SanFran Dem wants gay Pedophiles removed from sex-offender list

[JoeB131]

So this queer State Senator in San Francisco wants to remove 24 year old men who have sex (rape) 14 year old boys, because the current law is “unfair” to gays, and is more lenient towards straight men who have sex with underaged girls.
Hey homo, how about changing the law so heterosexual men having sex with underaged girls is illegal and such individuals should be put on a sex offender list. But no, he has to push his pedo Agenda.

Actually, all the law does is put the penalties for gay offenders to be the same as straight offenders.. As it should be.

 

[jc456]

Seems to be a high correlation of pedophiles and Jewish men

Right? Go figure all demofks

 

[pknopp]

It's still illegal. People need to quit getting their news from Facebook. It simply makes the reporting requirements the same for all.

Another pedo apologist.

It reduces the crime and you know it.

It makes the reporting requirements the same for everyone. Pesonally I do not think a 19 year old getting caught having sex with a 16 year old should be required to register as a sex offender their entire lives.

and a 14 with a 24 year old? Go ahead, defend that.

The problem there is the original law. If you wish the gap narrowed argue that. This isn't all that uncommon around the country.

A large portion of the country has an age of consent of 16. That means a 48 year old can have sex with a 16 year old.

If you have a problem with that, I'm not really going to argue against you. But all this bill does is make the reporting requirements non discriminatory. It's still illegal.

 

[texmaster]

It's still illegal. People need to quit getting their news from Facebook. It simply makes the reporting requirements the same for all.

Another pedo apologist.

It reduces the crime and you know it.

It makes the reporting requirements the same for everyone. Pesonally I do not think a 19 year old getting caught having sex with a 16 year old should be required to register as a sex offender their entire lives.

and a 14 with a 24 year old? Go ahead, defend that.

The problem there is the original law. If you wish the gap narrowed argue that. This isn't all that uncommon around the country.

A large portion of the country has an age of consent of 16. That means a 48 year old can have sex with a 16 year old.

If you have a problem with that, I'm not really going to argue against you. But all this bill does is make the reporting requirements non discriminatory. It's still illegal.

What a shocker you couldn't answer a direct question. Pathetic but painfully predictable.

 

[jc456]

So this queer State Senator in San Francisco wants to remove 24 year old men who have sex (rape) 14 year old boys, because the current law is “unfair” to gays, and is more lenient towards straight men who have sex with underaged girls.
Hey homo, how about changing the law so heterosexual men having sex with underaged girls is illegal and such individuals should be put on a sex offender list. But no, he has to push his pedo Agenda.

Actually, all the law does is put the penalties for gay offenders to be the same as straight offenders.. As it should be.

Yeah ohhhk

 

[pknopp]

It's still illegal. People need to quit getting their news from Facebook. It simply makes the reporting requirements the same for all.

Another pedo apologist.

It reduces the crime and you know it.

It makes the reporting requirements the same for everyone. Pesonally I do not think a 19 year old getting caught having sex with a 16 year old should be required to register as a sex offender their entire lives.

and a 14 with a 24 year old? Go ahead, defend that.

The problem there is the original law. If you wish the gap narrowed argue that. This isn't all that uncommon around the country.

A large portion of the country has an age of consent of 16. That means a 48 year old can have sex with a 16 year old.

If you have a problem with that, I'm not really going to argue against you. But all this bill does is make the reporting requirements non discriminatory. It's still illegal.

What a shocker you couldn't answer a direct question. Pathetic but painfully predictable.

I answered it. If you wish to argue the gap should be less, argue that. I won't argue with you as long as the gap is non discriminatory.

 

[22lcidw]

It's still illegal. People need to quit getting their news from Facebook. It simply makes the reporting requirements the same for all.

Regardless of the issue, you spiel the Prog answers that eventually get your agendas through. I at times look at the future more then the present. We could get a dictator to clean everything up. Including the people of all backgrounds.

 

[pknopp]

It's still illegal. People need to quit getting their news from Facebook. It simply makes the reporting requirements the same for all.

Regardless of the issue, you spiel the Prog answers that eventually get your agendas through. I at times look at the future more then the present. We could get a dictator to clean everything up. Including the people of all backgrounds.

I find it sad that you find being non discriminatory as a progressive position. I can not understand that we still have people that would defend discriminatory laws.

Why is it that Conservatives would support such a thing?

 

[texmaster]

It's still illegal. People need to quit getting their news from Facebook. It simply makes the reporting requirements the same for all.

Another pedo apologist.

It reduces the crime and you know it.

