Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules - You must read(Updated!)

DISCLAIMER

You agree to NOT use this site or its affiliated sites, services you may have access to as a result of being a member here (subscriber or otherwise), to post items (images, textual material, etc.) that are pornographic in nature, illegal in the United States and/or the country you reside in, support or encourage illegal activities (e.g., terrorism), advertise for your own personal profit, or send unsolicited messages (i.e. SPAM) to members or non-members.

AND

You agree that if any clause or component of this document is found to not be legally binding in a court of law of proper jurisdiction then the remainder of this document shall remain fully binding and in full force.

AND

You agree to NOT hold Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (makers of the forum software), uspoliticsonline.com, sites affiliated with uspoliticsonline.com, its administrators, its moderators, others associated with its operation, and its owners liable for any and all of the following (in whole or in part):
Personal insults/attacks by other members.
The content posted by other members, whether directed at you personally or a label/classification you associate with. This includes remarks you consider to be libelous or slanderous in any way.
Any financial or time loss due to your participation here or as a result of something you read at this site, including posts/PMs by other members and feature(s)/software available at the domain uspoliticsonline.com.
The dissemination of any personal information about you as a result of either your negligence (e.g. staying logged into a computer that others have access to) or willingness to post such information on a public and or private forum, private message or chat box. This includes using your real name or other details that could allow other members and/or the general public to determine your true identity. You are prohibited from using your real name on these forums, either as your username or in posts / PMs you write.

FORUM RULES, IN ADDITION TO THE DISCLAIMER

1. These rules apply to all sections of USPOL, including public and private forums, blogs, and visitor messages.

2. You cannot attack and/or personally insult someone. You cannot bait other forum members; this includes referring to posters by derogatory terms. Please, remain courteous and respectful to all forum members at all times. You agree to take responsibility for reporting such posts when you come across them. Please, use the ignore feature if need be. Any member who intentionally and continually posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response, or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion, may be regarded as a “troll” by staff, and have their account suspended or banned.

3. You cannot harass (sexually or otherwise) other members. This includes malicious, slanderous, or defamatory comments. If you are not sure if something you write is inappropriate or not then don't say it. Err on the side of caution.

4. Copying and Pasting Articles, and Starting New Threads. You cannot simply cut and paste in posts or when starting threads. You MUST provide the identifying information (source, author, date, and URL). You must also offer some original thoughts along with the cut and paste. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts from the article. Excerpts really shouldn’t be more then a paragraph or two. Furthermore, if you use images or other copyrighted material in your posts or signature you must have permission of the copyright holder unless you know for a fact that the image is in the public domain. In addition:
a. It must include the identifying information; e.g., where available, the author, the publication, the date, the URL.
b. The member must offer some context, including: How did you hear of this article? What is your opinion? Why is it important to you? Why should it be important to forum readers? The more context you provide, the more you assist others in gauging the excerpted information's significance.
c. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts, not the whole thing or even the majority of the whole thing to encourage people to read the entire article.

A violation of any of the above will result in the deletion or closing of the post or thread and could earn you a warning or suspension. If you have any questions concering any of the above please PM a moderator and we will be happy to clarify.

5. You cannot post the same thing in multiple forums. You must not open similar threads about the same or a similar topic. You cannot spam the board or send unsolicited messages to members via PM, email or any other means.

6. Do not post off-topic. You cannot derail a thread with off topic posts.

7. You cannot shout in posts. This includes posting in all CAPS, bold, lIkE tHiS, and extra large font. Posts should also be one color, although you may use an additional color for highlighting ideas you wish to address.

8. You may not alter quotes in a way that misrepresents what was originally said.

9. Multiple accounts are not allowed. If you are found to have more than one account all accounts will be permanently terminated.

10. You cannot have a user name, avatar, signature, or post images that are deliberately offensive. That includes the display of overly explicit or graphic images that may not be suitable for minors.

