The Prime Minister of Canada, Justin Trudeau Makes Announcement To Legalize Group And Underage Anal Sex
The Prime Minister made the announcement during a ceremony on Parliament Hill where the Pride, Transgender Pride, and Canada 150 Pride flags were raised. The Prime Minister was joined by his Special Advisor on LGBTQ2 issues, MP Randy Boissonnault, other Parliamentarians, and a number of individuals and organizations who play a crucial role in advancing equality.
The report recommended repealing the Criminal Code ban on anal sex, and in November, Liberals tabled legislation to repeal Criminal Code Section 159, a bill that was absorbed into Bill C-39 in March.
The effect of repealing Section 159 would be to lower the age of consent for anal sex to 16, putting it on par under the Code with the age of consent for all other sexual activity, but it could also allow group anal sex, and leave young male adolescents unprotected and vulnerable, Landolt said at that time.
By the way, for those of you who have not heard...
Ontario Passes Law Allowing Gov't to Seize Children From Parents Who Oppose Gender Transition
"I would consider that a form of abuse, when a child identifies one way and a caregiver is saying no, you need to do this differently," Minister of Child and Family Services Michael Coteau, who introduced the bill, was quoted as saying. "If it's abuse, and if it's within the definition, a child can be removed from that environment and placed into protection where the abuse stops."
ArtificalDuality ago
CANADA: You HAVE to GET your COUNTRY BACK!! Stop the sicko pedo luciferist syndicate that's fuggin' your country down the drain!
Cheesebooger ago
Wasn't Fidel a jew?
DoomMantia ago
Meanwhile, the age of consent in Japan is 13.
kazza64 ago
i believe gender is fluid. i think it is a very personal experience that nobody else can judge you on. too much emphasis is put on ' anal sex ' its really nobodys business what goes on behind closed doors. i dont know if the people next door are swinging off their ceiling practicing bondage and i dont care if it doesnt affect me. my only problem is with paedophilia and child abuse. look at countries where gays are murdered because they are gay. now there is the real problem murdering people because they choose same sex relationships because they were born homosexual. heterosexual men tend to reject their gay and transgender sons and can be very abusive towards them unfortunately.
banenya ago
Canada is obviously the choice for seeing how much of the Brave New World Order humanity will take. More sheeple up there maybe?
Tallest_Skil ago
Just annex Canada and purge the lunatic left. THE DAY OF THE RAKE APPROACHES.
Tallest_Skil ago
You're an idiot who doesn't know English, then. Either use the language properly or be labeled as the passive dialectical propagandist that you are.
bopper ago
Look how young he is for that office. I guess just a happy accident lol. He does what he's told. Yeah it is sad.
Nobody27 ago
Fucking rainbow loving turd....im getting sick of this. We have to accept this like rape and enjoy this shit? We say something against it, the women and gays scream hate talk...the world is coming to chaos. The pandoras box is open. Fuck the gay world order.
SayWhatNOWAY ago
Hell Yeah! Make PizzaIsRetarded2 and his goat start building the Northern Wall!
SayWhatNOWAY ago
Fucking GDamned Evil Nasty Vile Rat Bastard Satanic Cannibal Pedos! Jesus we need to wipe the earth of this filth!
dontmindthemess ago
This world is so fucked up. This is just another form of population control.
Mbailey63 ago
And its on. The devil is at the doorstep.
rodeo13 ago
:)
equineluvr ago
IF you use THEIR term "gender," you ARE part of the problem!!
There are only two SEXES, male (XY) and female (XX). You will never hear "gender" uttered in ANY biology class.
Eyezopen ago
That Trudeau is one sick globalist bastard. Also a good friend of BarryOs.
SayWhatNOWAY ago
He rims Barry's sphincter! Freaking disgusting animal fucker!
bopper ago
I think he's Castro's son.
KikeFree ago
I'm certain of it, but you know what's more important? He was raised by babysitters in the household of a cuckold with a lunatic mother. I wouldn't be surprised if he was passed around to the elites as a child.
bopper ago
Yep.
MrsWebb ago
Section 159 permits anal sex in private between any two consenting people age 18 and over, or between a husband and wife, but prohibits it between more than two people, in public, and for anyone under age 18.
Who are they to tell us that we can't have anal sex between more than 2 people?
VieBleu ago
the thought sickens me but the truth is, consenting adults shouldn't have to obay a law on what they do sexually, or face prosecution, fines whatever.
Tallest_Skil ago
You're a degenerate pile of shit and a medical burden to all others.
EricKaliberhall ago
Anal sex between more than 2 people at a time is strictly prohibited. That act is reserved for the aristocrats and royals according to the law of the land.
SayWhatNOWAY ago
WTF! Vomit!
KikeFree ago
Your owners. The Queen is visiting the plantation this week, best be on your best behavior.
MrsWebb ago
I'll give it a shot
KikeFree ago
Actually it's not The Queen, it's some other
freeloadinglovable royals.MrsWebb ago
Thanks for clarifying
srayzie ago
Well what some may think are "feminine qualities" could be a man crying or a man that is sensitive. I think those are good qualities. Some men have to act all macho like they are tough and don't get emotional. My husband is big and manly. But, he'll cry watching a movie that even I wouldn't cry in haha.
eucalyptus_spearmint ago
I love a man who is secure in their masculinity such that they can show a little emotion. ;)
srayzie ago
My thoughts exactly
sunajAeon ago
Well this well proves the point that LGBT leads to PEDOPHILIA 'nuf sed
eyeVoated ago
I'm going to start reading up on the sodomites, so I can get a handle on how history repeats itself
equineluvr ago
Yep. There is a ton of other evidence, too.
Bring that up around here and the pro homos jump your case.
Votescam ago
There is only evidence which proves that homosexuals are NOT our sexual abusers of children. In fact, Homosexuals males are 100X LESS likely to sexually abuse a child than a heterosexual male.
The Catholic Church has had a war on homosexuals and lesbians going on for 2,000 years now.
They didn't like the idea that homosexuals/lesbians didn't provide new members for them.
