Eurovision is not actually about Europe (nor, certainly, about Europeans, which should be one and the same).
As often happens, under the guise of being a 'European' thing, it's actually an anti-European thing.
It's an extension of that same weird transnational woketardation also plaguing the USA, and it's against all nations, societies, citizens, history, culture, etc.
It seeks a world of slave-like drone 'consumers' without any history, culture, loyalty, or even identity ... besides assorted corporate-brand allegiances of course.
Consider that Eurovision banned not just Russia but also the European flag and welcomed Israel(?), and its flag, as it's committing fucking genocide?!
You're merely confirming the 'intent' part of the attempted genocide.
Bizarrely, the law protects lying and criminalises telling the truth.
If you're lying about what sex you actually are, you're fine.
But if you notice that some guy pretending to be a girl is actually a guy,
you might be in trouble.
Why even bother modding something like that?
'Inane cookie-cutter Mc-songs sung in US-English' is about the artist and the art.
All the in-your-face perversions may even be there to distract from how uninteresting Mc-songs actually are.
And the promotion of abnormality/lying as a value ('There are not two sexes, but ... six, eight!'?), that's at least a little perverted/degenerate, isn't it?
One wonders if Snowden regrets throwing away his life to warn ungrateful Americans about unconstitutional NSA wire-tapping.
Half your age plus seven is really all you need to know.
Fucking retarded faggots and their DEI math.
I don't think that you should go to jail over it. That seems a bit totalitarian. At least you agree that shills are scum.
In my own words -
I'm sorry that the USA doesn't offer us something better. I'm sorry that it has become beyond obvious that it is not the force for freedom and democracy it promised it was. I couldn't be more sorry that it has proven itself to be unquestionably worse than Hamas, Iran, Russia, and China.
The US (along with most of the West) is currently waging war against humanity. Choosing a side in that war should be easy.
The USA doesn't necessarily need to be destroyed completely... but it cannot win a war against humanity. Again, easy.
If it wins, we lose all options. Multipolar > unipolar. Yet again, easy.
What Caitlin said:
I don't spend my time attacking the US war machine because I have any special love for Hamas, Iran, Russia, China, or any other power. I do it because the US empire is quantifiably the most destructive and tyrannical force on this planet, by an extremely massive margin.
No other power has spent the 21st century killing people by the millions and displacing them by the tens of millions. No other power is circling the planet with hundreds of military bases, starving people around the world with blockades and economic sanctions, staging proxy wars, color revolutions and coups all over the earth, and working to destabilize and destroy any nation anywhere on this planet who dares to defy its dictates.
Only the US empire is doing this. No other power comes anywhere remotely close.
That's as murderous and tyrannical as it gets. Propaganda-addled empire simps sometimes try to act like it's strange and suspicious that I spend all my time criticizing the US war machine, when what's actually strange and suspicious is that everyone else does not.
Peace lilies and snake plants are popular houseplants known for their ability to thrive in low-light conditions, making them ideal for indoor environments where sunlight is limited.
Peace Lily (Spathiphyllum): Peace lilies are renowned for their elegant white blooms and lush, dark green leaves. They are relatively easy to care for and can tolerate low to medium light levels, though they do best in indirect light. Peace lilies also help improve indoor air quality by filtering out common pollutants.
Snake plants, also known as mother-in-law’s tongue, are celebrated for their striking, upright leaves with variegated patterns. These plants are incredibly hardy and can survive in very low light conditions, even thriving in spaces with minimal natural light. Snake plants are also known for their air-purifying properties, making them a great addition to any indoor space.
Both of these plants are excellent choices for adding greenery to your home or office without the need for direct sunlight, contributing to a healthier and more aesthetically pleasing environment.
The Snake Plant, also known as Mother-in-Law’s Tongue, is a hardy and low-maintenance houseplant with striking, upright leaves that have variegated patterns. It thrives in low light and is very tolerant of neglect, making it ideal for beginners. Known for its air-purifying qualities, the Snake Plant can remove toxins such as formaldehyde and benzene from the air.