11. Signatures can not have more than three lines of text, with a font size no larger than "4", and no more than two font colors. Images in signatures cannot be any larger than 800 pixels wide x 200 pixels tall. Animated images are not allowed.

12. You are prohibited from taking any action to disturb the use of the services by others, distribute material that contains viruses, spyware or any other malicious code or harmful programs. This includes interfering with the working of the network, attempts to gain unauthorized access to a service or other computer systems that are part of the site or any other site, by use of the available services.

13. Discussion of moderation actions in public and/or private forums is not permitted. Moderation actions include warnings, suspensions and the editing or deletion of posts. If a member has a concern about a moderation action, he or she is invited to address it with the board staff via Private Message. This rule exists to protect the privacy of all posters with regards to disciplinary action. The moderator team will never publicly discuss the warnings/suspensions of any posters, and we ask that you return the favor, whether about yourself or another poster. Posting about moderation actions in the public forums constitutes a violation. You are free to discuss a moderation action via Private Message with the moderator involved, but you may not harass or abuse the moderators (as already specified in the forum rules). In practical terms, this means that once a moderator tells you his or her decision is final, no further PMs about that moderation action are permitted. If you have a concern about a moderation action, you are free to appeal to a Forum Administrator via Private Message. You may only discuss moderator activities or discussion of moderation with staff member if you chose to private message and are not under any circumstances allowed to use the PM function to forward or promote moderator discussion in regards to specific forum action, amongst other regular members. Administrators do reserve the right to read said PMs and may do so ; if that results in discovery of messaging between posters of such moderator discussion then it will lead to the same violation being received for discussing said moderator actions on the forum. If you receive a message to the effect of having been given moderator information, please report it to a member of staff. Engaging back in that discussion with the original violator will earn you just as stiff a sanction.

14. Do not ignore moderators or administrators. Do not repost something a moderator or administrator has deleted. You cannot have moderators or administrators on your ignore list.

15. Only post in English. Short passages in foreign languages may be acceptable if its use seems helpful for the ongoing discussion and when there is no indication of a potential violation of the forum rules. Always provide a translation into English in such cases. In case of doubt, the incident will be regarded as a violation, no matter of the actual meaning of the foreign language text.

16. The use of words/comments etc. written by other posters, without approval of the poster in your personal signature is not allowed nor are references, by name, to other posters allowed.

17. Please pay attention to announcements by Forum staff that will be found in the "Welcome! / News & Announcements" forum from time to time.

18. Use of "liar", "lies", "lying", etc. Accusing someone of being a "liar" or similar accusations towards other posters will generally be regarded as implying an insult and therewith as a violation of the forum rules. "I question the validity of your statement because...", "That's not the truth" or "you are wrong about that" are sufficient for any decent discussion if you want to disagree with somebody's assertions.

19. Thread opening restriction for new members. In order to control SPAM, new members must have moderator approval to start their own threads.

20. Thread titles must relate to the discussion within. Do not make misleading titles, or titles such as "Guess what..." or "You'll never believe this...". Members need to be able to identify the general gist of the thread via the title. Profanity in thread titles is not permitted.

21. Forum members are instructed to use forum tools and abilities for their intended purposes and no other. If members identify a forum glitch or weakness of any kind that allows you to see or do something you know you shouldn't, please report it. Being aware of any unintended access to the Forum and failing to take appropriate steps to notify staff of said access issues, will create a presumption of seeking to take advantage of the issue, will result in either account suspension, or banishment.

22. Any link to a site that contains graphic content, must contain a warning describing what a person might reasonably expect to view if they click on said link. No graphic pictures are to be posted on the Forum.

23. Threats or advocations of violence toward a public figure, or member of the Forum, will not be tolerated. Conversation about revolution or the like is not prohibited by this rule; directly calling for violence is, eg “It's time to kill every <redacted> that voted for the bill,” is not permitted.

24. Accounts with no posts will be deleted after 30 days. Inactive accounts with low post histories may be deleted after one year.

