PDA

View Full Version : Yay! Finally Congress is doing something to protect children!



Bill
07-25-2006, 05:02 PM
I just heard that congress has finally voted yes to to a bill that will start a national database of child molesters and pronographers, and establish new prison terms for porno pushers.

It's on the Presidents desk now, and you know this is one bill he won't veto!

It probably won't let us put all those porno pushers in jail, but I hope it will make their lives a bit harder, and maybe drive them out of this country.

boortzland
07-25-2006, 06:52 PM
I just heard that congress has finally voted yes to to a bill that will start a national database of child molesters and pronographers, and establish new prison terms for porno pushers.

It's on the Presidents desk now, and you know this is one bill he won't veto!

It probably won't let us put all those porno pushers in jail, but I hope it will make their lives a bit harder, and maybe drive them out of this country.

I have one question. How do they define "child molester"? In Georgia they passed a law that does not allow any "sex offender" to live within 1000feet of a school bus stop. Here is why I've told and asked you this. (2 examples)

1. A guy had just docked his boat at Lake Lanier. He needed to releive himself and went to the public restrooms. They were to his surprise, locked. He decided he could no longer wait, so he went behind some trees to releive himself. When he finiched he was greeted and written a citation by law enforcement. they had the restrooms staked out to catch a rapist. He plead guilty by paying his fine, but to his surprise is not listed "lifetime" as a Georgia Sex Offender". Under this new law, he would have to sell his home and move.

2. A lady who was in her car with her boyfriend, both were 15 at the time, she was caught doing the Lewinski on her boyfriend. That was 20 years ago, but she also is listed on the Sex Offender Registry. She will also have to up root her enitire family because of some feel good legislation that will not prevent, or deter any molestations.

My point here is, we have to be careful where this goes, and how its defined. There has to be some room for judgement, common sense. Neither of the above examples are threats to society, but none the less are lumped in with rapist and child molesters.:disbelief:

Bill
07-25-2006, 07:22 PM
1. The guy had his dick out in public. There might have been a 5 year old kid watching that. It starts a chain that never ends. Better to stop things now. End of story.

2. They were both underage. He should be in jail, and she should never have been there in the first place. Also, they were in public. End of story.

Sounds like they both belong in a government database to me.

It's a small price to pay to keep track of deviants. If they don't want to have to sell their houses, maybe next time they will keep their dicks or other sexual organs in their pants.

Bill
07-25-2006, 10:45 PM
Cool! Congress also acted to protect parental rights today, by passing a bill making it a federal crime to accompany a minor across state lines to get an abortion without her parents consent.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/07/25/interstate.abortion.ap/index.html

"Struggling to defend their majority this election year, Republican sponsors said the bill supports what a majority of the public believes: that a parent's right to know takes precedence over a young woman's right to have an abortion.

"No parent wants anyone to take their children across state lines or even across the street without their permission," said Senate Majority Whip Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky. "This is a fundamental right, and the Congress is right to uphold it in law."

Fourteen Democrats and 51 Republicans voted for the bill. Four Republicans voted against it: Sens. Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island, Susan Collins of Maine, Olympia Snowe of Maine and Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-California, was absent.

Bush applauded the Senate action and urged the House and Senate to resolve their differences and send him a bill he said he would sign. "Transporting minors across state lines to bypass parental consent laws regarding abortion undermines state law and jeopardizes the lives of young women," he said in a statement."

Maybe the thought that she'll have to tell her parents to get an abortion will keep 16 year old Towanda's legs closed.

Tommy
07-26-2006, 10:02 AM
Maybe the thought that she'll have to tell her parents to get an abortion will keep 16 year old Towanda's legs closed.

yeah I am sure thats gonna keep their legs closed

CatsEye
07-26-2006, 03:39 PM
"Maybe the thought that she'll have to tell her parents to get an abortion will keep 16 year old Towanda's legs closed."

Maybe she should tell her parents about the sexual abuse and/or rape that created the pregnancy,too, Bill. So easy to do when it's a family member that did it in the first place.

And why not "Shelly" or "Brianna" or "Anne Marie" instead of "Towanda"? What does "Towanda" signify to you?

"I just heard that congress has finally voted yes to to a bill that will start a national database of child molesters and pronographers, and establish new prison terms for porno pushers....It probably won't let us put all those porno pushers in jail, but I hope it will make their lives a bit harder, and maybe drive them out of this country."

Database for child molesters - hell yes. Pornographers? No. The legal creation of pornography and "porno pushing" as you call it, is LEGAL in this country and is created by consenting adults filming and photographing age-verified consenting adults, and distributed to same. Whether you like watching it not isn't the issue, whether you find it morally repugnant or not is not the issue, either. Of course it should be kept out of the hands--and visual field--of minors but again, consenting adults. Legal.

Ironic that pornography is such a big business co-opted and profted on by a lot of those same media companies you insist it's our "duty" to watch.

Scare mongering idiocy of lumping child molestors in with the creators of legal adult entertainment is just that - scare mongering idiocy.

Bill
07-26-2006, 04:39 PM
Well, if that legislation doesn't start a federal database of porn pushers, that's a mistake that can be corrected.