In fact, in earlier years, the Catholic Church actually seems to have performed homosexual marriages.
sunajAeon ago
Absurd-Homosexual men gravitate to young boys like ducks to water, its a very small step, heterosexual men DO NOT seek children-perverted psychopaths abuse chidren for reasons other than sex-it is an act of humiliation, terror power and control via sexual torture
Votescam ago
Homosexual males ARE young boys -- and we're not talking about two 15 year old homosexuals being attracted to one another.
What we're talking about about are people like Penn State's Jerry Sandusky -- a heterosexual male and a pedophile - who raped and assaulted what seems like an endless number of young males he had control over via sports activity.
Not only do heterosexual men seek children for sex -- but there is a label for them called "situational" pedophiles. As studies show, there are heterosexual males who prefer sex with adult females but when those females are not available to them, they will sexually abuse a child.
RAPE of women is also about "humiliation, terror, power and control" and it is heterosexual males who rape women. And often gang rape women. Often men who have been raped in prison will upon their release immediately assault and rape a female .... in order to prove their manhood.
Read the study --
sunajAeon ago
It is absurd to suggest that homosexual males are not attracted to young male children-PERIOD, I don't need to read every study that is out, this is common sense, " like ducks to water" the whole LGBT movement is synthetic, artificially foisted upon the public by the psychopaths in power for the express purpose of weakening the herd and destroying the fabric of society
Votescam ago
Well, ignore research if you wish --
But first notice that it is MALES who are our sexual abusers of children and that is supported even by right wing women's organizations.
Adult homosexuals -- as the study makes clear -- are interested in relationships with other adult homosexuals. Naturally, 14 and 15 year old homosexuals are attracted to one another .... just as 14 and 15 year old heterosexuals are attracted to the opposite sex.
If you truly think that homosexuals -- both gays and lesbians -- weren't interested in overturn 2,000 years or more of oppression which often resulted in beatings and violence against them -- and even their murder then you are really in denial of all reality. Or, you're reading too much right wing propaganda.
Reminds me of Hoover who used to try to blame African American campaign for human rights on Communists. Right ... AA's themselves couldn't be interested in freeing themselves from oppression!!
The fabric of our society is destroyed every day by male violence which goes pretty much unacknowledged by our "free press."
And by the corruption of our government and its agencies by our two corrupt political parties.
We have criminals running our government and our MIC.
PeesInPools ago
Considering that over 80% of child abuse cases are same-sex in nature (including those perpetrated by the Catholic church), you are completely wrong at the most fundamental level.
Votescam ago
Pedophilia is about the age of the child. And, yes, there are often preferences as to gender, but AGE is the controlling factor.
This is NOT homosexuality.
Pedophiles are thought to not actually have any sexual orientation.
VieBleu ago
I've seen that evidence about the early homo marriages between priests - usually who were going on missionary work together and would be isolated in a foreign land for long periods of time. They even had a liturgy for the gay marriage.
I always wonder why gays don't use that argument all the time- it's like nobody reads history of the church or something. So, I'm glad you brought that up. Whatever side you are on, the truth is the truth, and that did happen.
9694770? ago
Priests and nuns are supposed to be married to God, and marrying the same sex and multiple people are both not allowed. have you got a source for that evidence?
VieBleu ago
i'll do you the courtesy of looking but im going to do the same thing you could do - google homosexual marriage, early church and look at pages of links.
The early church had a lot of differences from what is now a 2,000 year old institution. history is history. i'm going to look now, i'll update this comment when i find something but you can go look for yourself as well. There are different sources, and it is a hot button issue so i know people are going to argue over it, etc. i believe there is enough evidence to have the conversation, this is certainly not just some made up thing. i think the church has a long history with homosexuality period - the church was a good place for young gay men with no fortune behind them to find protection actually and there always has been buggery in the church as well as pedophilia as the church scandals of recent years have proven. That the church may have been a little more tolerant of homosexuality and honest about it within its ranks in it's formative years is not that big a stretch if you think about it. And from what i understand, you can sin your whole life as a Catholic and as long as you ask for forgiveness at the end of your life you are ok to get into heaven. i am not Catholic so please pardon me if I have that wrong. The protestant movement i believe happened in part because of the homosexuality within the Catholic church. i know also that Hildegard von Bingen, a famous abbess of the 1100's wrote in letters to the pope that the church had become "too feminized" meaning too many gay men in it's ranks high and low in her opinion. She was an interesting character you may want to look her up too.
http://www.christianity-revealed.com/cr/files/whensamesexmarriagewasachristianrite.html
https://www.themonastery.org/blog/2011/06/did-the-early-church-perform-same-sex-weddings/
http://www.gaychristian101.com/Gay-Marriage.html
there are a lot more links, just do the google. i don't care to argue about this so if you object and want to disagree about it you won't have luck with me - i have an article on the misguided Keller exhoneration (convicted pedos set free and given $1.7 million taxpayer money) to write! cheers.
9696558? ago
Cheers thanks for response, good to know where stuff comes from. I know how to Google but I cant google your brain, and you soubded pretty specific...
So all three links say pretty much the same thing and reference Boswell https://sourcebooks.fordham.edu/pwh/bosrev-paglia.asp - a lot of rumors and innuendo but no clear evidence that the church officially sanctified gay unions. I'll have to see if I can get a copy to read for myself.
VieBleu ago
Ha ha jokes on me I said i was too busy but I can't resist commenting back - to me this all sounds pretty specific regarding the church officially sanctioning gay partnership/marriage and that the church of that day did not see things exactly as the church of recent memory. This is not innuendo and rumor, this is historically documented evidence. You've got two men known to be gay lovers who became Saints, and specific records of liturgical celebrations of union ceremonies that were public and ceebrated. It's from the first link - http://www.christianity-revealed.com/cr/files/whensamesexmarriagewasachristianrite.html btw I don't think this history undermines the church, God or jesus' true message. God may be infallable and unchanging, but the church is a human construct that is of this earth, and is going to reflect changes in the human condition, espeically over 2,000 years!