ZZ Plant (Zamioculcas zamiifolia) The ZZ Plant is a robust and attractive houseplant characterized by its glossy, dark green leaves that grow on thick, upright stems. It is exceptionally low-maintenance, thriving in low to bright indirect light and requiring infrequent watering. The ZZ Plant is also known for its air-purifying capabilities and is resistant to pests and diseases.
Cast Iron Plant (Aspidistra elatior) The Cast Iron Plant lives up to its name by being extremely tough and tolerant of neglect. It has broad, dark green leaves that can withstand low light, irregular watering, and poor air quality. This plant is ideal for low-light areas and requires minimal care, making it a favorite for busy or novice plant owners.
Chinese Evergreen (Aglaonema) The Chinese Evergreen is a popular indoor plant known for its attractive foliage, which comes in various patterns and colors, ranging from green to silver and red. It thrives in low to medium light and requires moderate watering. The Chinese Evergreen is also known for its air-purifying properties and ease of care, making it a great choice for both homes and offices.
Parlor Palm (Chamaedorea elegans) The Parlor Palm is a classic indoor plant with delicate, feathery fronds that add a touch of elegance to any room. It thrives in low to moderate light and prefers consistently moist soil. Known for its air-purifying abilities and non-toxic nature, the Parlor Palm is a pet-friendly plant that enhances indoor aesthetics and air quality.
These five plants are excellent choices for indoor gardening, offering a combination of aesthetic appeal, air purification, and low maintenance, making them suitable for a variety of home and office environments.
That list is not new information. The hoax is all the new potential grave sites that were only scanned with lidar indicating potential disturbed ground. These are the allegations that sparked 100 church burnings. All the digs that have happened since then have turned up nothing. $8M was sent to Kamloops, and again, nothing. The money is gone.
Are you an aspiring entrepreneur looking to launch a healthcare app? 👉 https://bit.ly/3y0fi1x Turn your ideas into reality with Sangvish's Practo clone script, the ideal solution for your business endeavors. Sangvish offers an affordable Practo clone app, 100% customizable and scalable to accommodate your future business expansion. Join Sangvish and pave your path to global success!
Check for more information: https://sangvish.com/practo-clone/
Whatever to justify religious persecution I guess.
Cool.
I'm pro-child which means anti-pedophilia.
That is how that Goatse guy got started.
Kamala's PR team: Try laughing, it will make you more relatable.
Kamala: (Inufferable demonic cackling)
Baby in back of room: 😫
Runes are rallying. Let's explore the exciting possibilities of integrating this game-changer protocol in cryptocurrency exchange software and its impact on CX. https://www.antiersolutions.com/cryptocurrency-exchange-development-company/
Hasbara jews
Sonic is a child??... I never even thought about this. Does he have parents? Are they both super fast hedgehogs as well, or are they just amazed at their son's super powers? Should he be at home right now? Doesn't it seem like his parents wouldn't want him out there fighting fat scientists?
Attraction to prepubescent children is a mental disorder called pedophilia. It is very dangerous, and pedophiles must never be allowed to be in the presence of children.
Not sure if I agree with the italic part to be honest. Obviously some pedophiles are that dangerous, but we don't know how common pedophilia actually is, which makes judging the danger difficult too. Kinda like how in the early days of Covid-19 there were claims of death rates of over 1%, but it turned out that was badly skewed by mild to moderate cases going unnoticed. I suspect pedophilia is like that too, though it is of course, very hard to know.
For the rest of your comment, yeah. Some people take the minor/adult distinction way too seriously and seemingly treat it as a fact instead of an imperfect but useful legal concept.
Story at a Glance:
- Repeatedly forcing the public (e.g., through mandates) to use unsafe and ineffective therapies (that injured millions) has created a public relations disaster for the establishment.
- Various attempts have been made to do the impossible—restore the public’s trust in our medical institutions without any of them admitting fault.
- Here, I review each of the previous attempts and how they were used to create the recent infamous article by the NYT—which while monumental for bringing attention to the COVID vaccine-injured, also repeats a variety of strategic and very harmful lies to protect the vaccine industry.
- One of the mysteries of the COVID-19 response is what could have possibly justified breaking the public’s trust in the medical institutions our society revolves around. Here I will review the most compelling explanations we’ve come across after three years of investigating this commonly asked question.
