Liberal Elite perform mass child-rape

Fistgate

Foxnews: Fistgate gets nastier


How Obamas Education and Schooling czar taught children about "Fisting" and other sex-practices.

Originally posted by 547000
reply to post by Billmeister

 

I think the sexualization of society is leading more kids to be curious in, and desire, sex, even before puberty.

Agree completely that seems to be all that gets pushed especially with MSMusic, and kids are getting younger and yonger with thier sexuality, even the way they dress at age 10 now is just disgusting and who can you really blame, the parents, im still young early 20's and have noticed that my parents and most of my friends parents just dont seem to care anymore they had kids and had no desire to take care fo them and teach them to be the way they wanted to be, so now we have a bunch of tv brain washed children running around sleeping with each other. I dont know who else to blame then the parents luckily for me i was very independant and didn't care to be one of the cool kids and sell my self for it, I was born with the ideology of what is good and wrong even though nobody taught me, I honestly dislike the majority of people my age who only care to drink and party and sex it up.

The Left Hearts Pedophilia

Within the space of a month, the Left has been–well, not exactly–forced to defend both Roman Polanski and ACORN. While most politicians have remained mum, an assortment of liberal bloggers, pundits and Hollywood celebs have rushed to the defense of ACORN, Roman Polanski or both. ACORN, shown on hidden camera instructing how to facilitate the importation of underage girls into the United States for the sex trade, rallied the Left first. Roman Polanski, convicted of drugging and anally raping a 13-year-old girl, is the latest to cause the Left, especially Hollywood, to spring to his defense–after he jumped bail, fled the U.S. and was arrested in Switzerland this past weekend. You’d expect the French to do something like this–and they have–but Americans? Maybe one reason Celebrities, diplomats unite behind convicted child-raping degenerate is because they feel like Whoopi Goldberg (Whoopi says Polanski didn’t commit “rape-rape”).

Originally posted by NewAgeMan
[
Oh, my, God - I don't think I've seen anything more disgraceful, or I should say more STUPID and utterly ignorant than this since joining ATS, and I don't mean your reply but the intentionality, and the sheer brainwashing and the MADNESS of the OP.

Do you know why more old people are conservatives and more young people are liberals? Because, if you see the world for a long time, you begin to see patterns. The fact that ALL pedophilia advocacy groups are of left-wing politics is no coincidence. It was no different in the 60s.

Young people dont see the big picture, they only see the news of the day. They dont see the long term agenda.

Originally posted by kalamatas
U.N. Thinks teaching 5 year olds about masturbation is appropriate:
www.dailymail.co.uk...

And the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child, pretty much removes parental rights in deeming what is best for a child:
www.parentalrights.org...

Obama thinks sex-ed for kindergartners is the right thing to do:
blogs.abcnews.com...

While clearly the exploitation and violation of children is not party specific....

You are mistaken about the "not party specific" part. The U.N. is mostly a leftist organization.

The philosophy or the left is that "there is no right or wrong". Thats why prominent liberals do not consider Polanskis acts rape or why the U.N. supports mass-murdering regimes. Thats why liberals hate Religion.

Liberalism is essentially "there is no right or wrong".It doesnt take much brains to predict what that will lead to over time.

Originally posted by Sinnthia

According to you when a child is raped by a liberal and a child is raped by a Catholic, there is a "big difference." Sure there is. I eagerly await the reports of child rape that have been thrown out of court because it was a different kind of child rape, not that dirty liberal kind.

edit on 8-1-2011 by Sinnthia because: (no reason given)

There is a big difference in motivation. A Catholic priest represses his sexuality for decades, which causes mental issues, which cause his transgression. A liberal openly and explicitly follows a "everything goes" philosophy. Those are entirely different causes. Both must be taken seriously if we, as a society, want to solve the problem. I do give liberals credit for being so open about what they want to do with children where conservatives would rather hide it because they see it as something wrong.

If these pedophile tracts are not motivated by leftist politics, I dont know what is:

A call for social justice

Sexual Freedom for All

The politics of Ageism

The criminal injustice system

reply to post by lucid eyes


Anytime you want to explain how you can say 0.000016% of any group of people represents the other 99% that might really help you make the case these extremely biased sources of yours are supposed to be making. You kind of left credibility at the front door when you came in. Long way back up from where you are.

Explain the math to me.

reply to post by lucid eyes


It's just another hate piece on liberals from someone that's so obviously stuck within the left-right paradigm.