"In the definitive 10th century account of their lives, St. Sergius is openly celebrated as the "sweet companion and lover" of St. Bacchus. Sergius and Bacchus's close relationship has led many modern scholars to believe they were lovers. But the most compelling evidence for this view is that the oldest text of their martyrology, written in New Testament Greek describes them as "erastai,” or "lovers". In other words, they were a male homosexual couple. Their orientation and relationship was not only acknowledged, but it was fully accepted and celebrated by the early Christian church, which was far more tolerant than it is today.
Contrary to myth, Christianity's concept of marriage has not been set in stone since the days of Christ, but has constantly evolved as a concept and ritual.
Prof. John Boswell3, the late Chairman of Yale University’s history department, discovered that in addition to heterosexual marriage ceremonies in ancient Christian church liturgical documents, there were also ceremonies called the "Office of Same-Sex Union" (10th and 11th century), and the "Order for Uniting Two Men" (11th and 12th century).
These church rites had all the symbols of a heterosexual marriage: the whole community gathered in a church, a blessing of the couple before the altar was conducted with their right hands joined, holy vows were exchanged, a priest officiatied in the taking of the Eucharist and a wedding feast for the guests was celebrated afterwards. These elements all appear in contemporary illustrations of the holy union of the Byzantine Warrior-Emperor, Basil the First (867-886 CE) and his companion John.
Such same gender Christian sanctified unions also took place in Ireland in the late 12th and early 13th centuries, as the chronicler Gerald of Wales (‘Geraldus Cambrensis’) recorded.
9704420? ago
Have you read the book? I have not yet. Until then I reserve judgement on what he was saying and take others interpretations of his interpretations with a grain of salt.
I thought JewYorkTimes would've been more strongly pushing his case: http://www.nytimes.com/1994/06/11/us/beliefs-study-medieval-rituals-same-sex-unions-raises-question-what-were-they.html
On Gerald I find something about Kingly beatiality and this https://www.questia.com/library/journal/1G1-18529371/gerald-of-wales-topographia-hibernica-sex-and
SayWhatNOWAY ago
Ok Mika!
WhiteyWhiteman ago
Looks to me like they are lowering the age for the homo pedos that Canada seems to be full of. If they get the age lowered to 16, next it will be 14, etc. Look for the same thing come soon to the US.
BlackSwordsman ago
Canadian here. The age of consent in Canada was raised from 14 to 16 in 2007, however, anal sex remained the same. I'm all for crushing pedos, but all age of consent should be uniform. Having anal sex being higher than vaginal penetration doesn't make much sense to me. Personally, I'd be fore raising the age to 18. But uniformity should be the goal. Our education is actually quite a lot better in Canada than it is in the US. I don't mean for that to come off as an insult, but I understand it being 16 here. I lost mine when I was 17, a year before university, which doesn't seem to far off base.
bopper ago
Are you familiar w/ Waterloo University?
Narcissism ago
The age of consent in the UK is 16 for both straight and gay. Canada is owned by the Queen of England so I guess its fair to have the same laws.
Cheesebooger ago
I think he's a crypto jew. After this they will start talking about how "sex with children isn't bad at all" then they will try and legalize pedophilia the sick fucks
Votescam ago
From Australia to Ireland it is the Catholic Church which are the sexual abusers of children.
https://search.yahoo.com/search?p=Lates+in+Catholic+Church+sexual+abuse+of+children&fr=ush-mailn&fr2=p%3Aml%2Cm%3Asb
Cheesebooger ago
Rabbis are pretty bad pedo's too...
equineluvr ago
Of course he's a crypto Jew. If he weren't, he wouldn't be Prime Minister. :) ^
srayzie ago
Letters and numbers keep being added! I found this....
http://gender.wikia.com/wiki/Two-Spirit
http://acronyms.thefreedictionary.com/LGBTTIQQ2S
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=two%20spirited
Instead of confused, they are VERY confused. That I can tell you. (As Trump would say) 🙂
The list will continue to grow I'm sure. There is such a need from the liberals to have political correctness and we don't want to upset the little snowflakes.
readstuff ago
........all of whom the PIMMPIC commands us to respect. (That is the Pedophilic Intelligence Media Military Industrial Complex.)
SayWhatNOWAY ago
Omg! These LGBTSFAWJNMNOPR's are nothing more than mental cases!
srayzie ago
I agree! You can be labeled mentally ill for the smallest things but a man thinking he's a woman or vice versa is normal??
4_InquiringMinds ago
I hug trees (true story) bc I love them so that makes 2 spirit ambiguous bc in me is feminine and tree...I think we need to have a law clarifying just exactly what 2 spirit means :)
But I am not an ecosexual who has sex with the earth (or trees) so even further clarification needs to happen.
Maybe 2 F+T-E/2 M+T-E/2F+T+E/2M+T+E
Joking btw :)
Votescam ago
As we can all see, no one is more confused -- more emotionally immature or more ignorant than Trump!
Homosexuality was inconvenient for male-supremacist religions because it didn't generally provide for new members/procreation.
Before the coming of the "white" man, in Hawaii ... homosexuals and lesbians were held in high esteem and honor for their care of orphaned children.
If you're trying to prevent sexual abuse of children, you need to know that studies shown that it is MALES who are our sexual abusers o children and that they are heterosexual males. Heterosexual males are 100X more likely to sexually abuse a child than a homosexual male. If you want more info on that, let me know.
The term "political correctness" is a term invented by the right wing to suggest there is something wrong with overturning the abuse of homosexuals here in our schools, in our military and throughout society. This hatred and intolerance for homosexuals has long been preached by the Catholic church which itself has been one of the primary sexual abusers of children by its pedophile priests.
The Church itself has also sought to control not only the sexuality and sexual relationships of its own members, but of all of society. Including restricting of birth control/contraceptives in all of society up until the late 1960's -- !!
DonKeyhote ago
Hawaiians practiced ritual canmibalism too, sound familiar LOL you are the worst
srayzie ago
I don't know if I should feel bad for you and take it easy because you're confused. Or, just lay it out there.
You can throw out statistics all you want on who is most likely to be a pervert and abuse a child. Just like serial killers are more likely to be white men. That doesn't mean a man identifying as a woman is in some way helping the children. It doesn't mean that not wanting to be labeled as male or female will make someone any less likely to be a pervert.