It makes the reporting requirements the same for everyone. Pesonally I do not think a 19 year old getting caught having sex with a 16 year old should be required to register as a sex offender their entire lives.

and a 14 with a 24 year old? Go ahead, defend that.

The problem there is the original law. If you wish the gap narrowed argue that. This isn't all that uncommon around the country.

A large portion of the country has an age of consent of 16. That means a 48 year old can have sex with a 16 year old.

If you have a problem with that, I'm not really going to argue against you. But all this bill does is make the reporting requirements non discriminatory. It's still illegal.

What a shocker you couldn't answer a direct question. Pathetic but painfully predictable.

I answered it. If you wish to argue the gap should be less, argue that. I won't argue with you as long as the gap is non discriminatory.

No you didn't. You ran from answering it directly just as you did again. Gutless.

I'll say it. Its disgusting and should be illegal. How about you grow a pair and actually answer it this time?

 

[pknopp]

It's still illegal. People need to quit getting their news from Facebook. It simply makes the reporting requirements the same for all.

Another pedo apologist.

It reduces the crime and you know it.

It makes the reporting requirements the same for everyone. Pesonally I do not think a 19 year old getting caught having sex with a 16 year old should be required to register as a sex offender their entire lives.

and a 14 with a 24 year old? Go ahead, defend that.

The problem there is the original law. If you wish the gap narrowed argue that. This isn't all that uncommon around the country.

A large portion of the country has an age of consent of 16. That means a 48 year old can have sex with a 16 year old.

If you have a problem with that, I'm not really going to argue against you. But all this bill does is make the reporting requirements non discriminatory. It's still illegal.

What a shocker you couldn't answer a direct question. Pathetic but painfully predictable.

I answered it. If you wish to argue the gap should be less, argue that. I won't argue with you as long as the gap is non discriminatory.

No you didn't. You ran from answering it directly just as you did again. Gutless.

I'll say it. Its disgusting and should be illegal. How about you grow a pair and actually answer it this time?

It IS illegal. Why would you say it should be illegal when it IS illegal?

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Tell ya what he's a deal for the fuckin ****** perverts. We'll take thier names off the list by standing them up against a wall and blowing their shit away. How's that for a deal?

I have this tool, that I bought a short while back at a thrift store. The blade is razor sharp, and the ratchet mechanism closes it with an incredible amount of force.

It's for cutting PVC conduit, but this discussion has caused me to think of another application for it.

Still I think the most appropriate way of dealing with these kinds, and those who defend them, involves a millstone and a one-way trip to the ocean.

 

[22lcidw]

It's still illegal. People need to quit getting their news from Facebook. It simply makes the reporting requirements the same for all.

Regardless of the issue, you spiel the Prog answers that eventually get your agendas through. I at times look at the future more then the present. We could get a dictator to clean everything up. Including the people of all backgrounds.

I find it sad that you find being non discriminatory as a progressive position. I can not understand that we still have people that would defend discriminatory laws.

Why is it that Conservatives would support such a thing?

I look at things that cost the taxpayers also. I am not on a soapbox. Drugs, sexual diseases, divorces, single moms, the list goes on. This costs our society a lot of money. With a lot of pain also. We call this freedom. It isn't. These things can be reduced. But the political winds have said they will not. Utopia does not exist. A comfortable life with happiness and the ups and downs of life is possible for most people. We don't want that. So more suffer and we are taxed extensively for it. That is only part of the problem it corruption and stealing on the list also.

 

[pknopp]

It's still illegal. People need to quit getting their news from Facebook. It simply makes the reporting requirements the same for all.

Regardless of the issue, you spiel the Prog answers that eventually get your agendas through. I at times look at the future more then the present. We could get a dictator to clean everything up. Including the people of all backgrounds.

I find it sad that you find being non discriminatory as a progressive position. I can not understand that we still have people that would defend discriminatory laws.

Why is it that Conservatives would support such a thing?

I look at things that cost the taxpayers also. I am not on a soapbox. Drugs, sexual diseases, divorces, single moms, the list goes on. This costs our society a lot of money. With a lot of pain also. We call this freedom. It isn't. These things can be reduced. But the political winds have said they will not. Utopia does not exist. A comfortable life with happiness and the ups and downs of life is possible for most people. We don't want that. So more suffer and we are taxed extensively for it. That is only part of the problem it corruption and stealing on the list also.

Did that address what I said? You claim to not be against discrimination is to be a progressive. Are you really saying that Conservatives are OK with discrimination?

