US Politics: Bike tricks

[tetrasect]

Trump2024

I hope he does run so we can see him lose for the 65th time.

 

[quovadis]

If you're unable to understand the 1st amendment and it's imposed limitations how is that my problem?

You've lost your train of thought.

It's of little concern because their partners, barring some rare cases, are within the same age range. So no it's not.
Let me guess when abortion debates roll around your one of those that cry about rape instead of the actual issues at play? Didn't we have the "Reductio ad absurdum" quip already?
Again you have no idea what actual pedophilia involves. This is not it and I hope you never have to be exposed to it.

You need some introspection. A 10 yr old marrying a 24 yr old even if rare is still not defensible.

Nope you're the one that don't know what they are.
Why not go ask the leftist that actually defend MAPS instead?

You're right, I'm not a pedophile expert nor a pedophile apologist.

 

[The_Right_Honourable_Brit]

Good on the senators (probably mostly Republicans) for sinking this AA nominee, who was clearly only nominated based on his colour. Imagine leading the FAA with only 2 years of experience....

Loading…

www.politico.com

President Joe Biden’s pick to lead the Federal Aviation Administration withdrew his nomination on Saturday evening, following nine months in limbo and amid concerns from senators in both parties over his background and relative lack of aviation experience.

DOT Secretary Pete Buttigieg tweeted late Saturday that Phil Washington, the CEO of Denver International Airport, has decided to take himself out of the running.

 

[Temujin]

 

[Kieppie]

OMG are you thick in the head or something?

Projecting again are we?

If they marry the child it is not a crime but if they had not married the child then it would be. That's what I said from the beginning. Your comprehension is terrible.

No. I'm saying instances of underage people engaging in sex is much much more common than rare youth marriage.
Sure some would be charged if they were not married, but as pointed out this is by far the minority of cases? Did that small matter escape you somehow?

Don't think too hard, cause as we see above, you will fail.

We you're failing already, so there's that...

Loading…

www.unchainedatlast.org

Great so your oversized picture confirms bascially all that I said.
"Nearly all were aged 16-17" so guess you didn't read that as well?

Forgive me for not trusting an advocacy group on their "60000" claim. Especially when you consider that 95% are over the age of consent. Math kinda refutes their claims.
So yeah it's a rubbish claim, but I understand that they are an advocacy group so they want to make their case appear stronger than it actually is.
Also implicitly endorses child rape??? What are they smoking Behaviour by parents/peers account for much more underage sexual activity.

I'm arguing against what you said. And you literally said that a 24 year old who marries and has sex with a 10 year old is not a pedophile unless he divorces her when she grows up, which is honestly one of the most bizarre statements I have ever read. Anyone who wants to have sex with a 10 year old is a fking pedo.

Pedophilia is a defined concept. It isn't just about an age difference and that's my point. Somehow you miss this basic thing.
You keep hammering on the extreme examples to try and proof your point. I already said that some might harbour pedophiles, there are always exceptions after all, but that's not the rule amongst youth marriages.
Try and spin this as much as you wish.

And a drag queen reading a fking book is not. End of story.

Only reading books...

There is no "actual grooming" going on, you're just so homophobic that a man wearing a dress scares you half to death. And it's pretty pathetic.

Hahah now I'm homophobic? Hilarious. You realise many drag queens are not even gay?
And yes there is actual grooming going on here. I already gave you the example of Desmond.
Stay clueless about the world if you wish.

Why there is this concerted effort by the Dems to groom I can only guess.

I've had my say, so make up your own interpretations of what it means, that's what you do anyway after all.
Just remember that every time you try to paint Republicans as trying to groom "children" I, and rest of the sane world, will be laughing at you.

 

[quovadis]

Good on the senators (probably mostly Republicans) for sinking this AA nominee, who was clearly only nominated based on his colour. Imagine leading the FAA with only 2 years of experience....

That's a bit harsh. In terms of transport administration experience he's got over 12 years as CEO of MTA and RTD. The previous acting was a pilot and held a VP position at an airline for 2 years. Both had military backgrounds.

 

[Kieppie]

You've lost your train of thought.

Nope, your having an argument in your head.

You need some introspection. A 10 yr old marrying a 24 yr old even if rare is still not defensible.

I never said it's a good thing nor that I approve of it. In fact I said I oppose it. What I meant by it being an exception is to stop trying to formulate your arguments based on it.
If you can argue why the 95%, who are above the age of consent and have a partner that is on average 4 yrs older, should not marry then go ahead.
I already said that these arguments mostly have to do with health and safety concerns. Although I believe this is mostly false from a biological standpoint.

You're right, I'm not a pedophile expert nor a pedophile apologist.

I can't say that I'm glad being more of an expert on this matter. I wouldn't wish it on anyone.
As for apologist, dunno you'll have to ask some leftists friends about that. The MAPS thing is their baby.

Anyway this is turning into one of those endless debates where you'll refuse to budge and I'll just end up wasting my precious time.

 

[Kieppie]

Good on the senators (probably mostly Republicans) for sinking this AA nominee, who was clearly only nominated based on his colour. Imagine leading the FAA with only 2 years of experience....

