Very good response, BTLN.

In effect, your gripe might be parsed as “where do you draw the line”?

There is debate (in serious circles) as to whether nappies were invented to contain foul smelling excretions or to stop babies masturbating. So where you draw the line?

I say if it is natural it is ok and if it is unnatural the “chances are” it’s not.

Clear enough for you?

The “American people” need to put their priorities in check. Sexual sobriety gives no indication of character other than promiscuous people tend to be more inclined to take “risks”.

My dear departed father gave me some advice on “types” to avoid like the plague. Unsurprisingly that contradicts your standard mould and points are, in no particular order, as follows:

a) Celibates

b) Teetotallers

c) Over-zealous

As for paedophilia, I see that (and I iterate again) as an attack on sovereign individuality. The arrack isn’t directed at adults. The SYSTEM targets “promiscuous children’ (who may or may not be adult depending on your determination as to what “adult” is) and “punishes” adults (per their “brand”) that dare to deny its power.

If a young person decides (against all advice) they are going to engage in sexual activity, that is their sovereign right. In this case, sovereign rights conflict with legal rights because the law is an ass vainly determined to uphold whatever idealistic standards are proposed by designate controllers (or whip masters, might be a better term).

You may or may not be aware of my seamless connection to, I’ll call them, “cosmic forces”. Our excuse for science blusters with authority about things it cannot understand. Light, for instance, is barely represented by the puny bandwidth we call “the spectrum”. “Light beings” (from which bandwidth I cannot affirm) presented some information to me via an intermediary.

They said, succinctly, that the most important body chakra of the human being is the base chakra. That is the one that happens to govern sexuality and it’s there pre-birth (i.e. it doesn’t mystically appear at “18” or whenever the fudge-heads decide adulthood is “appropriate”). Our sexuality is also our life potence, so a sexually potent human is a life potent one. Conversely any attack on sexuality is an attack on the libido. That’s how the powers behind the SYSTEM turn you into snivelling little slaves.

Get it?

If you do, yours will be a merry Christmas.

P.S. the message crashed TWICE, so I had to rewrite the whole thing in word. This might sound really “nutty” (as in “off to the funny farm with this guy”) or “over-paranoid”, but the information I have provided so conflicts with the (extra-terrestrial) agenda of those that underlie the powers behind the system, it will be interesting to see whether this comment will “make it”…..;-)

There does seem to be something theocratic about the age of consent, like it’s the state’s version of abstinence before marriage. Age 18 adulthood and the invention of the teenager is a rather recent phenomenon, is it not? America’s Puritan roots contribute to making it a particularly deranged, hypocritical and contradictory place when it comes to sex (e.g. the average age of virginity loss vs. the monstrously overblown sex-offender registry, mostly populated with people who, while “age of majority”, had a relationship with someone who was at or above the aforementioned average age.) Of course other places, like Canada, are not far afield in some respects, as Tom Flanagan found out (see, http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/jonathan-kay-on-tom-flanagan-a-media-mobbing-victim-tells-his-tale).

Addressing what Jon said directly, why would “the boy” want to get on the stand and “tell his story”? He himself went on Grindr and wound up where he did, apparently on purpose. Why would he want to tell people in a courtroom about his gay encounter with a much older man and his meth-head pal? “We’ve decided you’re a victim, so please come and humiliate yourself so we can prosecute our laws of “felony sodomy””? That said, sure, Bean’s connections wouldn’t go unnoticed.

We have the same old slanderous accusations bubbling beneath the surface turning reason, logic and liberty into a grand chess game. The rules are “black and white”. Innocence, sexual abstinence are inextricably linked to social obedience and “purity”. Per this Puritan idealism, the most pure never have intimate sex and, consequentially, it was thought (for a long time) that priests, in their capacity as “God’s ambassadors”, should remain celibate. They didn’t have to be particularly good. Not having sex was sufficient for purity.

Puritans are cut-down Pharisees and “utopian” New World Order is Zionism (it may have been Rosicrucian-ism, but the Catholics lost – “sort of”). You regularly take umbrage at “big brother” group squashing individual voices. Big brother is Zionism; atheism with bubble and squeak coating.

I notice this article featured yet another sexual “minor”. To your credit, you didn’t overplay the pedo “angle” (highlighted and UNDERLINED). Wow and this one refuses (highlighted and UNDERLINED) to “confess”. Confess what? He hooked a politician, was well paid and well looked after? Maybe he can “cash in” some more? But blame game, slander and “false association” is what makes the American people the American people. The same insane American people expect a “level” political playing field (or chess board).

Now you know the problem. Going round and round in giant circles will NEVER fix it.

Best
OT

https://www.amazon.com/Barack-Obama-Larry-Sinclair-Cocaine/dp/0578013878