Perverts are perverts. Trying to apply a political ideology to a pervert is pointless when they are breaking the law. It's the same when conservative Catholic priests molest altar boys.

Originally posted by Sinnthia
reply to post by lucid eyes

 

Anytime you want to explain how you can say 0.000016% of any group of people represents the other 99% that might really help you make the case these extremely biased sources of yours are supposed to be making. You kind of left credibility at the front door when you came in. Long way back up from where you are.

Explain the math to me.

Still denying that ALL pedo-activist groups are left-wing?

Still denying that "sexual liberation" is a liberal philosophy?

Are you denying ACLUs fight for child porn?

Are you denying Fistgate?

Are you denying liberal activism for Polanski?

Are you denying the story in the OP?

Are you denying the motivational difference between Catholic and Liberal child-molestation?

You go right ahead and deny. I´ll continue exposing these creeps.

reply to post by Sinnthia


I´ll explain the math to you:

99% of Liberals are for sexual liberation.

There's nothing wrong with that. It becomes wrong when no lines are drawn.

reply to post by lucid eyes


So.....that would be a no, you cannot explain how you blame 99% of liberals for what 0.000016% of them have done then? A simple yes or no might suffice if attempting to explain it is too difficult.

Originally posted by lucid eyes
reply to post by Sinnthia

 

I´ll explain the math to you:

99% of Liberals are for sexual liberation.

There's nothing wrong with that. It becomes wrong when no lines are drawn.

99% of liberals are for sexual liberation so you can claim that they all support Polanski even though you can only find evidence that 0.000016% of them supported Polanski? Yeah...I think you might need to run that math by me again.

Originally posted by Sinnthia
reply to post by lucid eyes

 

So.....that would be a no, you cannot explain how you blame 99% of liberals for what 0.000016% of them have done then? A simple yes or no might suffice if attempting to explain it is too difficult.

No, its not 0.000016%. There is no valid data on this because its a "taboo" subject.

Now its your turn: Are 99% of all liberals are pro sexual liberation?

Yes or No?

reply to post by lucid eyes


There is one other person in this thread that has fallen for your BS sources and apparently swallowed your factless claims and thus agrees with you. The problem is, that other poster has restated the premise of the thread for you at least twice. So you have convinced one whole person and even you do not agree with them about what they agree with you on. Feeling a bit uphill yet? You have no logic here. You have no facts here. All you have is some of the oddest and most unfounded bias I have ever seen. If it makes you feel good to ignore conservative child rapists in order to chase after some boogeyman you want to just make up, then I think it is rather clear that the issue at hand is one best dealt with in private sessions and will not be sussed out here online. Good luck though.

Originally posted by lucid eyes
No, its not 0.000016%. There is no valid data on this because its a "taboo" subject.

Actually yes it is 0.000016%. That is the exact number of people you are able to show have verbally lent support to Polanski and I have not even bothered to go through the list to see who on it was not even an American. Should I?

Now its your turn: Are 99% of all liberals are pro sexual liberation?

Yes or No?

No.

These events are connected to the marxist "sexual liberation of children" movement. They are motivated by a different set of ideas than other cases of child-molestation.

edit on 5-1-2011 by lucid eyes because: (no reason given)

Can you point me to the work and page number of where Marx discusses the "sexual liberation of children"??

What's that got to do with Marx? You're confusing Marxism with New-Age-Feel-Good hogwash; something that is rather common in the USA thanks to the John Birch society...

Originally posted by lucid eyes
reply to post by Sinnthia

 

I´ll explain the math to you:

99% of Liberals are for sexual liberation.

There's nothing wrong with that. It becomes wrong when no lines are drawn.

If by "sexual liberation" you mean ending the sick reign of puritan pseudo-morals left over from the middle ages, then yes.

If by "sexual liberation" you mean the conservative fantasy that any and all liberals want nothing more than to abuse kids and marry animals then no.

I've got a hunch about which of the 2 uses of those words you prefer.

Originally posted by Sinnthia

No.

No? You would not say that the "sexual liberation movement" is a thing of the left? Amazing.

Originally posted by lucid eyes
No? You would not say that the "sexual liberation movement" is a thing of the left? Amazing.

Ah, now I see how you do it. This is not even the same as the question you asked me. You did not ask if it was something maybe found on the left. You asked if 99% of all Liberals were on board. Tsk tsk tsk.