25. Private forums are something offered to members that decide to contribute directly to this site via donations. These donations help immensely in keeping this site up and running. Private forums are designed to allow the contributing member discuss whatever he/she wants to and to have the power to direct that discussion in whatever way he/she chose. They were not designed nor are they intended for simply talking trash about members that don't have access to the forum. While the targeted members cannot see the forum or the comments, it creates a negative atmosphere that really isn't necessary. If you want to totally rip apart ideas, ideologies, political parties, etc. that is fine. We simply ask that you don't use the private forums as a means to attack other members that aren't privy to such comments. It is difficult enough to have a political discussion forum because the discussion of politics is inherently heated as people are so passionate about their beliefs...the ones that take the time to come to such a site in the first place at least. The idea of private forums is so people of similar political persuasions can discuss whatever they want without fear of being attacked. Nonetheless, we hope that a certain level of maturity would foster itself within such an arena and not simply lend itself to a bashing forum.

Private Forums are governed by all of the above Forum rules. In addition:
  • Private forums that essentially become abandoned homes will be subject to deletion, donation or reorganization. Just like elsewhere in life, clubs sometimes lose their vitality and purpose for a myriad of reasons. If it becomes clear that a private forum has clearly lost its vitality and nobody is going to really use it anymore, owners are advised to consider whether to reuse the forum for something new and productive rather than let them linger or notify the Administration that the forum should be rearranged for other purposes, closed, merged with other compatible private forums, donated to others for new purposes, etc. Do not be concerned that your forum must be a membership and post count race with others to avoid falling under this policy; the question is whether your forum has actual vitality instead of being 'brain dead.'
  • Additionally, private forums may only be owned by subscribed members in the Platinum or Diamond categories.
  • Should the owner of a private forum be banned, quit USPOL or otherwise abandon the forum the PF will be transferred to another owner or closed.
  • Propriety of private forums. Administration staff will determine the desirability of a proposed private forum and enact any conditions upon it to ensure its purpose is productive.
  • Any and all instances of sharing accounts by allowing someone else to log in under their own account so they can see into private forums for which they are otherwise not permitted to access, will be deemed violation of the double account rule and all caught doing so will be permanently banned.
  • Relaying private forum posts and information to other posters who are not members of the particular private forum for any negative or destructive purpose (eg mean-spirited gossip, fueling interpersonal disputes, etc), is not permitted, and will constitute a violation of the Forum rules.
  • For purposes of monitoring USPOL Terms of Service Administrative staff (not Moderators) will have access to Private Forums.
  • All Private Forums must have at least one active Administrator as a member for purposes of handling issues which cannot be addressed through moderation permissions.
  • Discussion of moderation activities is prohibited on the open site and is likewise prohibited in Private Forums.

26. The administrators and moderators reserve the right to edit and/or delete a post,and/or close a thread, and/or delete a thread at any time if of the opinion that the post is too obscene, inappropriate, or the discussion has run its course.

27. 'Back seat moderating' is not allowed. If you take issue with another poster's contribution to the forum, you're welcome to report any posts you think are out of line, but you should not bring it up publicly within the forum.

28. Images in posts (whether embedded or hot linked) must be reasonable in size. 800x800 should be considered a good rule of thumb. Excessively large images make it difficult for users on mobile devices to load pages. If necessary please simply link to very large images using the URL tags. In addition, the following images are not permitted (including, but not limited to pages with images or videos containing):
  • Strategically covered nudity
  • Sheer or see-through clothing
  • Lewd or provocative poses
  • Close-ups of breasts, buttocks, or crotches

29. Any solicitation or communication involving sports betting / gambling / online casinos / bookies and or internet based card or slot machine systems or sites will lead to all said content being physically removed from the site and server, and will lead to any and or all parties involved being permanently removed and banned from the site to the farthest extent possible. This includes any links to any form of bookmaker, casino, any type of game or match or event where money transfers on the outcome or link of any sort to wire act violations and or anything in violation of either the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, or the Federal wire Act. This applies not only to the open forum but all and or any chat rooms, articles, private messages and or private forums. All content that violates this rule will be deleted, without notice.