Xin chào các bà mẹ thân yêu! Mỗi bước chân của bé là một phần quan trọng trong hành trình khám phá và phát triển. Do đó, việc chọn lựa giày dép cho bé không chỉ là một việc mua sắm thông thường mà còn là cách chúng ta quan tâm đến sức khỏe và sự thoải mái của bé. Trong bài viết này, chúng tôi sẽ chia sẻ những kinh nghiệm và lời khuyên quý giá về việc chọn giày dép phù hợp cho bé, giúp các mẹ có những lựa chọn tốt nhất nhé!
I'm sorry, you're just not right. If you go on any website on the Internet that isn't a little backwater free-speech site, and you say "If we're being honest, of course teenagers do know the difference between right and wrong, do know exactly what they do and don't want, and do know how to consent," people will scream at you that they have undeveloped brains, that it's horrific that you think those things, and that you're obviously a pedophile. I've been there enough times to know. Millennials and Zoomers are really and truly losing sight of the fact that 16 and 6 are not the same age.
You are mistaking Reddit and other online communities for what the world at large understands. I'm sorry, you're just not right. What you'll find is that online communities where people are anonymous and thrive on popular opinion differ greatly from the real world, where you sit down with a person and say something and they are looking you in the eye and hearing your words.
Even in the online communities, there's a difference between the knee-jerk reaction to the implication of pedophilia and the rush to be the most virtuous one to decry it... And the actual understandings of the facts of adolescents. Everyone might be in a rush to say the right thing, but even these performative people understand that there's a difference between: "We don't permit sexual interaction with children" and "Children don't do anything sexual in their room with the door closed"... And, hopefully, you understand the difference as well, and how that difference is expressed much more firmly when it comes from adults and children, as opposed to children on their own or children and other children.
There's no single "the law" - there's a different law for every country and every state. What you're saying is true for California, where it's against the law for two fifteen year olds to have sex with each other. It's not true for most states, where it's perfectly legal for two fifteen year olds to have sex with each other.
That's not really relevant. All that does it show that, in some places, the law differs. In those places they have different laws, and that can be because of different beliefs, different needs... In some places laws just linger unchanged despite everyone knowing they should be. There are some places it's legal to have normal, penetrative sex with an animal, but illegal to have anal sex with them. Do you think that's because they all sat down and agreed that some animal is okay, so long as it's Christian? Or do you think maybe it's a lingering law they didn't feel the need to change?
The point is, there are laws against children sexually molesting other children in a lot of places, because we typically agree children shouldn't be involved in those activities. In places where there aren't, it's likely not a result of people all agreeing kids should be able to have sex with other kids and that's normal and healthy - It's likely due to a feeling that parents should be handling those responsibilities without further damaging the child's growth by getting them caught in the legal system.
Of course we base cultural morality, at least in part, on what's biologically normal.
Only in part, and as I pointed out, that makes it irrelevant to the argument. Murder is natural. Cannibalism is natural. Rape is natural. We don't base our laws on what is natural - we might take aspects of it, but it's pointless to argue that because something occurs in nature it shouldn't be illegal.
Also, you keep mentioning culture and society. I can't help you there - having sex with children is repugnant and repulsive. That's just how people find it. You can argue it shouldn't be, if you're so inclined, but that's like the people on Reddit arguing that we should all be okay having sex with transexuals, regardless of their actual sex. They can say it all they like and demand you agree, but normal people in the street will never be okay with it.
Anyway, I understand your overall point - Like I said, nobody is under the impression that at the stroke of midnight on your 18th birthday, you are instantly blessed by an angel to be able to have sex, drive, drink and get a tattoo. It's an age we all kind of shrugged and said: "Seems about right" to. Some people will be mature, intelligent 17 year old people, some people will be immature, unprepared 20 year olds. You have to draw a line in the sand, otherwise you would be constantly renegotiating the process every day and no two people would ever feel safe entering a relationship until they had grey hair. I hope you enjoyed the conversation we had - you're always free to debate the topic and shouldn't feel attacked for doing so. Understand that it disgusts most people, and we live in a cynical age of victimhood and accusation... And not many people want to get philosophical about when it's okay to screw over a beer... So it's not likely you'll find many chances to talk about it, sorry.