 

[Coyote]

The Gay Pressure group, NAMBLA, is a powerful lobby in liberal states like California. If you don't think that Child Molestation of boys should be glorified, you have to get rid of politicians that are beholden to NAMBLA.

You have got to be KIDDING...you are right?

How exactly can a tiny group (who...in its heyday around 1991 numbered only around 1,100) be a pressure group?

I suspect it's a rightwing bogeyman group more useful for propagating fear of the "gay agenda" than any real world applications.

the OP topic kinda proves you wrong doesnt it???

its happening right in front of you,,,

I think you kind of miss a lot here, but that's ok.

NAMBLA has nothing to do with anything here.

The Bill is to make the law consistent - i.e. it is the same regardless of whether it is male/female or male/male (or presumably female/female but that is pretty rare). CONSISTENT.

Now, that said there is a real issue....but it's not with this bill....I'll give you a chance to guess what it is

while youre trying to put the focus on NAMBLA its their ideology thats trying to be put into legislation,,

so you can go ahead and say its not happening, we can clearly see their goals are being pushed on us,,,

umh dude...I wasn't the one who brought up NAMBLA was I? So...what do YOU think is the real problem here?

I can tell you what I think it is: a ten year age difference.

What say you?

I believe the adult was 24 and the child was 14... that's the problem.

If you can't recognize that leave the goddamn thread.

I believe you didn't read my response in your knee jerk reaction.

"I can tell you what I think it is: a ten year age difference."

A 24 having sex with a 14 year old is wrong,no?

Let's play

You go first and you focus on 24/14...then I'll crush you and your nonsense.

Go for it

so the talking points are out to justify their sickness and vile behavior I see. Anyone condoning this is a pedophile.

Surprisingly, it IS legal to marry a 14 yr old in 10 states which have no marriage age by statute. And in two states: Alaska and NC the minimum age is 14. I have to to admit I was surprised to find that there could be no minimum age.

States with no statutory minimum age are:
CA, MI, OK, MA, MS, NM, RI, WA, WV, WY

14 is WAY too young in today's age. 16 is too young. And a 24 yr old with a 14 year old, seems almost like grooming.

you should really look things up before you post,,,



18 years

No blood test or physical exam is required. Residents and nonresidents are eligible to apply for a marriage license. Both parties must be 18 years of age or older to marry without parental consent. A birth certificate may be required to show proof of age.
Marriage Licenses - Alaska Department of Health and Social ...
dhss.alaska.gov › dph › VitalStats › Pages › marriagel

Cool. Let's cross Alaska of then.

This is where I looked it up: Marriage laws but it's as of 2008 so might be outdated.

Marriage is one thing, raping children is another.

I'm not sure it is. Between a 14 and 24 year old? Statutory rape laws are "rape" only because a child can't legally consent to sex. If a 14 yr old can't consent to sex, then what kind of logic is it that says they consent to sex in a marriage?

 

[Coyote]

It's still illegal. People need to quit getting their news from Facebook. It simply makes the reporting requirements the same for all.

Another pedo apologist.

It reduces the crime and you know it.

It makes the reporting requirements the same for everyone. Pesonally I do not think a 19 year old getting caught having sex with a 16 year old should be required to register as a sex offender their entire lives.

and a 14 with a 24 year old? Go ahead, defend that.

When I looked up California law on statutory rape, it seems that the penalties are much harsher the younger the victim is...so it might be in that case, the person does go on the registry.

 

[Coyote]

The Gay Pressure group, NAMBLA, is a powerful lobby in liberal states like California. If you don't think that Child Molestation of boys should be glorified, you have to get rid of politicians that are beholden to NAMBLA.

You have got to be KIDDING...you are right?

How exactly can a tiny group (who...in its heyday around 1991 numbered only around 1,100) be a pressure group?

I suspect it's a rightwing bogeyman group more useful for propagating fear of the "gay agenda" than any real world applications.

the OP topic kinda proves you wrong doesnt it???

its happening right in front of you,,,

I think you kind of miss a lot here, but that's ok.

NAMBLA has nothing to do with anything here.

The Bill is to make the law consistent - i.e. it is the same regardless of whether it is male/female or male/male (or presumably female/female but that is pretty rare). CONSISTENT.

Now, that said there is a real issue....but it's not with this bill....I'll give you a chance to guess what it is

while youre trying to put the focus on NAMBLA its their ideology thats trying to be put into legislation,,

so you can go ahead and say its not happening, we can clearly see their goals are being pushed on us,,,

umh dude...I wasn't the one who brought up NAMBLA was I? So...what do YOU think is the real problem here?

