worse than any other abuse of children of same magnitude but of differing motivations.

That one is the one I really really really cannot wait to read.


Look at whats become of your mind thanks to liberalism. You cant even tell the difference between pedophilia-advocacy and child abuse.


Hmmmm. I do not think you know enough about me or anything you are talking about to really make such a judgement but you seem to like judging people so who am I to stomp on that, even when it is usually so wrong.
edit on 26-2-2011 by Sinnthia because: (no reason given)
edit on 26-2-2011 by Sinnthia because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 26 2011 @ 04:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Sinnthia

You still refuse to research the Marianas. Why is that? It is a place where conservatives go for underage sex. You want to see them trying to lower the age of consent while you turn a blind eye to them just RAPING CHILDREN.

Where do you get such fancy blinders?



Its not that I "refuse" to research it but that I found ZERO evidence on the Internet when looking for it. Much different than the LOADS of evidence exposing the liberal agenda for our children.

Anyone reading this thread can see that you provided no evidence at all for your claim that the Mariana Islands is a place Republicans go for raping children..



posted on Feb, 26 2011 @ 06:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by lucid eyes
Its not that I "refuse" to research it but that I found ZERO evidence on the Internet when looking for it.


You must have tried really hard then.

Here is a start



posted on Feb, 27 2011 @ 05:54 AM
link   
The first site on the search-page you link is called "Stop Republican Pedophilia".

It shows the crimes of people who happen to be Republican, but there is not a shred of evidence for any "sexual liberation movement" within Republican and Conservative circles. Neither is there a campaigning for pedophiles and the rights of child-rapists.

Again, on the right people do commit crimes. You have criminals in ANY group. Does this make sense? Is this too difficult for you to understand???? Sheeeesh. With some liberals however, these crimes are not seen as crimes but as "sexual liberation". This is an important difference because it shows that while there are many black sheep among Conservatives, the whole mindset of the far-left is totally deranged.

Btw, two quotes from that first site:



Republican Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld authorized the rape of children




Republican serial killer Ted Bundy


Those reek of hatred not factual journalism.

As for the Marianas: There is not a single website to back up your claim. If your claim is correct then why cant you provide an article on it? Stop pretending. Your agenda became clear a few pages ago when it was shown that, in other threads, you defend pedophiles. Thats why everyone reading this can see why you would attack exposers of child-rape.



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 01:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by lucid eyes
Those reek of hatred not factual journalism.


Well I guess if you just pick a couple of titles you do not like and dismiss just those based on just that, I am not sure what to tell you.


As for the Marianas: There is not a single website to back up your claim. If your claim is correct then why cant you provide an article on it?


Are you honestly suggesting that you care even a little about child rape but you do not believe it is a huge trade in the phillipines?

As for Republican support, I can only suggest that actually look. Perhaps even go the library. See, it is not my job to prove anything to you because I am not the one standing here screaming about how much I care and then refusing to follow leads. You are. That is your problem. Continue to believe whatever you like. Dismiss titles because you do not like how they are written. Whatever it is that is making you feel so good about yourself here.


Stop pretending. Your agenda became clear a few pages ago when it was shown that, in other threads, you defend pedophiles.


You have repeatedly failed to back that claim up. Do you honestly think repetition = truth?


Thats why everyone reading this can see why you would attack exposers of child-rape.


Oh I am indeed overwhelmed by your fans.



posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 03:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Sinnthia

Are you honestly suggesting that you care even a little about child rape but you do not believe it is a huge trade in the phillipines?



I claim that liberals perform mass-rape in schools and kindergardens. I have provided articles by reputable mainstream and left-wing newspapers and magazines, police reports, documentation, links.

You claim that Republicans mass-rape in the Mariana Islands. You have provided no articles, no documentation, no police reports, no links.

Its easy to see who of us has a dishonest agenda.



posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 04:04 AM
link   
Sec ular Humanist debunks myth of Catholic "mass child rape"

The reason certain people keep going around falsely claiming that religious folk are mass-child-rapists is to cover up their own agenda.
edit on 5-3-2011 by lucid eyes because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 9 2011 @ 05:40 AM
link   





new topics
top topics
 
45
<< 19  20  21    23 >>

log in

join