Good luck!
Couldn't find anything more definitive than random people on X saying he was or wasn't.
It's really never been that unusual for 64 year olds to have heart attacks.
I don't really care what a small minority of people think about children's activity of capacity. It's irrelevant to this conversation and life in general. You can always find a handful of people who think some stupid bullshit. As a rule, society doesn't think these things.
I'm sorry, you're just not right. If you go on any website on the Internet that isn't a little backwater free-speech site, and you say "If we're being honest, of course teenagers do know the difference between right and wrong, do know exactly what they do and don't want, and do know how to consent," people will scream at you that they have undeveloped brains, that it's horrific that you think those things, and that you're obviously a pedophile. I've been there enough times to know. Millennials and Zoomers are really and truly losing sight of the fact that 16 and 6 are not the same age.
Sexual activity under the age of consent is still against the law. Two kids aren't meant to be having sex.
There's no single "the law" - there's a different law for every country and every state. What you're saying is true for California, where it's against the law for two fifteen year olds to have sex with each other. It's not true for most states, where it's perfectly legal for two fifteen year olds to have sex with each other.
Of course, since some of the biggest sites, like Reddit, are headquartered in California, people all over the world have taken to referring to California state law as "the law."
It's really only in the last fifteen years or so that anyone started thinking that teenage sex was weird and "not meant to be." In the '80s, '90s, '00s, everyone understood that teenagers were gonna fuck and there was nothing their parents, let alone the government, could really do to stop them.
We don't base the legal system and the morality of our society by what's biologically normal.
Of course we base cultural morality, at least in part, on what's biologically normal. Sure, the law itself is disconnected from both nature and morality, but the culture shouldn't be. If you refer to a normal thing, people shouldn't gasp in horror and scream "Monster! Monster!"
Which is exactly what people have begun to do if they hear of (gasp) an 19 year old, a legal adult, thinking a 17 year old is attractive. "Those are on opposite sides of the line!" they gasp, feigning shock and horror so no one will hurt them. "The slightly older one is a pedophile!"
They think that if they do anything except feign that outrage, the FBI will be knocking on their door the next morning.
A basic understanding of the life a person leads before they reach university and how infrequently that involves going to Palestine.
That's at least partially because your points all refer back to the same process, or are the same question worded slightly differently. I hope this helps.
1) Those are legal functions. Buying beer and renting are legal process. We aren't pretending it's different, it is different, because last year you were a minor and this year you are an adult. That's the function that distinction serves - to legally allow us to create a time we can generally agree is the right time for these activities. There's no social function at play except to say that we, typically, agree to that age despite there being little to factually distinguish it or scientifically distinguish it for want of a better way to lay it out.
2) I don't really care what a small minority of people think about children's activity of capacity. It's irrelevant to this conversation and life in general. You can always find a handful of people who think some stupid bullshit. As a rule, society doesn't think these things. What we do know to be true is, as I've pointed out, while some children may be capable of making certain choices, most are not equipped to do that.
3) I don't think you're making a point at all here. Yes, sometimes children date and do things with children. Sexual activity under the age of consent is still against the law. Two kids aren't meant to be having sex. We view it the same way - it doesn't matter what a child thinks is fine for them, they aren't capable of making the choice.
We don't really go: "Eh, I'll allow it". We make it illegal and let the law decide what's worth enforcing - most of the time the assumption is: The parents will take care of the matter. They are just stupid kids.. When it's an adult, it's not fine. You should know better. If or not you find them attractive is relevant only in as much as: it doesn't matter, don't do it.
4) Biologically normal isn't really relevant here. It's biologically normal for penguins to fuck their dead and for lions to eat zebras alive. We don't base the legal system and the morality of our society by what's biologically normal.
It is punished as a normal crime. We don't have distinctions in the law for "aberrations of nature". People might find it more reprehensible, and they are right to do so, because it is, but there's not a legal category for things "Unnatural"... Otherwise we wouldn't punish murder at all.
