you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Canbot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

The last time this was shot down someone mentioned that pedophilia is already illegal and claimed this bill is one of those scam bills that claims it is one thing but is actually a different thing, like the patriot act is actually the violate the constitution bill.

Which sounds about right because pedophilia is very much illegal already.

[–]Questionable[S] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

pedophilia is very much illegal already.

That word is a psychological term meaning attraction to prepubescent children. One can no more make illegal 'attractions' as one can outlaw any other thought.

Please reread the title of the article you are dismissing, and then click the link to the bill on the page.

[–]Canbot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Nah

[–]Questionable[S] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

OK. You don't have to read anything. I can't force you to understand the topic. Though I will ask you to refrain from making things up, citing things from half forgotten memories, or comparing state laws to congressional bills you don't like.

Honestly, if you don't want to think about this. You don't have to.

[–]Titanic 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Yes you are technically right it is a mental illness, but in common parlance it is also an action.

[–]Questionable[S] 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

And in this case, it is also the premise of some rather outlandish claims made by u/Canbot. Is the use of a 'common parlance' a valid excuse for dismissing laws that involve sex crimes against minors?

Make this make sense.