• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

Republicans Seem To Have A Big Pedophile Problem


I'm just wondering if any of our forum "grammar" nazis will now begin a crusade about how "child" means a certain age range and not any particular minor as if there's a distinction that matters in this context.
I have three children and the youngest is now 42, but each of them is still my child. The word child has never had definite boundaries and common usage has pushed the upper limit higher in the past couple centuries. The laws that deal with this sort of thing seldom use the word child. This is probably more to do with Legalese preferring Latin root words, so minor wins out over child. Minority, in the eyes of the law is very specifically defined.

That said, calling someone a "minor molester" doesn't have the same punch.
 

Was this already mentioned? It's all so similar, I am getting confused.
 

Was this already mentioned? It's all so similar, I am getting confused.
It was probably another MAGA pastor.
 

Was this already mentioned? It's all so similar, I am getting confused.
I wasn't even joking.

 

Was this already mentioned? It's all so similar, I am getting confused.
It was probably another MAGA pastor.

Ya this was a different pedo Texas Megachurch guy I posted a couple days ago.

 
And now we have a celebrated Texas Republican, once Governor of Texas and now Senator, saying we should stop going after pedophiles.

That means Ted Cruz is a pedophile.
No. It could mean he's protecting someone who is a pedophile.
 
What words actually mean is not a "semantic loophole". I do not think it's appropriate for >30 to go after, say, 15 year olds, but it's not "pedophilia" either, as the latter refers specifically to an attraction to prepubescent children.
Yup. I'll go a bit farther and say I do not think it's appropriate for anyone to go after someone substantially younger regardless of age. But that does not mean I think it's automatically wrong for an age gap relationship to exist. Sometimes proximity turns into something more, tread with caution but I do not consider such automatically wrong. (Fair disclosure: I'm the younger half of such a situation. Neither of us even thought the other was available, there certainly was no going after. It was just we both came to realize that our hearts had their own idea about the situation.)

While I think it is wrong to pay a 17 year old for sex, it certainly is not "pedophilia", since a 17 year old is developmentally hardly different from an 18 year old, or even a 20 year old.
Yup. I'd go further and say that the age of consent for sex work should be 21, but it's not a matter of pedophilia.
 
Back
Top Bottom