CONSEQUENCES

Failure to comply with any of the forum rules may result in your posts being edited or deleted and/or your account being temporarily or permanently banned from the forums. U.S. Politics Online uses a warning system that generates an automated Private Message to members when they are in violation of Forum rules. The decision to issue a warning is left to the discretion of the moderator or administrator handling the violation. If a member does not agree with an action taken by a moderator, they can appeal to an administrator after seeking clarification from the moderator who issued the warning/infraction and appealing to them in the first instance. Members MAY NOT harass a moderator or administrator by sending excessive PMs when they are discussing an appeal.

Violations are assigned a point value. Points are valid for 30 days. When a members earns 10 points, their account will be automatically suspended: five (5) days for a first suspension; ten (10) days for a second suspension; and twenty (20) days for a third suspension. If a member incurs an additional 10 points after having served three periods of suspension, then they will be permanently banned from the Forum.

Point values are as follows:
Zero (0) points – Warning
Two (2) points - Minor infraction / Non post infraction (minor) / Off topic posts / spamming
Four (4) points - Academic dishonesty / Baiting / Discussing moderator or administrator actions / Implying an insult / Minor insults / Moderate infraction / Non-post infraction (moderate) / Thread dumping
Six (6) points - Direct insult at another member / major infraction / Non-post infraction (major)
Ten (10) points - Act of criminality, or advocating thereof

The administrators and moderators also bear the right to issue warnings, temporarily suspend or ban posters for continued trolling or other serious misconduct (eg. professional spamming) even if the poster has not yet reached the maximum warning points or suspensions level. Other options if the above consequences do not seem adequate include placing the member in a moderation queue, which means all posts will have to be approved before they are posted to the board.

PRIVACY POLICY

All information obtained by the end user via the registration process is for internal purposes only and will not be sold to or shared with any third parties. However, if the end user participates in illegal activities and a court of proper jurisdiction orders U.S. Politics Online to release certain information about said user then we will act according to the law. Furthermore, no information will be released on threat of a lawsuit, attempted or actual intimidation, or due to any other reason except as notated in the first sentence of this paragraph. Nonetheless, keep in mind that the information we do have is very limited and generally only consists of the IP address a member uses.

SUBSCRIPTIONS

U.S. Politics Online offers several subscription plans to help cover the operational costs of the site. As a thank you for your donation, you will receive special added benefits meant to enhance your U.S. Politics Online experience. Plans vary in price, starting at only $0.05/day, and benefits vary with the price. Benefits include ability to go straight to new posts, to search the forum, larger avatar, private forums, invisible mode, photo gallery, email, web hosting, and no advertisement banners. Please, click here for more details.
See more
See less

Why Republicans love Roy Moore

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • OldmanDan
    replied
    Originally posted by radcentr View Post
    Sometimes the purge happens based on who is in power. Dems sending GOP lawyers up the river by the handful during Watergate, or the GOP ending careers inside the Clinton WH. It can get lop-sided, I get your point.

    The advantage with our current situation is the "scorched earth" aspect. It takes down several clowns on both sides of the aisle, and it goes into state gov't and private sector (fe Hollywood) as well. Bad news for bad actors, but it is only bad news for the rest of us if it goes into "automatic kill" mode, similar to Joseph McCarthy's excess.
    It is obviously already in the kill mode. Nobody ever proved anything in the Roy Moore case. It was all simply allegations. I guess if you pay enough women to say something, it suddenly becomes proof. Gloria Alred is the payoff person and her daughter Lisa Bloom is following in mom's footsteps.