We don't lose track of the idea of kids sexually assaulting kids. It's a serious crime and we punish it like any other. Maybe parents don't like to talk about it and try and pass it off as "Kids will be kids", but we still see it as a problem.
The best solution probably would be to have something like Gepard move with the tanks. In the future, a mounted microwave or laser anti-drone system would move with tanks.
Yes, war would exist between Britain and Russia. France has already said it might send troops if Russia achieve a breakthrough. NATO should not get involved. It would give Putin an excuse to use nuclear weapons because he would claim he is being overwhelmed. He cannot claim that with small Britain. The problem for Putin is that Britain's military has historically been very good.
The return of Donald Trump to the White House, with his zero-sum worldview, would continue the erosion of institutions and norms.
Compared to the left's corruption of institutions with abnormality.
She's uncontrollably cracked up for 10 minutes over the fact that she said fuck.
Yeah it pisses me off when they claim a 14 yo raping a 6 yo is "child" on child abuse. Ones a full on adolescent (adolescent as in teenager aged 13-19) and the other is a literal child. It minimises the harm that has been done.
I know a little bit about the freemasons. How do you get from there to Zionism?
What makes you think they've never been to Palestine?
Her comment is based.
You don't like her laugh?
Yeah.
People who try to subvert the American democracy should be imprisoned and those that amplify their false messaging are scum, don't you agree?
Americans scream anyone who loves freedom is a traitor, but maybe the real traitors are the Americans who love tyranny.
So, you took those ten things point by point, but I feel like you only really made four different arguments, so let me just group my replies that way:
1-3) We can agree that legal fictions need to exist. But cultural fictions don't need to exist in the same way. Do we need some arbitrary age where it's okay to rent an apartment or buy a beer? Sure. Do we need to pretend that it's really any different at all whether you bought the beer this year or last year? We don't.
We can say "It's the law that if someone is under x age, any sexual relationship with an age gap of more than three years is illegal." But we don't have to tack on some cultural inanity like "because we think that's a child." If you can't tell that a 16 year old and a 6 year old are not in the same category of people, you're quite frankly either insane or playing along with the naked Emperor.
4-6) Here you say "People don't really believe those things, they're just ways of expressing legal fictions." But, yes. People do believe those things. Not people over 40, of course, but hang out on the Internet with 30 year olds and that's exactly what they believe.
7-9) What I'm saying is: when you were 15, other 15 year olds were attracted to you. And you were attracted to other 15 year olds. And most of you were thinking about those attractions all the time, and masturbating. That isn't because you were all pedophiles. It's because you were pubescent, and fertile, and very naturally attracted to each other.
And 17 year olds were naturally attracted to you, too. And we go "ehh I'll allow it." And 19 year olds were naturally attracted to you, too. And we scream "AHHHH PEDOPHILE!"
No. That's not a pedophile. It's fine to make it illegal to date you, but it's kinda not fine to pretend that anyone who could be attracted to you is a pedophile. If you're fertile, then it's biologically normal to be found attractive.
10) I'm saying that if a 19 year has sex with a 15 year old, that may be culturally wrong, or illegal, but it's biologically normal. So it should be punished as an ordinary crime, not an aberration of nature. Whereas if a 14 year old has sex with a 10 year old, that is a full-on pedophile. When we pretend that 14 year olds and 10 year olds are in the same category (they absolutely are not), we lose sight of the fact that there are a lot of pedophile minors out there. We just pretend they don't exist, and a lot of sexual abuse happens as a result. There are a shocking number of children getting raped by adolescents.
Where's his body?
Awwww. It's so hard to be hungry for a cause you don't really understand, happening in another country you've never been to and will never be to, at a place that has very little to do with it. Poor kids. :(
He was impotent so he killed himself.
What the fuck do you think was giving people in every country in the world an infection with a novel coronavirus, if it wasn't a pandemic?
So you're not talking about the artist and the art at all?
When you said and since the Nazis hated what they called 'Degenerate Art', it now had to be promoted as the culmination of excellence. Really needs clarification if you didn't mean to imply that this had something to do with what the Nazis called "Degenerate Art'
What do you claim is perverted/degenerate about Nemo?
