It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by koji_K For example, if a 19 year old has sex with a 17 year old (and its consensual, of course), I don't think there should be the same kind of penalty that, say, a 40 year old would get for having sex with the same 17 year old.
Originally posted by Amuk
To me the problem people are those over 18 having sex with those under 14. These have no excuse in my book and I wouldnt care if they were shot, or locked up forever.
That is what they are pushing is a minimum of 25 years (Jessica law)
Originally posted by xmotex
The ACLU supports anyone they feel is not getting legal due process or being accorded their constitutional rights, however unpopular they might be.
They've also "supported" neo-Nazis and the KKK in specific legal cases IIRC, that doesn't mean they advocate Naziism.
Originally posted by curme
So whatever issue he be may currently covering, I can't help but look for an ulterior motive, as opposed to a genuine regard for the issue at hand.
Originally posted by Amuk
I would like to here form yall what you think about him and his Crusade and would like to hear from my fellow Libertarians about what they thought about the slanderous libel from his guest.
Originally posted by brimstone735
I'd take O'Reilly more serious, if he weren't so well versed in Thailand sex shows
www.thesmokinggun.com...
Because it's not as though sex traffickers check identification in the nation with the highest child prostitution rates in the world.
Originally posted by curme
So whatever issue he be may currently covering, I can't help but look for an ulterior motive, as opposed to a genuine regard for the issue at hand.
Of course what his guest said about Libertarians is ridiculous. That's why I thought of the 'anti-Republican grouping' suspicion. Libertarians haven't been slandered nearly as much as the 'left-wing liberals' and they need a little dirt thrown their way so they don't get a big following. If they're not careful, some disenchanted Democrats might just switch to Libertarian.
Originally posted by Amuk
The one thing I took issue with was the claim form one of his Guests that Libertarians were AGAINST child sex laws which is ridiculous. She claimed that we were for allowing anyone to have sex with anyone which is absurd. I know MOST (not all) are for gay rights but I haven't talked to ONE Libertarian in the 25+years I have been in the party that was FOR child sex.
I would like to here form yall what you think about him and his Crusade and would like to hear from my fellow Libertarians about what they thought about the slanderous libel from his guest.