No matter what gender someone wants to call themselves, if they have kid fantasies, it will come out no matter what gender someone wants to pretend to be. So, in other words, if someone has a penis, putting a dress on won't take away his pedophile urges. Coming out of the closet won't take away those urges either. So none of what you said makes sense when it comes to child abuse.
I have gay friends. But, once someone feels the need to start dressing like the opposite sex and chooses to go by a gender they are not, I think it's confusion or mental illness. You are born a male or a female. Period. That is reality.
I am not catholic so am not standing up for that religion when replying to your comment. I am not talking about a man made religious belief. But, yes we are a creation of God and HE made male and female.
Votescam ago
True -- males are responsible for the violence in our societies.
But your obsession with transgender issues seems to be the point of your main confusion.
And if you recall that Catholic priests all wear dresses, you have a lot of confusion to be obsessed with.
If you look at all history, males have always had the urge to dress as females.
How many women have told about finding their husbands trying on their clothing? How many comedy skits are based on MEN dressing up at women?. How many college performances are based on MEN dressing up at women?
Of course, these people are not experiencing a mental illness. Nature does make mistakes. They are simply people who find their very being is opposed to the gender assignment they've been given -- or in many cases where either the penis has descended or has not descended - they feel they are the opposite sex.
And sorry to disappoint you but there is no proof of any "god," leave alone just one.
srayzie ago
So, you don't believe in God, you blame males for the violence in societies and the heterosexual males for being the pedophiles.
But gays were held in high regard for caring for the orphans until the white man showed up? 🤔 If I came home and found my husband trying on my clothing, I would be VERY disturbed. You realize that it's odd behavior right?
I'm not obsessed with transgenders. This was a topic because of the never ending alphabet used to describe people that are confused. I can accept gay people. I can love everybody. But it doesn't mean I agree with them.
I can't imagine the future. People are going to be so confused. When they hit the real world, they won't be able to run to no safe space. If they get offended, they won't know how to deal with it. Where will "choice" end? Should we be able to start identifying as a different race? A different age? I mean seriously. You are what you are.
Being gay doesn't gross me out. It's being a tranny that is the weirdest part. Choosing to have sex with someone of the same sex is different to me than not accepting your own sex and playing dress up. Then think you should have more rights because of it. If someone wants to play dress up, they don't have the right to follow me to the woman's restrooms. It doesn't give them the right to encourage children to walk in their footsteps. They can keep their confused views on sexuality away from school.
I don't care what catholic priests wear. I'm not catholic. Many priests are pervs. I know. Men who wear kilts doesn't mean he's gay. It's a different culture. I'm talking about what someone identifies with. Not sitcoms. How you feel about God is up to you. If you believe we came from monkeys, that's your prerogative. But it all boils down to this. It's simple. If you are born with a penis, you are and will always be MALE.
I'm sorry but that's life.
Votescam ago
Note that even right wing women's groups (see Footnotes) agree that MALES are our sexual abusers of children. Of course Freud lied in his Oedipus Complex when he made the ridiculous suggestion that it is infants, toddlers and young children who are the sexual aggressors against fathers, grandfathers, uncles, male cousins -- and male friends of the family.
Also note this from the Footnotes ...
**Are children at risk for sexual abuse by homosexuals? Pediatrics. 94(1).p.44.
In an earlier study of convicted male child molesters in Massachusetts, none of the 175 men were found to have an exclusively homosexual adult sexual orientation or to be primarily attracted to other adult men.**
Here's one of the studies --
Votescam ago
srayzie --
Studies show that heterosexual males are our sexual abusers of children ... as much as you would like to ignore that information.
Is there some law that says everyone must believe in the "god"? No. Has anyone proved that there is a "god" or "gods"? No.
Look around you at the violence created by patriarchy ... destruction of nature, wars, violence against women.
You seem to have missed it, but the "odd behavior" I was pointing out to you is how often men LOVE to wear female clothing. (In the case of priests, of course, they do it because the original spiritual leaders were female.)
Where could AA's Americans run in the days of lynching?
Could they have used some of what right-wingers call "political correctness"?
Transgender isn't about "choice."
It's about the true identity of the individual being the opposite of their genitals.
Clearly, humans don't know who they are, though scientists seem to be making clear that we are hybrids. The native Americans called the white race the "pig people" because actually we are more pink that white ... maybe beige. But we're not "white."
If you consider things confused now where will your thinking being when it becomes clearer just how many Bisexuals exist in our society?
Homosexuality is NOT a "choice" any more than Transgenderism is a Choice...
Homosexuals/lesbians have only asked for Human rights -- including the right not to be beaten up or murdered because they love someone of the same sex -- the right to marry -- the right to have their spouse present if they are ill, the right for their same sex spouse to be entitled to health benefits and their Social Security spousal benefits.
Children have a right to their own sexual identities. If they are homosexual, then they have the right to live in peace, without being attacked either in school or in society.
And where homosexuals/lesbians have been so abused in our societies and even murdered, we all have the right and the responsibility to ensure that in future they will no longer be harassed and beaten.
It's strange that you imagine this is all "tyranny" against you personally.
No ... it's not that simple.
Obviously you don't realize that the model for life is female -- that all life beings as female -- and that the male genitals are formed from the same material that makes the vagina --
If a birth is to be male, then a penis descends, but there are many times when even that doesn't work right.
Many times the genitals are confusing even to doctors who sadly will make the decision on their own to call a birth either "male" or "female" when even the parents disagree.
Things don't always work the way people think they do.
:)
srayzie ago
I'm not trying to be mean because you have been pretty nice even tho we disagree. But, I think your way of thinking when it comes to gender is way off. We're not going to agree. Our beliefs are on the opposite ends of the spectrum. I'm a conservative and I do believe in God. I am the complete opposite of a liberal.
You seem to have problems with heterosexual men. As if it's bad to choose to be the gender you're born as. Like I said, I'm friends with a lesbian couple and have bisexual friends. But, when you have to keep adding letters and numbers to figure out which gender you want to identify as, that's a confused person. I know someone who won't go by he or a she. I won't play those games. I won't call her an "it", so she'll have to go to her safe space if she can't deal with that.