    David Brock from Media Matters Was Behind Lisa Bloom Effort To Bring Forward Sexual Harassment Claims Against Trump

    Ms. Bloom would not identify the donors. But two Democrats familiar with the arrangements said a nonprofit group founded by Mr. Brock, American Bridge 21st Century Foundation, gave $200,000, while the fashion entrepreneur Susie Tompkins Buell, a major donor to Mr. Brock’s suite of groups, gave $500,000 to Ms. Bloom’s firm for the last-ditch effort. […]

    Mr. Brock declined to comment, and representatives from Mrs. Clinton’s campaign said they were unaware of his work with Ms. Bloom.
    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017...-claims-trump/

    Leave a comment:


  • Captain Trips
    replied
    Originally posted by radcentr View Post
    Sometimes the purge happens based on who is in power. Dems sending GOP lawyers up the river by the handful during Watergate, or the GOP ending careers inside the Clinton WH. It can get lop-sided, I get your point.

    The advantage with our current situation is the "scorched earth" aspect. It takes down several clowns on both sides of the aisle, and it goes into state gov't and private sector (fe Hollywood) as well. Bad news for bad actors, but it is only bad news for the rest of us if it goes into "automatic kill" mode, similar to Joseph McCarthy's excess.
    Agreed. We can only hope that this purge as you call it, effectively cleans out so many of the liars and creeps that have infected so much of "govt." at all levels.

    Leave a comment:


  • radcentr
    replied
    Originally posted by Captain Trips View Post

    This of course depends on who happens to be defining "moral decay" at the time & in the circumstances.

    Also, much depends on who committed the crime and what it was, as to how our "media" decides to cover it. .. or cover it up.

    It's always interesting to note the differences in how some crimes are ignored or covered up for some, and others go straight to jail.

    Strange in these days when "equality" is supposedly so important to us.

    "Equality under the law" is an absolute farce.
    Sometimes the purge happens based on who is in power. Dems sending GOP lawyers up the river by the handful during Watergate, or the GOP ending careers inside the Clinton WH. It can get lop-sided, I get your point.

    The advantage with our current situation is the "scorched earth" aspect. It takes down several clowns on both sides of the aisle, and it goes into state gov't and private sector (fe Hollywood) as well. Bad news for bad actors, but it is only bad news for the rest of us if it goes into "automatic kill" mode, similar to Joseph McCarthy's excess.

    Leave a comment:


  • Captain Trips
    replied
    Originally posted by radcentr View Post
    That's just the obvious stuff. Paid extortionists can sometimes be found out, sometimes the evidence is too strong to deny (like the "sexting" idiots). Moore was also sanctioned by Alabama supreme court for ethics violations, but I realize that purging bad actors for political/legal violations would be piling hope on top of itself. Moore didn't seem to have trouble with the sanctions, instead he ran into trouble when it got to the pedophile and other sexual harassment allegations.

    In the meantime, the moral scandals will take center stage. Since moral decay is a good indicator of criminal behavior, it should serve as a guide on "who to look for" on the purge list.
    This of course depends on who happens to be defining "moral decay" at the time & in the circumstances.

    Also, much depends on who committed the crime and what it was, as to how our "media" decides to cover it. .. or cover it up.

    It's always interesting to note the differences in how some crimes are ignored or covered up for some, and others go straight to jail.

    Strange in these days when "equality" is supposedly so important to us.

    "Equality under the law" is an absolute farce.

    Leave a comment:


  • radcentr
    replied
    Originally posted by Captain Trips View Post

    It's over - Ol' Roy lost LOL

    What I don't like about any of this;

    ...now if we don't care for a politician running for office, all we need is to find some people from his or her area of residence in the past, willing to tell tales of "sexual misconduct" of some sort. Be it improper fondling, sexual harassment, unwanted advances, he/she "touched me & I felt uncomfortable" - whatever. Make something up, no reason or need to prove anything...

    ....it can even be 30 or 40 years ago !! LOL Get it spread from hell to breakfast in the media and ....

    ... that candidate is effectively destroyed !