That sounds very suspicious, have you registered as a foreign agent?
I think there's some false premises you're working on, and some sophistic ones as well, and I'll do my best to address them, understanding that, as you've pointed out, this is a hot button topic, so most people won't want to engage in any way.
1) You're correct, there's far more categories for humans than simply "Minor" and "Adult". For the purpose of this specific conversation and the laws surrounding it, and to avoid constantly having to shift, mitigate, forgive, condemn various actions based on the individual or the minute changes in age and circumstance, we create these categories and stick to them - The, somewhat arbitrary, age that we agree to be Too Young and the age we agree to be Old Enough. It isn't based on some strict definition, and it would be almost impossible for it to be so. Instead it's a handshake where society says: "We'll never know the perfect age for each individual to start doing various adult things, so we'll all just agree that it be age XX and leave it at that".
This isn't just satisfactory, it's necessary. The same as we don't modify the rule of law for every individual, but rather allow the justice system to judge them based on their individual circumstances, we need to do the same for these laws. We don't make it illegal to steal unless your Dad is dying of cancer and you need money for his treatment... But when you get to court, we expect a judge to be more lenient on someone in those circumstances. By the same token, we all know that Minor and Adult are chosen at a good guess at best for the purposes to determining an age limit on certain activities, but we expect a judge to take into account the circumstances around it.
2) True, but, again, for legal purposes, you could continue this divide forever. Pre-pubescent kids, toddlers, infants, kids currently going through puberty, people who are the right age to start puberty but haven't, people who started puberty young, people who haven't gone through puberty but are very intelligent and mature... The list could stretch forever. While it's not perfect, we accept that the legal treatment of these people needs to be general and allow the court to make their own judgements.
3) Obviously this changes from person to person, but it's the same as point 1 - We don't all believe that people who are 17 years, 364 days, 23 hours, 59 mins and 59 seconds old are mindless, drooling children who, in 1 second time, will become intelligent adults. Instead we agree that there's no single point where that's universally true, but there needs to be an agreed point for us to treat the law and the people equally. Otherwise, when people started turning 12, we'd be having yearly tests of their maturity by phycologists and doctors to see if they are adults yet, and then there would be primers on how to pass those tests going around online... It isn't viable for us to expect the world to treat every individual as an individual in this broad a sense.
4) Very few people think that, but we agree that children are ill equipped to understand these things. They don't have the experience or the understanding of the world, are still very much driven by basic wants and desires, don't have a good grasp of the future or what the world expects of them, so on, so forth. There's a reason we have to teach kids not to play with fire, or not to go out and party all night before an exam. If they were capable of understanding the harm their actions were going to bring them, it wouldn't be necessary to protect them from anything... But that simply isn't the case.
5) See above. It's not impossible any one child might know what they want, but we understand that children in general don't know what they want. They are short sighted and impulse driven. It's not just a stereotype. You might say you know a child that is mature, intelligent and knows what they want in life... But the fact will remain that, if you have 1,000 kids in a room and threw a stone, the odds are you'd hit one who doesn't. As a result, we need to create our laws and rules around the understanding of what is true typically and let the individual issues become a matter for a court or jury to determine.
6) See above. Same thing, different window dressing.
7) To give you the benefit of the doubt here, I'll assume we're talking about someone who has physically matured and is attempting to look older - make up, clothes, environment, etc. Yes, accidents can happen. If you're talking about before a person matures, I would say that's unnatural, yes, and I think most people would agree. That being said, because we don't have much choice but to pick a time when a person is considered an "Adult", we have to treat them in this way. If your point is: "Why do we punish them if we agree it can happen?" - Because we need to have this agreed age in order to create reliable laws, we have to rely, then, on the legal system to judge if the person's actions were reasonable and forgivable.
8) See above. We know they can, we accept that they can, we just acknowledge that, as a rule, the majority of them aren't mature enough to understand or control what they feel. We also agree that a mature, intelligent adult can manipulate and control these children, meaning that they can easily take someone who isn't ready, convince them they are and be heedless of the results. Is it always true? No. Is it true often enough that we have to worry about it and make laws to prevent it?... Yeah, sadly.
