Heartbreaking Photo: Young girl covers eyes as nude men walk past

CaféAuLait;8806442 said:
Why is this in political forum?

For shock value? That is the only thing it could be when one says:

Heartwarming Photo: Young girl smiles and has fun as nude men walk past


Sounds like something straight out of NAMBLA.

OP, Your take on this, no matter if you are, gay, pro gay or not, is simply doing nothing for your cause. Perhaps you can't see how your thread will be perceived in the wrong manner. It sounds SICK, gay or not, straight or not. The title of this thread screams pedophile paradise. Especially, for someone with no knowledge of the other thread until it was just bumped up- It sounds like you are advocating for pedophiles and not gay rights without that knowledge.

Are you really this fucking dense?

Here's what happened.

I see the other thread. Amused by the indignation of the OP, I go to the source of the story and find fifty or so pics of the parade. Right after the one of the girl with her hands over eyes what do I see? Two more of her watching the parade, having fun and laughing.

So I mock the other thread by starting this one.

The girl was having fun. Obviously her parents took her there. She won't be damaged for life see influence a man's wee wee or a woman's titty. Get over your prudent self and worry about your own snot nosed ships and not this girl. I guarantee you she'll grow up better adjusted than some kid locked in a closet of ignorance their whole childhood.

Right, UNLESS YOU KNOW About the other thread. Something you completely missed in my post. YOUR post made no flppin sense, that is why I edited my post to reflect that I had seen the other post AFTER it was bumped up.

All I saw was your title

Heartwarming Photo: Young girl smiles and has fun as nude men walk past

and the photos of some little girl watching naked men.

You are assuming everyone saw the other thread, I had not, so you came off as some pervert instead of a gay rights activist mentioning gay people in the OP for some strange reason. If you had linked the two together it *may* have made sense for those of us who had not seen the other thread. Either way, it still sounds off.
 
Last edited:
Liberals truly feel that children should be exposed to nudity and sexual activity at their very earliest ages. If a child is correctly raised it will have been fondled and penetrate by parents. Sex with any other adult will be the same as any expression of parental love.

You were among the rw's who applauded the fake duck dynasty slime preaching that old men should be able to "marry" 14 year old girls.

Your nasty little fantasies are beyond disgusting.

Oh yeah, and as usual, you're a liar.



`
 
My heavens put a fig leaf on David's doodle when you take your kids to the art museum....damn those tits of Venus!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
My heavens put a fig leaf on David's doodle when you take your kids to the art museum....damn those tits of Venus!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sooooo, you think it's appropriate for strange naked men to parade in front of children?

Am I reading this correctly?
 
Last edited:
Paul Ryan says poor children are better off hungry.

Seeing a naked man is much, much worse.
 
My heavens put a fig leaf on David's doodle when you take your kids to the art museum....damn those tits of Venus!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Sooooo, you think it's appropriate for strange naked men to parade in front of children?

Am I reading this correctly?

It's done in art all the time....

Know many museum curators registered as sex offenders?

Thought not
 
Liberals truly feel that children should be exposed to nudity and sexual activity at their very earliest ages. If a child is correctly raised it will have been fondled and penetrate by parents. Sex with any other adult will be the same as any expression of parental love.

You were among the rw's who applauded the fake duck dynasty slime preaching that old men should be able to "marry" 14 year old girls.

Your nasty little fantasies are beyond disgusting.

Oh yeah, and as usual, you're a liar.



`

I am no duck dynasty fan and honestly don't get the show. But even I know he did not claim what you are stating above.

He said 15 and 16 year olds and he said BOYS NOT "old men" and he said after checking with "Mom and Dad of course"

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H_YchVeJs50]Duck Dynasty Star's Advice: Marry 15-Year-Old Girls - YouTube[/ame]
 
Paul Ryan says poor children are better off hungry.

Seeing a naked man is much, much worse.

My god, next time save us the time, just say

boooooosssssshhhhhhh

What Paul Ryan says that most Republicans agree with isn't Bush's fault. Quit trying to blame everything on Bush.

Link to polls showing most republicans think children are better off hungry please
 
My god, next time save us the time, just say

boooooosssssshhhhhhh

What Paul Ryan says that most Republicans agree with isn't Bush's fault. Quit trying to blame everything on Bush.

Link to polls showing most republicans think children are better off hungry please

Come on. If the GOP base puts politicians into office who believe it, then they believe it too. Why put them into office?
 

Forum List

Back
Top