    Think "republicans" are too "clean" or "moral" to sink to the demonic levels democrats used ???????

    Faith brother faith... I hope you have a LOT of faith !!! I'm a believer !!! Are you a believer too ????

    Remember, two can play these kinds of nasty games folks !
    That's just the obvious stuff. Paid extortionists can sometimes be found out, sometimes the evidence is too strong to deny (like the "sexting" idiots). Moore was also sanctioned by Alabama supreme court for ethics violations, but I realize that purging bad actors for political/legal violations would be piling hope on top of itself. Moore didn't seem to have trouble with the sanctions, instead he ran into trouble when it got to the pedophile and other sexual harassment allegations.

    In the meantime, the moral scandals will take center stage. Since moral decay is a good indicator of criminal behavior, it should serve as a guide on "who to look for" on the purge list.

    Leave a comment:


  • Captain Trips
    replied
    Originally posted by radcentr View Post
    While you make a good point that too many GOP will choose anything that will win an election, I would like to believe there are more than a few R's that were genuinely relieved to see Moore lose. --Call it hope that the GOP will recover a sense of decency or a moral compass, on my part. From there, the rational ones can regain control of their party, as they demonstrated with their return to sanity after the Joe McCarthy incident in the 1950's.

    That would help the Dems out as well. One has to "up their game" when one's opponents are cut from better cloth. They stop choosing sanctimonious child molesters, we stop choosing twits who post pictures of their privates on the internet. A "win-win" for the Republic, a welcome loss for paparazzi news.
    It's over - Ol' Roy lost LOL

    What I don't like about any of this;

    ...now if we don't care for a politician running for office, all we need is to find some people from his or her area of residence in the past, willing to tell tales of "sexual misconduct" of some sort. Be it improper fondling, sexual harassment, unwanted advances, he/she "touched me & I felt uncomfortable" - whatever. Make something up, no reason or need to prove anything...

    ....it can even be 30 or 40 years ago !! LOL Get it spread from hell to breakfast in the media and ....

    ... that candidate is effectively destroyed !

    Think "republicans" are too "clean" or "moral" to sink to the demonic levels democrats used ???????

    Faith brother faith... I hope you have a LOT of faith !!! I'm a believer !!! Are you a believer too ????

    Remember, two can play these kinds of nasty games folks !

    Leave a comment:


  • radcentr
    replied
    Originally posted by redrover View Post

    Roy is claiming massive voter fraud. Somebody let all these black people vote. The republicans will have that fixed before November.
    While you make a good point that too many GOP will choose anything that will win an election, I would like to believe there are more than a few R's that were genuinely relieved to see Moore lose. --Call it hope that the GOP will recover a sense of decency or a moral compass, on my part. From there, the rational ones can regain control of their party, as they demonstrated with their return to sanity after the Joe McCarthy incident in the 1950's.

    That would help the Dems out as well. One has to "up their game" when one's opponents are cut from better cloth. They stop choosing sanctimonious child molesters, we stop choosing twits who post pictures of their privates on the internet. A "win-win" for the Republic, a welcome loss for paparazzi news.

    Leave a comment:


  • redrover
    replied
    Originally posted by radcentr View Post
    Age of consent and pedophiles was tied together in law for moral and business purposes, IMO. Bad morality for adults to contract with children, either for sexual or money interests. It is also bad business for government, which should be operating on a non-profit basis. Cleaning up the mess -psychological or financial- is bad enuf for adults who are clueless about productive behavior. We still have apologists for pedophiles who want taxpayers to pay for the damage that Chesters inflict on children? Moore and his supporters would be in that category, apparently.

    The 13-year old girl pretending to be a competent sexual adult is trolling for 15-16 year old boys, if she is slightly twisted. If she is preparing for a career in prostitution or some other form of misery, she might be trolling for older males who will spend money on them. Do I blame her parents (or her single parent)? Sure I do. But the one who get the lion's share of blame after the girl's childhood is ignored, is the older male who "completes the transaction" ...the pedophile.
    Roy is claiming massive voter fraud. Somebody let all these black people vote. The republicans will have that fixed before November.