Loading…

www.politico.com

Few days old, but good segue

Pilot Welcomes Passengers Aboard And Reassures Them He Was Not A Diversity Hire

DALLAS, TX — Passengers boarding American Airlines flight 467 from Dallas to Chicago were welcomed by pilot Walter Kerry, who quickly assured them that he was not a diversity hire.

babylonbee.com

PS your link doesn't work.

Biden's FAA nominee bows out, after senators waver

DOT Secretary Pete Buttigieg tweeted late Saturday that Phil Washington, the CEO of Denver International Airport, has decided to take himself out of the running.

www.politico.com

Seems you cut off the "7"

 

[quovadis]

Nope, your having an argument in your head.


I never said it's a good thing nor that I approve of it. In fact I said I oppose it. What I meant by it being an exception is to stop trying to formulate your arguments based on it.
If you can argue why the 95%, who are above the age of consent and have a partner that is on average 4 yrs older, should not marry then go ahead.
I already said that these arguments mostly have to do with health and safety concerns. Although I believe this is mostly false from a biological standpoint.


I can't say that I'm glad being more of an expert on this matter. I wouldn't wish it on anyone.
As for apologist, dunno you'll have to ask some leftists friends about that. The MAPS thing is their baby.

Anyway this is turning into one of those endless debates where you'll refuse to budge and I'll just end up wasting my precious time.

I don't need to budge on pedophiles marrying 10 yr olds because it's only 1%. It's like arguing that the abortion rate is 1% of women aged 15–44 years thus it's an exception so stop trying to formulate your arguments based on it.

Get it?!?!

 

[Kieppie]

I don't need to budge on pedophiles marrying 10 yr olds because it's only 1%. It's like arguing that the abortion rate is 1% of women aged 15–44 years thus it's an exception so stop trying to formulate your arguments based on it.

Get it?!?!

No you don't get it, but whatever. Guess you just don't have an actual argument about the norm.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[quovadis]

No you don't get it, but whatever. Guess you just don't have an actual argument about the norm.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Apparently you don't. Keep up the pedo-aplogist fight then. Good luck with that.

 

[Kieppie]

Apparently you don't. Keep up the pedo-aplogist fight then. Good luck with that.

Well going by your reasoning and considering that a percentage of Dems push the MAPS agenda that must mean you're an apologist too. Cheers Comrade.
Perhaps you'll eventually understand, then again perhaps not.

 

[quovadis]

Well going by your reasoning and considering that a percentage of Dems push the MAPS agenda that must mean you're an apologist too. Cheers Comrade.
Perhaps you'll eventually understand, then again perhaps not.

Logic isn't your forte.

 

[Kieppie]

Logic isn't your forte.

It's more mine than yours apparently. Probably not needed in your career eh?

 

[tetrasect]

Projecting again are we?


No. I'm saying instances of underage people engaging in sex is much much more common than rare youth marriage.
Sure some would be charged if they were not married, but as pointed out this is by far the minority of cases? Did that small matter escape you somehow?


We you're failing already, so there's that...


Great so your oversized picture confirms bascially all that I said.
"Nearly all were aged 16-17" so guess you didn't read that as well?

You fail miserably to distinguish between underage people engaging in sex and adult men above the legal age difference marrying underage girls who would be considered rapists if their marital status did not exempt them.

Forgive me for not trusting an advocacy group on their "60000" claim. Especially when you consider that 95% are over the age of consent. Math kinda refutes their claims.
So yeah it's a rubbish claim, but I understand that they are an advocacy group so they want to make their case appear stronger than it actually is.
Also implicitly endorses child rape??? What are they smoking Behaviour by parents/peers account for much more underage sexual activity.

Yeah sure, it's a "rubbish claim" cause Kieppie said so.

Guess the study they got the number from is also "rubbish".

Loading…

www.sciencedirect.com

Pedophilia is a defined concept. It isn't just about an age difference and that's my point. Somehow you miss this basic thing.
You keep hammering on the extreme examples to try and proof your point. I already said that some might harbour pedophiles, there are always exceptions after all, but that's not the rule amongst youth marriages.
Try and spin this as much as you wish.

Anyone who is sexually attracted to a 10 year old is a pedophile. That's a simple fact. You're the one trying to "spin this" "basic thing" and you're failing miserably.

Only reading books...

Yes, reading books. That's what we're talking about.

Again you fail to understand what the subject of this conversation is.

Let me give you a hint. This is the post that we are discussing:

Hahah now I'm homophobic? Hilarious. You realise many drag queens are not even gay?

Yeah if many meant few.

And yes there is actual grooming going on here. I already gave you the example of Desmond.
Stay clueless about the world if you wish.

What are you talking about? Who did Desmond groom?

Why there is this concerted effort by the Dems to groom I can only guess.

Again you have zero actual examples of drag queens "grooming" kids by reading them books at school, only hysterical whining about some bizarre fantasy that's playing in your head.

I've had my say, so make up your own interpretations of what it means, that's what you do anyway after all.

Perhaps if you made a lick of sense I wouldn't have to.

Just remember that every time you try to paint Republicans as trying to groom "children" I, and rest of the sane world, will be laughing at you.