9) That's the same point as the two above, just a different coat of paint.
10) I'm not sure what you're saying. We agree that children can sexually assault each other, we just treat them differently under the law, as mentioned above.
So, in essence, what you're arguing is that there's more nuance to life than we recognise in the law, and that's always true. It's why we don't simply have a computer that we input your crime and receive your punishment. We use a court system so that the law can be general to treat everyone equally, and then the outcome can be moderated by a human who understands that there's circumstances which differ from person to person. If your argument is that pedophiles don't get treated with much nuance - Hard to say you're wrong, but I totally understand why. Children are innocent, easily led, and things like this can easily ruin their growth and alter their whole lives going forward. The same way we naturally react with disgust at the murder of a child, we naturally act with disgust at the harm of a child in this way.
What it might help to argue is that there needs to be better methods of treating people who are pedophiles and agreeing on helping those who seek treatment without judgement. It's just one of those fucked up things nobody asks to happen to them, and if someone is trying to get help, good. That's what we want, right? Not for them to hide it until they act on it, but to try and fix it. It's till gross... If I found out a friend was like that, I'd still be repulsed... But that's half the issue.
Here is a list of 51 of the students who died at Kamloops school using church and state records.
GPR has located potential grave sites.
What we know is that the register of missing children is incomplete, "due to a large volume of yet-to-be-examined and destroyed records".
And we know that the deaths of more than 4000 indigenous students associated with residential schools has been confirmed.
So, obviously we know that its not a hoax.
I'm so glad this one isn't Canadian.
Tyranny didn't work out too well for the USSR, Nazi Germany, and Cambodia so why are Americans embracing it?
good.
I believe Internet search engines try to tailor results to the user. So different people get different results for the same query, further polarizing the public. I do a lot of foreign country and foreign language queries.
Americans scream globalism is wonderful because there would be free trade, no borders, and no wars, but actually globalism means that the world would be run by a few elites and you couldn't escape high taxes or draconian laws.
Is having sex with a hairy woman who demands you call her "Sir" gay? Scientists say...
Alright, you enjoy yourself. I don't know how healthy it is to trawl threads over a year old looking for madness though. Plenty of madness coming out on the daily.
I don't see why it wouldn't be. It takes a certain kind of person to pay for sex, and they come in all varieties. There will be hard working people who don't have a lot of time, but are also the kind of person who would buy sex. Just because you wouldn't isn't much of a statement - that's like saying because you wouldn't eat human flesh, nobody would.
Total nigger death!
They should do synagogues next...
What's the difference between mormons and jesuits?
Can you provide an example?
The goal was burning down churches. Jews have a long history of burning churches
They will let this faggot coach under-12 youth team so he can join post-game team shower
Orthodox Christian = LGBT is terrorist
Catholic Christian = Hosted drag queen show inside church during Easter
Yeah, our world is going to need a lot more energy.
I'm being told that nuclear stocks are starting to spike. It looks like the industry is seeing the need for new plants in the foreseeable future.
She's rightfully transphobic. No women want to share space with ugly and horny guy crossdressing as anime character
What's up with having 2 photos of the same person for each entry?
Sometimes the most interesting and hilarious threads.are the oldest ones
In normal times, on its own, I could see what he was doing being a problem. But considering how much the activist teachers blast their kids with propaganda and involve them in activism, or how much effort school boards will spend quietly shuffling pedo teachers around from school to school, this is just another sad example of bias enforcement.
Basically child abuse. Hate seeing gaslighting thrown around but apt in this case.
Definitely sex pest that gets off on going places he isn't welcome. It's especially stupid in this context since that area has fucking loads of gay bars for every specific type of fetish you can think of so there's definitely one where "trans lesbians" are very welcome. Though I suspect that the clientele will be pretty much 100% trans lesbians.
Interesting choice to call SRS 'barbaric'. Yet when TERFs say it..
Yeah that's always funny. It's barbaric to make people transition medically before you let them change sex legally? Why? Is it because the medical transition itself is barbaric?
Really sticks a foot in their mouth.