The only problem I have with gay people are the ones that have to shout it to the world and demand all these rights that make others uncomfortable. Like the whole bathroom thing. Liberal views on gender and sexual orientation do not belong in schools. We don't need hashtags like #FreeTheNipple. They are not the same.
Children are subjected to this influence before they reach puberty or even know what sex is. Can you imagine how confusing that is? Teenagers go thru periods while growing up where they are trying to figure out who they are. They lean a lot on who they look up to and idolize. Like celebrities! There is almost a push like being gay or transgender is "in" right now.
Since you don't believe in God, then maybe you believe in evolution. Even if that were the case, it is and always has been a male and female for the purpose of reproducing. That is natural. A mother and a father.
Our government really pushes the liberal homosexual view. It's a form of population control. 20 years from now you are going to have snowflakes that never learned how to deal and depend on the government for everything. They will continue to be brainwashed by the media into believing lies. Being manly will be a thing of the past so there won't be near as much fight against government corruption. Less children will be born because they are pushing same sex marriage and gender confusion.
Anyway, no matter what your views on how we all came to be, if a man chooses to become a woman or vice versa, it is not natural. I believe they are confused or it could be a mental illness. Like I said, we're not going to agree so there's no reason to keep going back and forth. We're both entitled to our own opinions.
Peace
Votescam ago
I wrote a reply to this the other day which I think has been lost -- I'll check again --
Votescam ago
srayzie --
Bear in mind that what I am telling you about pedophiles being heterosexual males isn't something I dreamed up -- you're not disagreeing with me, you're disagree with STUDIES of pedophiles.
Many people still believe in a "god." But most of our religion is male-supremacist religion which required a "god" in order to declare them superior. The RCC and its armies forced their religion upon other nations. It is only because of Separation of Church and State that we are not all forced to support male-supremacist religions. It's a guarantee of your right to freedom of thought, freedom of conscience and free will in decision making.
When you say you're "the complete opposite of a liberal" you're really not telling me what issues you do support. Social Security, Medicare, Public Education, Libraries, Medicaid, National Health Care for All...? Labor -- which we all are -- unions and the right to unionize? Human rights to shelter, water, clothing, health care?
Do you support these illegal wars of aggression by US? Regime Change?
Corporate ownership of our political parties and representatives?
MIC -- NSA spying on all of us and citizens and leaders all over the world?
I don't have problems with heterosexual males. I have problems with Elite patriarchy which our Founders created here. I have problems with male-supremacist religions.
It is not transgenders who are confused ... it is our society which has had so much information kept from them -- particularly about human sexuality where our society has been kept ignorant of homosexuality and Bi-Sexuality which were rarely ever mentioned in any common discourse in the past. We are now all learning about these things together. But there was certainly "Christian" teachings against homosexuality and vile propaganda against homosexuals by the Church which without question caused violence against homosexuals, even murder.
You seem to be suggesting that the issue isn't denial of human rights to others -- but the inconvenience it causes you. :) No one is demanding any rights that a heterosexual doesn't have. Personally -- I know men who HATE to use the men's rooms because they're so filthy!! That's the issue we should be working on. And, as far as I can see... "the whole bathroom thing" has been made an issue by right wing states/governors. We all need more bathrooms -- and we need CLEAN bathrooms -- that's what's important.
I have no idea what "Free the Nipple" is ... However, children cannot be taught that there is but one norm and that it is heterosexuality. They have to know that if they love someone of the same sex that it's OK, or if they are aware that they are attracted to both males and females that it is OK.
There is NO one in our schools suggesting to anyone that they come on their "team." They are simply being made aware that there are homosexuals in the world and Bi-sexuals.
Children are aware of their bodies long before school begins which is why sex education has to start early. Many children will ask very early on, "Where do babies come from." Often they are met with embarrassment on the part of the parents - and often lies.
It's always rather amusing to hear anyone continue to suggest that someone would chose homosexuality in a society that was in denial of it and which created many penalties for anyone who was homosexual -- And it's equally amusing now to see anyone suggest that someone would adopt a transgender life as something hip ... when one recognizes the pain, medications, doctor visits, surgery and other serious issues involved in that situation
Remember that the Bible relates that you were made "in their image." That suggests more than one "god" which was what was being taught before the one-god monopoly arrived. But, again, there is no proof of a god. Faith is not fact. I don't think evolution is the whole story -- I do think that we are likely hybrids -- i.e., that there was alien intervention probably hundreds of thousands of years ago -- and it has continued on. I do believe in universal spirituality. And Reincarnation. At which time you may come back as the opposite sex. Used to be that we supposed Reincarnation might be based in 100 lives or so, but now I read maybe a 1000 lives!! Don't know if you ever saw the movie, "Defending Your Life" which is a comedy based on reincarnation ... thought the "eating" part was really fun.
Life and love aren't necessarily based in procreation. And you seem to be in denial that any lesbian can have a child. All she needs is sperm and there are millions of ways to solve that problem. So can a homosexual male be a father ... by adoption, or by having a child of his own with a woman.
Children are surviving very well in families with single Mothers, though I do think that those Mothers make it a point to keep males in their children's lives by joint-custody and by having brothers or grandfathers to fill in.
Our government was forced by pressure from the whole of our population to provide human rights for homosexuals -- to STOP the violence against them -- and to approve of same sex marriage. Citizens responded to the homosexual campaign for human rights very positively and showed that they were sickened by the idea that "religious views" could convince parents to throw their homosexual children out of their homes. They would no longer stand idly by watching violence against homosexuals. And I think at this point we are heading towards 9 BILLION on the planet, so maybe your "god" is smarter than you are in providing homosexuals as "birth control."
We certainly do not have a government we can depend on for anything -- they are feeding us to the wolves. They will overturn every social responsible program that we have -- from unemployment insurance to Medicare. It took the right wing 60-70 years to overturn the New Deal, but they finally did it and no one is better off for it. We've entered a new Robber Baron Era.
Well if you think it's "manly" to go off to war, I'm sure the right wing will ensure that there will continue to be plenty of it to take the lives of our soldiers and others around the world. 1 million Muslims dead so far, victims of US war.