Strawman fantasy deluxe. Nobody said that except the voices in your head.

We are talking about Republicans fighting to keep or even introduce laws that protect men who are raping children, not grooming them.

 

[Kieppie]

You fail miserably to distinguish between underage people engaging in sex and adult men above the legal age difference marrying underage girls who would be considered rapists if their marital status did not exempt them.

Yeah sure, it's a "rubbish claim" cause Kieppie said so.

Guess the study they got the number from is also "rubbish".

Loading…

www.sciencedirect.com

No I don't fail at distinguishing, but you apparently have trouble with 95% or 4 year avg age difference.
At least sciencedirect has the 1% correct...

Anyone who is sexually attracted to a 10 year old is a pedophile. That's a simple fact. You're the one trying to "spin this" "basic thing" and you're failing miserably.

Anyone? So a 12 yr old is a pedophile? What about a 13 yr old? Where do you draw the line? An imagined 18?
You're obviously not very good with facts. A pedophile is attracted to underage, yes, but marrying someone young implies staying with them until they are no longer young. So again unless they purely do this to skirt the law then that is not the intent behind the action.
I have no idea why someone would want to marry with such a large age gap, but the reason for them doing this can vary from cultural like arranged marriages to what have you.
Again considering that "10 year olds" account for less than 1% of 1% I fail to see the point in trying to argue the validity of these exception.

Yes, reading books. That's what we're talking about.
Again you fail to understand what the subject of this conversation is.
Let me give you a hint. This is the post that we are discussing:

Precisely. You incorrectly believe Republicans are pushing grooming by your misunderstanding of youth marriages. That's a you problem.

Yeah if many meant few.

Sure, that's just your opinion though. Unless you have a study breaking down the sexual preferences of Drag Queens in the US?

What are you talking about? Who did Desmond groom?

Desmond is the one that's groomed. His parents are to blame.

Nolte: 11-Year-Old 'Drag Queen' Dances for Dollar Bills in Gay Bar

An 11-year-old boy known as "Desmond Is Amazing" danced on stage at a New York gay bar while grown men tossed dollar bills at him.

www.breitbart.com

There are many more such instances, but one example should suffice. Heck even Sen. Steve Santarsiero promoted a Drag Queen dance a while back.

Another one that caused a bit of a stir recently (all ages mind you)

Again you have zero actual examples of drag queens "grooming" kids by reading them books at school, only hysterical whining about some bizarre fantasy that's playing in your head.

Oops I guess he just forgot?

Perhaps if you made a lick of sense I wouldn't have to.

I love how you pretend it's only about reading books, which in itself is a form of grooming, perhaps you're just clueless as to what is happening?
I mean you're one of those that believe the whole trans indoctrination is a concocted boogeyman. Yet we have numerous politicians doing just that, even the President and VP.

Strawman fantasy deluxe. Nobody said that except the voices in your head.

Uhuh... refer back to the meme you defended. Perhaps you didn't understand said meme?

We are talking about Republicans fighting to keep or even introduce laws that protect men who are raping children, not grooming them.

No we're not.
First of all 55% of the youths are female 45% are male. So they aren't protecting "men".
Secondly you can't throw out the protection clause because of 1% (or more accurately 1% of 1%). The protections for religious freedoms exist for a reason.

So let people argue against the law using the actual overwhelming majority of cases.
Perhaps then the law will be changed.

If you can think of a way to formulate a law that would preclude these extreme cases without trampling the rights of the majority which aren't problematic then I'm sure they'll be all ears.

 

[Kieppie]

Found this video funny as the one presenter is a South African (Ex Provincial Rugby player), obvious from his accent. Just ignore the religious aspects and focus on the rest.

Oh and w.r.t. MAPS, here is an article that covers some of the arguments people try to use as a defence for it. It also contains segments which should make it clear why I differentiate between them and those involved with youth marriages.
Use it don't use it.

Most Child Sex Abusers Are Not Pedophiles, Expert Says

An increasing number of experts believe that pedophiles might not have a choice in the matter. We spoke with an expert to understand child sexual abuse, and whether or not pedophilia is really a sexual orientation.

www.vice.com

With that..

 

[Kieppie]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1640118154985721857

 

[quovadis]

A pedophile is attracted to underage, yes, but marrying someone young implies staying with them until they are no longer young.

So again unless they purely do this to skirt the law then that is not the intent behind the action.

 

[rietrot]

You fail miserably to distinguish between underage people engaging in sex and adult men above the legal age difference marrying underage girls who would be considered rapists if their marital status did not exempt them.

Nobody has made this destination. I have not seen any stats on the age of the men involved. You like to pretend it is 40 year olds marrying 10 year old girls but there is just no evidence for that. You are simply overstating the problem to score political points.

Meanwhile:

Teenage pregnancy in the United States refers to females under the age of 20 who become pregnant. 89% of these births take place out-of-wedlock

Wikipedia

The vast majority of teen pregnancy is outside of wedlock.

This is a really silly libtard hypocrisy. Kids should be allowed to have sex and get abortions, right? But just not get married, because underage marriage still requires parental consent?