I can tell you what I think it is: a ten year age difference.

What say you?

I believe the adult was 24 and the child was 14... that's the problem.

If you can't recognize that leave the goddamn thread.

I believe you didn't read my response in your knee jerk reaction.

"I can tell you what I think it is: a ten year age difference."

A 24 having sex with a 14 year old is wrong,no?

Let's play

You go first and you focus on 24/14...then I'll crush you and your nonsense.

Go for it

so the talking points are out to justify their sickness and vile behavior I see. Anyone condoning this is a pedophile.

Surprisingly, it IS legal to marry a 14 yr old in 10 states which have no marriage age by statute. And in two states: Alaska and NC the minimum age is 14. I have to to admit I was surprised to find that there could be no minimum age.

States with no statutory minimum age are:
CA, MI, OK, MA, MS, NM, RI, WA, WV, WY

14 is WAY too young in today's age. 16 is too young. And a 24 yr old with a 14 year old, seems almost like grooming.

California, where the thread topic is about, age of consent is 18.

Try again

Yes, but like I said - California has no minimum age for marriage. They have to jump through more hoops if they are below 18.

california-lacks-minimum-marriage-age-puts-children-in-danger

 

[Eric Arthur Blair]

Scott Wiener is the same guy who decriminalized laws in California for someone who knowingly gave a partner AIDS. Anything to help ******* over someone else.

 

[texmaster]

It's still illegal. People need to quit getting their news from Facebook. It simply makes the reporting requirements the same for all.

Another pedo apologist.

It reduces the crime and you know it.

It makes the reporting requirements the same for everyone. Pesonally I do not think a 19 year old getting caught having sex with a 16 year old should be required to register as a sex offender their entire lives.

and a 14 with a 24 year old? Go ahead, defend that.

When I looked up California law on statutory rape, it seems that the penalties are much harsher the younger the victim is...so it might be in that case, the person does go on the registry.

So you avoid the child stripping for men question directly to you and jump in on this discussion. Nice.

 

[texmaster]

It's still illegal. People need to quit getting their news from Facebook. It simply makes the reporting requirements the same for all.

Another pedo apologist.

It reduces the crime and you know it.

It makes the reporting requirements the same for everyone. Pesonally I do not think a 19 year old getting caught having sex with a 16 year old should be required to register as a sex offender their entire lives.

and a 14 with a 24 year old? Go ahead, defend that.

The problem there is the original law. If you wish the gap narrowed argue that. This isn't all that uncommon around the country.

A large portion of the country has an age of consent of 16. That means a 48 year old can have sex with a 16 year old.

If you have a problem with that, I'm not really going to argue against you. But all this bill does is make the reporting requirements non discriminatory. It's still illegal.

What a shocker you couldn't answer a direct question. Pathetic but painfully predictable.

I answered it. If you wish to argue the gap should be less, argue that. I won't argue with you as long as the gap is non discriminatory.

No you didn't. You ran from answering it directly just as you did again. Gutless.

I'll say it. Its disgusting and should be illegal. How about you grow a pair and actually answer it this time?

It IS illegal. Why would you say it should be illegal when it IS illegal?

Not if this law passes. Are you trying to be cute because it isn't working.

 

[pknopp]

It's still illegal. People need to quit getting their news from Facebook. It simply makes the reporting requirements the same for all.

Another pedo apologist.

It reduces the crime and you know it.

It makes the reporting requirements the same for everyone. Pesonally I do not think a 19 year old getting caught having sex with a 16 year old should be required to register as a sex offender their entire lives.

and a 14 with a 24 year old? Go ahead, defend that.

The problem there is the original law. If you wish the gap narrowed argue that. This isn't all that uncommon around the country.

A large portion of the country has an age of consent of 16. That means a 48 year old can have sex with a 16 year old.

If you have a problem with that, I'm not really going to argue against you. But all this bill does is make the reporting requirements non discriminatory. It's still illegal.

What a shocker you couldn't answer a direct question. Pathetic but painfully predictable.

I answered it. If you wish to argue the gap should be less, argue that. I won't argue with you as long as the gap is non discriminatory.

No you didn't. You ran from answering it directly just as you did again. Gutless.

I'll say it. Its disgusting and should be illegal. How about you grow a pair and actually answer it this time?

It IS illegal. Why would you say it should be illegal when it IS illegal?

Not if this law passes. Are you trying to be cute because it isn't working.

It's really tough dealing with so much ignorance. Yes it's still illegal even if this law passes.