Message from @MikaSetsu
Discord ID: 750807978109698048
(If you didn’t know)
Men in the old tongue meant humanity
Yes indeed
interestingly enough...the usa constitution and original bill of rights was written in the 'old tongue' ...and had to be translated to modern english
And in the old tongue, I mean pre-SJW
Now its huPERSONity
If Trudeaun’t is to be believed
Yeah *pretending to not be dumb and know what that meant*
go on the germans some good new for a change in euro zone
news
well with alot of the ppl protesting in the capital, i guess it was a good time to hit the homes of the pedos
Conservatism on a rise possibly in Germany?
well the last time it was that high, the allies bombed the hell out of it
not this time
I hope so...herr merkel let too many pedo worshippers into her country too.
Half right, from what I've read of the bill, and I could be wrong, I'm not a lawyer: The punishment for sodomy is that the perp MUST be registered. As it stands vaginal intercourse isn't as restrictive. It's on the judge to decide that. So if an 18 year and 17 year have consensual sex, and they're gay, then the 18y.o. must be registered as a sex offender. Similarly, any Julio&Romeo situation would be the same.
Again, not a lawyer, I was trying to understand the legaleze of it.
If my interpretation is how it is changing, then I'm in favor of it. It doesnt change the age, or the punishment type, it simply removes sodomy from being a mandatory charge. The judge can still render whatever verdict just like the case of vaginal intercourse.
Devil's advocate: yes, a sympathetic judge can be nicer in the case of an adult male assaulting a minor male. There is an argument for that.
You make a good point but we are talking about a 10 year age gap... That's a lot of "grey" area and not something I would support personally
It's a tough bill. I do know too many people accuse people of false rape accusations and the way the law was before would get them in the registry guilty or not. Now the judge must decide. I don't think this is a win for the alphabet people though.
The dude didn’t even want to upload it to YouTube
Also, be warned it contains very disturbing images but it’s a must watch for anyone who wants to know more
> You make a good point but we are talking about a 10 year age gap... That's a lot of "grey" area and not something I would support personally
@MikaSetsu
It was _already_ that way though
@Red Jasper I wanted to get ahead of the story because people fly with the misinfo too often, additionally there was a law involving the age of consent in France that was recently passed. Conservatives freaked out because it set the age of consent to 15. The key point of the story though is that _there was no age of consent before._
Yeah. And before SB-145, the bill was not including all persons. I can imagine how all of these assholes that were identifying as "non-binary" or all that other bullshit might have actually been trying to get away with bullshit.
@Jayson should i start with part 1?
@Red Jasper I kinda covered that in my Devil's Advocate. There are definitely arguments, I wish I could just speak legaleze.
Yes. Scott Weiner is THAT asshole.
I can already tell senator weiner passed which bill due to the bills passed.
we seem to have a few weiner problems
Guys please retweet and like this post of a little girl describing how her mom's boyfriend is sexually assaulting her. The judge ruled the mom to get her :C https://twitter.com/SydneyLWatson/status/1300535038631649281?s=20
@pepperfresh The one single thing I’ve heard in defense of SB 145 is that it applies not to people *convicted* of sex crimes, but to people *accused* of sex crimes. People accused, but not convicted, should be protected, it is said.
SB-145 did not change statutory rape laws.
@mathgrant people who are accused do not need to register as sex offenders. That is part of the conviction.