We haven't had leverage over our politicians -- or the ability to make them accountable -- since 1963. There is no power in the vote -- we have a corrupt political system owned by corporations and Elites.
And I sure as hell hope that "less children will be born" -- we might save the planet. Citizens here didn't even have the right to birth control until the late 1960's and the pill -- !! Catholic Church ensured that every sexual encounter resulted in children. Those days are over ... for now. Either Trump or Pence now have a solidly right wing Supreme Court to overturn reproductive freedom/abortion.
Again -- No one "chooses" to have identity issues where one feels very much female, but has male genitals.
Did you happen to watch SNOWDEN last night?
srayzie ago
I don't know why you want to continue this discussion. Your views are so off the wall. I do not believe in abortion either by the way. I did not watch Snowden last night.
There is no way your going to sway me to believe in any of the things you have said. I will correct you with this though... it's HIS, not their
Votescam ago
Clearly, if you believe in a male-supremacist "god" then you don't support female reproductive rights.
And someone's lying to you about that quote --
And here's the original story -- and the alibi suggesting that it was the "Trinity" at work ....
Thousands and thousands of years before male-supremacist religions and suggestion of one all powerful "god" there was the Old World Religions based in nature -- there was no Devil, no Satan, and no Hell which are the boogey-man investions of organized patriarchal religions to control their members through FEAR.
srayzie ago
Your way of thinking is really warped. God is a male supremacist? Wow. You really have a problem with males unless they are gay! It's not about supporting a woman's reproductive rights. It's about supporting the rights of the unborn. The defenseless child who never asked to be conceived in the first place. Where is that little persons rights? The heart starts beating at 21 days. A growing human with a soul. Creating that baby was a miracle in the first place.
I don't know where you are getting your "quotes". But, I get mine from the Bible. It takes a lot more faith to think we came from nothing than to believe in a creator.
The Bible shows very clearly that there is only one God, and yet that there are three personal distinctions in His complex nature, traditionally referred to as “three Persons in the Godhead”—God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit.
Each is distinct from the others but never acts independently. They are one in nature and purpose. This mystery is called the doctrine of the Trinity, though that term is not used in the Bible. The teaching, however, is present in seed form in the Old Testament and is revealed explicitly in the New Testament. Note passages such as Matthew 28:19; John 10:30, 14:26; 2 Corinthians 13:14.
Our finite minds cannot understand or explain this mystery of God, which is nevertheless a fact. We must accept the truths found in the Word of God by faith even though we ourselves cannot comprehend them fully; read Hebrews 11:1, 3, 6 and 1 Corinthians 2:5-10, 14; 13:12.
It is really not surprising that the infinite God should be complex in His nature beyond the ability of finite humans to comprehend!
Even tho I am female, I am not a feminist. I don't hate heterosexuals. We will never agree. You will not change my opinion in any way. So, I think this conversation is settled.
Votescam ago
Funny, I was just reflecting on how "warped" your views are.
What I've said to you is that organized patriarchal religions are based in male-supremacy ... which is not deniable. The Vatican has never acknowledged the full personhood of females as it acknowledges the full personhood of males. Same with the Mormon religion. And the Old Testament was written to cement patriarchy.
And you don't need to be male for you to be homophobic which you make clear once again.
You're female but not for female equality?
Of course you don't support reproductive freedom or abortion. How many children do you have?
You've never taken a birth control pill? Or used a condom?
The Bible is a book written by men, frequently changed, many parts thrown out and in total conflict with itself -- and other than that it's probably the most violent book ever written.
Keep in mind that what the Catholic Church has said about the Bible is that it is too "convoluted" to teach to members.
Vatican has also suggested that the "god" they have been teaching about may turn out to have been an alien and they'll have no problem with that.
When you say "must" you are making clear that you have succumbed to religious dictates . . . which is why organized patriarchal religions work desperately to overturn Separation of Church and State. However, remember that it is your guarantee of free thought, freedom of conscience, and free will -- though those options don't seem to have any importance to you.
Bye --
srayzie ago
I've said over and over I'm not catholic and I sure as heck am not Mormon. Of course I've taken birth control. I don't want to create babies only to murder them because they might be inconvenient at that point of my life. I wouldn't never say either way on rather or not I had children in a Pizzagate forum.
How about you tell me if you are male or female? Have you used birth control? Condom? Do you have kids? How many? Are you married? Gay? Lesbian? Transgender? I'm really curious about what sex you were born as because you sure seem confused in that area. I can only imagine your lifestyle. Yikes.
Votescam ago
I support female equality and birth control so the questions don't apply -- I support ALL forms of birth control -- and obviously I am female.
Think I recall this correctly -- two-third's of the pregnancies are unplanned and unintended -- but HALF of those pregnancies go forward and HALF are terminated in early abortions. THIS is why anti-birth control fanatics don't want more user-friendly birth control products and more effective birth control products -- or more available condoms for teenagers -- because they would lose that HALF of the unintended pregnancies which go to term.
You seem to be in denial as well that women have very valid reasons for abortions -- as you can see only 1/3rd of pregnancies seem to be planned or intended. Often birth control fails and often males don't want to use condoms. Additionally many of these pregnancies are among teenagers where they aren't yet educated on how pregnancies occur. Often the male is older and still ignorant about preventing a pregnancy.
I'm heterosexual and never made a "choice" about it -- have always been heterosexual.
Meanwhile, what you are recommending is that we go back to the days when men were handed a newborn and told that their wife was "dead" because only one life could be saved. People stopped going to Catholic hospitals when they realized what was being done but it went on a very long time.
The established life, of course, is the life to be considered and saved.
If abortion is overturned it will not change anything as we've seen before -- women will still have abortions and so will young girls at the very same rates, but more of them will die.
srayzie ago
Being anti birth control doesn't apply to me. For people who live in a developing country should always use birth control if they don't want to get pregnant. If 2/3rds of pregnancies are unplanned, that means a lot of people are being irresponsible. If people were to use it correctly, that would be cut by A LOT.
"A father being handed a newborn because his wife was dead and only one could be saved"... What does that have to do with abortion?
I've said over and over that I am NOT CATHOLIC. A lot of what you say doesn't apply to me.