It does make creating obscenity and moving it across state lines a felony, which is a step in the right direction. Pretty soon those porno pushers will be picking up the soap in a butt slamming federal prison. Poetic justice, I call it.

Moby
07-26-2006, 05:27 PM
"No parent wants anyone to take their children across state lines or even across the street without their permission," said Senate Majority Whip Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky. "This is a fundamental right, and the Congress is right to uphold it in law."

If a 16 year old girl has a situation that will effect the rest of her life and she doesn't feel comfortable in in discussing it with her parents then there's a serious issue in the family unit.

This seems like a law designed to allow terrible parents to continue to be terrible.

I think we're going to see more little 16 year old Susie's beaten and abused by their parents but maybe that is the American way.

CatsEye
07-26-2006, 05:29 PM
I'm not surprised you can't respond to a single one of the legitimate points I raised. :lmao2:

As for "obscenity across state lines" have fun with that; obscenity standards differ state to state and city to city.

But hoping that American citizens are thrown in jail and forcibly ass raped for "pushing" what is legally protected in this country - yeah, you go with that.

Kinky Jones
07-26-2006, 10:30 PM
Well, if that legislation doesn't start a federal database of porn pushers, that's a mistake that can be corrected.

It does make creating obscenity and moving it across state lines a felony, which is a step in the right direction. Pretty soon those porno pushers will be picking up the soap in a butt slamming federal prison. Poetic justice, I call it.

people having sex is obscenity??? put down your bible and go get laid :thumbsup:

if we really want to protect young children it would do more to lock up all the little boy loving priests
that the catholic church covers up and ignores

AJ
07-27-2006, 04:12 PM
people having sex is obscenity??? put down your bible and go get laid :thumbsup:

if we really want to protect young children it would do more to lock up all the little boy loving priests
that the catholic church covers up and ignores

"put down your bible and go get laid"

that is exactly the problem with people like yourself and why we need laws to protect decent people
we have chosen to live our lives by a moral code that escapes you
good christians should not have to be subject to your immoral ideology

boortzland
07-27-2006, 05:16 PM
1. The guy had his dick out in public. There might have been a 5 year old kid watching that. It starts a chain that never ends. Better to stop things now. End of story.

2. They were both underage. He should be in jail, and she should never have been there in the first place. Also, they were in public. End of story.

Sounds like they both belong in a government database to me.

It's a small price to pay to keep track of deviants. If they don't want to have to sell their houses, maybe next time they will keep their dicks or other sexual organs in their pants.

You really think that someone who takes a leak in the woods because the public restrooms were locked should be on an offender registry. Sure maybe give him a warning or even a ticket, but the guy is no sex offender. If you lump him in the same bucket with the child molesters and rapist this guy is ruined..is that right???NO!

And 2 teens involved in consentual sex does not & should not make them lifetime members of the Sex Offender registry. There are penalties that they can pay for that action if they are caught, but would you want your daughter to be labeled for life because she does a Lewinski in the back of a car.
Get real man!

I'm for protecting kids, and locking up Rapist, but lets be sure that this other stuff is sorted out. It does not benefit anyone to use over kill in these situations. You may create more criminals than you can correct. :talktothehand:

Moby
07-27-2006, 05:21 PM
I fully agree that you have the right to live life as you choose. What gives you the right to create laws to force others to live life that way?


they should make gay people pay higher taxes

if they want to do that kind of stuff they should have to pay for all the court expenses, programs and laws that surround the gay issues
This statement makes it seem that you have some prejudice against gay people. After all, the only court expenses are really caused by people not wanting them to do as they choose.

If you have your right to live life as you choose then why shouldn't gay people have the right to live life as they choose?


I don't recall Jesus ever teaching prejudice or God trying to change free will.

Kinky Jones
07-27-2006, 09:42 PM
"put down your bible and go get laid"

that is exactly the problem with people like yourself and why we need laws to protect decent people
we have chosen to live our lives by a moral code that escapes you
good christians should not have to be subject to your immoral ideology

i have more morals in my pinky than most "good christians" and the fact that you think getting laid is immoral you are the biggest dumbass sheep on this planet... next time try to post an original though instead of the endless repetitive drabble that religious folk spit out over and over and over and over :talktothehand:

kingiii64
08-04-2008, 08:45 PM
It is sad that like most religious zealots, you seem to think that you and your specific flavor of church has a cornerstone on morals.

If you have chosen to live your life in a particular manner then all the luck to you. I have chosen to live my life in a manner that I think is right also. I choose what I want to watch, I choose what I will do and how I will do it. I have a personal moral code that does not break any laws. and I do not need some old fable manual in my hand to tell me that I am right. Of course your faith by it's very nature prevents any critical thought on the believer's part. You must blindly accept that the stuff you have learned and had interpreted for you is the one right way and all others are immoral and wrong. The mere fact that you lump all Christians together is testament to how completely ignorant you are to your own faith. Not accepting individuals as they are and not trying to change them is nothing more than bigotry!

When you mention "good Christians" are you insinuating that there are bad Christians? Is it possible that just by saying that you are Christian makes you good or, can some Christians be bad?


"put down your bible and go get laid"

that is exactly the problem with people like yourself and why we need laws to protect decent people
we have chosen to live our lives by a moral code that escapes you
good christians should not have to be subject to your immoral ideology