It's amusing that the more PC users are trying to lecture the less PC users about writing "trans man" instead of "transman" and fully reminds me why i should never add the space. They think adding the space proves they are a man or something lol... I've actually had this argument with them a long time ago trying to claim "trans" is an adjective. Like... No... Fuck off... I'll use it as a prefix for your self declared identity, that's it.
I'm just pointing out that the Germans and international Jewry were two sides at war with each other. People tend to forget this when it comes to discussing muh shoa...
This isn't really a gotcha imo (trying to say Jews started it), the Nazi's were openly and vehemently anti Jewish on the campaign trail before they came to power with Hitler fully outlining this view in mein kampf.
Best BS all day.
Someone tried warning the world but he died in 1945.
I clicked on it and saw no adverts.
Poor camel jockey.
Can DailyMail get sued? Or is this the line the advertisers won't let them cross? Maybe this allows them to get posted on social media without a complete site block.
If you put that in your toilet just for Socks, you'll never get rid of him.
This site is as much of a far-right echo chamber of traditional racism and inceldom as much as Reddit is a far-left echo chamber of wokeism, anti-white racism, and soy.
It's a failed experiment. Diversity is not a strength and there's no nation on Earth that has been successful because of it. Add to that, these "immigrants" are not the cream of the crop by any means. What percentage are people who just washed up on Europe's doorstep? What I find ironic is that they fled from their home countries either just looking for the best welfare handout or because of war/disease/famine in their countries. And yet, they want to drag down their new hosts to shithole level. What's the point?
Yeah at some point you must be obsessed with trannies on Reddit like I get it it's a problem but forget about Reddit
Got a malware warning immediately
Where have I seen this before? Oh yeah:
Deadnaming is delusional. You don't get to erase 57 years of your life and change your name just because you now decide you're a different sex. And why do they change their last names?
Sorry, but I’m not going to watch neither multiple ads nor a 1:45 minute ad to see what is posted on rumble.
Sorry, but I’m not going to watch neither multiple ads nor a 1:45 minute ad to see what is posted on rumble.
Sorry, but I’m not going to watch neither multiple ads nor a 1:45 minute ad to see what is posted on rumble.
Sorry, but I’m not going to watch neither multiple ads nor a 1:45 minute ad to see what is posted on rumble.
Sorry, but I’m not going to watch neither multiple ads nor a 1:45 minute ad to see what is posted on rumble.
Sorry, but I’m not going to watch neither multiple ads nor a 1:45 minute ad to see what is posted on rumble.
Sorry, but I’m not going to watch neither multiple ads nor a 1:45 minute ad to see what is posted on rumble.
view more: next
Canbot |2 pointswritten 2 minutes ago ago
There seem to be a lot of double standards going on. More precisely everyone acts extremely outraged and disgusted until it is someone they know and care about. The people who are the most passionate about going after pedos seem to be more interested in their own cathartic violence, only using their anti pedo outrage as an excuse to unleash on someone. If I had to guess most are victims of sexual abuse and that trauma festers inside them, so they instantly rationalize it as getting some justice. But when you really look at how they react to the details it becomes clear that no one is actually that interested in the details, or by extension justice or revenge; and especially not what is best for the kids. What they are most interested in is being violent.
Until, of course, the pedo is a fellow cop, or teacher, or a beloved coach, or a fellow jew, any version of "one of us" really.
Ultimately everyone is very interested in using it as a weapon against, and as an excuse to attack those they don't like. The media uses it to paint catholic priests as pedos, the poor accuse the rich of being pedos, feminists accuse all men, the left say it's mostly conservatives, the right says it's a left wing conspiracy.
So the conversation about pedophilia is less about pedophilia and more about who gets to indulge in their primal blood lust and against whom.
As such, any hint of restraint is a direct challenge to everyone's desires.
Which feels disgusting to say, and I can't be sure if it is because of my own blood lust or because I genuinely see the degradation of society being engineered and pedophilia normalization being a large part of that. I want to say that despite the topic being hijacked by blood thirsty narcissists, there are certainly valid reasons to be conservative and strict when creating policies on the matter. Not least of which is erring on the side of caution on a topic that is poorly fleshed out, has potentially devastating consequences, and there is a lack of scientific data to support any claims.