I still see you saying that you're all about women's rights. What about the babies rights?
Having said all that, as much as it breaks my heart, I can understand why someone would do it in certain circumstances. Like rape. Or having the baby could kill the mother. But, for the majority, if a woman gets pregnant and can't take care of the baby, there is always adoption. Partial birth abortion or late term abortion is horrible and should NEVER be done.
Votescam ago
Just lost a post to you -- back later to reply --
Votescam ago
Eh ... if you're against abortion then you have to understand that also applies to the pill.
Actually, NATURE is pro-choice and had given women and their families many options on controlling reproduction. via plants and the knowledge of them. However, most of that knowledge and the plants themselves were destroyed by patriarchy. Plants are our medicines and our drugs and the model for ALL pharmaceuticals, but with many less side effects.
At any rate, these plants provided ways to control pregnancies, limit births, end fertility at anytime - and interrupt conception. Again -- Nature is pro-choice.
If you're against abortion, then you have to be against the PILL (as the anti-abortion right wing makes clear) because the PILL is based on old knowledge and ingredients where RU486 actually will prevent a fertilized egg from adhering to the lining of the womb and it is then flushed out of the woman's body. Anti-abortion fanatics consider this an abortion.
There are still some of these means of birth control and abortion still being used -- if I recall correctly RU486 may be based on papaya plant -- women in tropical areas used to eat papaya for 7 days to cause an aborting of a pregnancy. In early term, I would presume, because anything after the second trimester becomes dangerous to the life of the female.
That is why "late term abortions" require approval to protect the life of the female -- These are rare abortions -- only about ONE in every county of the US every year. And they occur most often because it was a wanted pregnancy which went wrong -- something wrong with the child which makes it undeliverable and likely short-lived, or something to do with the pregnancy which is threatening the life of the female. Often delivering a child with an abnormally enlarged head would so damage the woman's body that she would be unable to have other children.
Further on the insanity of this distrust of women, where NATURE actually puts all of her trust in women, is the reality that even in very recent times when abortion was illegal, there were cases like the actress Debbie Reynold's where she had a pregnancy where the child died in something like the 7th month and she had to walk around pregnant carrying a dead child and then finally go through an actual labor/delivery of the dead child at term. But NO abortion was permitted.
The insanity of all of this becomes even clearer when we learn that some time later, Debbie Reynolds became pregnant again and this time the child died even earlier in the pregnancy and again no abortion was permitted. Later, of course, it was discovered that the second pregnancy was doomed because the first dead child pregnancy where she had to carry the dead child around for months and months had so depleted her health that she was unable to carry the next pregnancy to term. But again this second pregnancy had to be carried to term so that she had to go through labor again and deliver another dead child.
Of course, there is the occasional situation where there is a third trimester abortion done on a 10 or 11 year old girl who was the victim of incest by her father -- sometimes these children come to the US where they can still receive an abortion here. But -- you'd deny that abortion, as well, I imagine.
As for you personal comments --
** If 2/3rds of pregnancies are unplanned, that means a lot of people are being irresponsible. If people were to use it correctly, that would be cut by A LOT. **
Whatever happened to "Thou shalt not judge?" Actually we do not have 100% effective birth control whether the pill or the sponge or the condom or anything else. And there are many side-effects which accompany these and other forms of birth control. Plus, there is still male dominance and many women still find themselves in positions where the male doesn't want her to use birth control to prevent a pregnancy, or the male refuses to have a vasectomy, or to use a condom. PLUS many women can't afford the PILL -- and you do recall that Planned Parenthood is under attack and being defunded?
**"A father being handed a newborn because his wife was dead and only one could be saved"... What does that have to do with abortion? **
I told you that story because it is about the dangers of male-supremacy and male dominated religions which have mind-sets that the newborn is of higher value than the female host ... though that woman (and the many more like her) may have not only been wives but mothers to other children they cared for. They may have had homes and responsibilities, or even a job to keep the family going.
But this is the mind-set of too often of our 90% male Congress and our male-dominated religions -- that it is the newborn who is to be saved and NOT the female.
You ask WHY should you be concerned? Mainly because "No man is an island -- and neither is any woman."
The Catholic Church also has great influence over our government -- we have a huge percentage of Catholic members of Congress. Also the Catholic Church and the Mormon Church funded the anti-ERA movement with "tax-exempt" dollars.
The UN has accorded the Vatican the privilege of a "Sovereign Nation" at the United Nations which gives them great influence over worldly political issues -- many issues having to do with females. Even though this is a "nation" of only one square mile made up ONLY of males.
These are things we should all be concerned with.
A fetus is dependent upon the female for survival - her body, her choice. And, again, the majority of these pregnancies take place in first few weeks of the pregnancy. If you consider a wanted pregnancy and a child which is negatively impacting the health and life of the female ... then the question you have to answer is does the female have the right to self-defense?
Also consider that if a woman delivers a male child at birth then that male will have rights under our Constitution which the Mother does not have as she does not have equality under our Constitution.
If you are able to make allowances for certain situations such as rape and incest, then you would certainly make allowances for a 10 or 11 year old girl, perhaps? Or for a woman threatening to kill herself should she have to carry a pregnancy to term? Or for a woman who finds her husband cheating on her and herself pregnant while she must take responsibility for other children and earn a living? Or for a pregnant woman who's husband is killed and she has children to care for and finds herself pregnant?
Adoption? Until recently, women had no expectation of every seeing that child again -- even in adulthood. But times did mercifully change to some degree. And, knowing the chances of children being abused in homes where they are adopted, would that stop you?
Obviously, you read nothing that I said about "late term abortion" which is called "partial birth abortion" by right wing propagandists to make it sound like something it isn't -- PLEAS re-read what I said about late-term abortion and understand that the purpose of abortion is to abort the child. The practice where the fetus is brought further down the birth canal is done so as not to further damage the body of the woman - and to preserve her ability to become pregnant again and have a healthy child. If you force one of these late abortions to be done by labor/natural delivery rather than by breaking up the fetus ... then you are damaging the health and life of the female.
Sadly, too many males in our society allegedly treasure the life of a newborn over the life of a living, breathing female with an established life. Until it is time to aid children and then they disappear. We have 43 million Americans living in poverty in the US today as we are constantly being reduced to a third world nation by the right wing. And we have the highest levels of child poverty in the world. Little proof that anyone in our government or Congress gives a fig about the life of a child AFTER it is born.
Meanwhile, if you want females to be responsible for their own lives and those they take care of then birth control and abortion are necessary for them to be able to do that.
Partial birth abortion or late term abortion is horrible and should NEVER be done.
srayzie ago
Yes I can be against abortion and still believe in birth control. Nature came from God. You're crazy! Move on. Your conversation with me is becoming weirder and weirder.
Votescam ago
No -- because birth control in the form of the PILL is abortion.
There is no proof of a "god" ... a one "god" or a world or hereafter of many "gods."
Faith is not fact.
And I don't think you really want to do any hard thinking about these things. Easier to just accept what you've been told.
Meanwhile, onward to more research.
Bye --
eucalyptus_spearmint ago
If i could upvote this post x 1000 I would.
srayzie ago
Thank you. :)
eucalyptus_spearmint ago
You're welcome. And I find Votescam's demonization of heterosexual males particularly telling. Also particularly disingenuous. If there's any data about homo males being less likely to be pedophiles, the statistics were probably collected by a liberal corrupt think tank. People have a short memory. Milo Yiannopolous, anyone?
srayzie ago
I know. I don't get why he/she demonizes a heterosexual male. i'm not trying to sound mean, but I can't imagine the lifestyle of this person lol. Yikes!
EricKaliberhall ago
So Hillary is in a category of her own?
rogerdirters ago
Is this something like Scientology and Thetans?
rodeo13 ago
We need to start melting the snowflakes.
BlowjaySimpson ago
I think you misspelled "mentally retarded" a bunch.
DammitMoonMoon ago
They're fucking confused because adults are pressuring them into these things before they're even old enough to understand what it is they are being pressured into. This is the most absurd, unbelievable bs I've ever read. My mind is blown, seriously.
Canada, wtf are you guys doing up there?
BlowjaySimpson ago
I'm not Canadian, but it looks like they are putting an express lane for the kids to get to the pedos.
rodeo13 ago
Exactly. Confuse the kids so they don't know wtf is up & then abuse them at will.
AssFaceSandwich2 ago
The consent age doesn't need to be lowered, but this stupid and unenforceable law needed to go "The report recommended repealing the Criminal Code ban on anal sex". Should the government be in your bedroom? If your wife said yes, you would be in there, I'm sure.
Votescam ago
Agree on that -- in fact, 18 might be more preferable as an age of consent, but of course how would it be enforceable by parents? You might prevent more sexual relationships between 16 year old girls and guys four and five years older which often result in pregnancies -- probably because the guys themselves are immature and ignorant -- but what other complications of doing that might arise?
We always need more sex education -- and earlier. And teaching something about these earlier relationships where they can be a lot of pressures on young people within the relationship -- but also peer pressure from outside.
Weirdly enough, anal sex is very popular in countries which are Catholic because it prevents pregnancies.
Think birth control/contraceptives would be a better alternative, however.
Sodomy laws have always been unrealistic because they are directed primarily at gays....
As I recalled it, it was Scalia who stood in the way of overturning all of US sodomy laws ..... Here's a search page on it -- https://search.yahoo.com/search;_ylc=X3oDMTFiN25laTRvBF9TAzIwMjM1MzgwNzUEaXRjAzEEc2VjA3NyY2hfcWEEc2xrA3NyY2h3ZWI-?p=US+overturned+its+sodomy+laws%3F&fr=yfp-t&fp=1&toggle=1&cop=mss&ei=UTF-8 Since then, they've been overturned state by state. Don't have time to actually read all of it right now.
Also, as we all learn about these subjects together, we need to know what physical dangers there may be involved with anal sex either for a male or a female. The rectum is a rather necessary organ throughout life -- and no sense destroying it at age 18.
icuntstopswearing ago
https://m.imgur.com/r/NSFWFunny/gCsYqg6
carmencita ago
WHAT?
UnicornAndSparkles ago
I'm guessing the picture means anal = birthday treat 😂
carmencita ago
Yes, could be. But who is the treat for? Probably the giver and not the receiver.
AssFaceSandwich2 ago
Plenty like to receive nice treats.
carmencita ago
Women are pleasers and many times say yes to please their partners. That is all I am saying. There is also something bad about it as well. There has been info on here about injecting the outcome into the spine, if I am getting that right and it can cause serious illness. Just a warning and something people should worry about. It is something to look into.
bikergang_accountant ago
Meh, I wouldn't. Anal is hyped. By the porn industry, by gays, by shitposters that want to look cool. There's really nothing attractive about it.
AssFaceSandwich2 ago
To each their own. With consent, of course.
abattoirdaydream ago
I think the motivation is to encourage spite to enter relationships. At least in hetro relationships.
Part of the desire, and encouragement of anal is that since it is taboo, for obvious reasons, and since it comes with greater risk to both partners, it also comes with a certain amount of spite attached to it. Particularly when a perfectly good vagina is available. Look at how it is talked about.
No not everyone, all of the time, but for many people, much of the time.
Cheesebooger ago
I don't understand why a man would want to stick it in a woman asshole when she has a perfectly good vagina. I think it may be a little dick thing.
eucalyptus_spearmint ago
Lol. I've always said this. It may also be about demeaning the woman or causing pain. 😕
seekingpeace ago
There are those that believe that the eye of horus = the anus.
Cheesebooger ago
lol I'm sure you're joking but the eye of horus means that there are jew eyes everywhere
rodeo13 ago
Not a joke. The elites are all about the Babylonian mystery religions. They believe that anal sex somehow stimulates the pineal gland, which opens the "third eye". It's f'd up sh*t. Literally.
Cheesebooger ago
I didn't know that. Thanks for the info. I guess that explains why so many jews are into fudge packing
carmencita ago
Yes, I have no problem with two consenting adults, but just assuming every woman would want this just because a man does, is really going too far. I can make up my own mind, thank you.