    Leave a comment:


  • radcentr
    replied
    Originally posted by redrover View Post

    You will really hate this but teachers in my area are required by law to report suspected cases of child abuse. While I see that when a pervert wants to hit on a child in Alabama he just goes to her school and calls her out of class. I knew you are prolife but I never knew you were such an advocate of twelve year olds having babies.
    Age of consent and pedophiles was tied together in law for moral and business purposes, IMO. Bad morality for adults to contract with children, either for sexual or money interests. It is also bad business for government, which should be operating on a non-profit basis. Cleaning up the mess -psychological or financial- is bad enuf for adults who are clueless about productive behavior. We still have apologists for pedophiles who want taxpayers to pay for the damage that Chesters inflict on children? Moore and his supporters would be in that category, apparently.

    The 13-year old girl pretending to be a competent sexual adult is trolling for 15-16 year old boys, if she is slightly twisted. If she is preparing for a career in prostitution or some other form of misery, she might be trolling for older males who will spend money on them. Do I blame her parents (or her single parent)? Sure I do. But the one who get the lion's share of blame after the girl's childhood is ignored, is the older male who "completes the transaction" ...the pedophile.

    Leave a comment:


  • redrover
    replied
    Originally posted by OldmanDan View Post

    That's what you get when you put Liberals in charge of education and moral values. And there you go again, claiming to have friends.
    You will really hate this but teachers in my area are required by law to report suspected cases of child abuse. While I see that when a pervert wants to hit on a child in Alabama he just goes to her school and calls her out of class. I knew you are prolife but I never knew you were such an advocate of twelve year olds having babies.

    Leave a comment:


  • OldmanDan
    replied
    Originally posted by redrover View Post

    Isn't sad some children find their childhood over by age ten and some people like Trump extend childhood well into their seventies. I have a friend who was a registered nurse who worked with young mothers. She had some toys in her office for the children who accompanied the mothers to their appointment. My friend said it was said watching the mothers playing with the toys. That's what you get with children having children.
    That's what you get when you put Liberals in charge of education and moral values. And there you go again, claiming to have friends.

    Leave a comment:


  • redrover
    replied
    Originally posted by OldmanDan View Post

    The founders of the country knew when they stipulated age requirements for Legislators and Presidents. As far as age of consent and pedophiles, these are two different subjects. The law calls someone attracted to young children as a pedophile. The definition of young children is quite vague. There are quite a few 13 year olds running the streets today who I would be hard pressed to call young children.
    Isn't sad some children find their childhood over by age ten and some people like Trump extend childhood well into their seventies. I have a friend who was a registered nurse who worked with young mothers. She had some toys in her office for the children who accompanied the mothers to their appointment. My friend said it was said watching the mothers playing with the toys. That's what you get with children having children.

    Leave a comment:


  • OldmanDan
    replied
    Originally posted by radcentr View Post
    The magic number in the US is usually 18 for sexual consent, but that varies depending on who the "adult" in the relationship. Some states have laws permitting an adult of 19, "dating" a 17 year old. Your point about 25 being a more appropriate age is taken; that tended to be the "age of consent" for most transactions (from sexual to business contracts) a century or two ago, unless parents arranged a marriage.

    Oddly enuf, that number (25 yrs old) seems to be a point of study for modern-day psychology. Seems the human brain tends to wait that long before achieving more control over impulse and a developed conscience, among other traits. Link:

    http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-24173194

    -Aside from parents legally marrying off their 14-year old daughter to a 30-year old farmer, I have to give credit to the those who formed laws about the age of majority, circa 1800. They knew by experience what psychology is just now re-discovering.
    The founders of the country knew when they stipulated age requirements for Legislators and Presidents. As far as age of consent and pedophiles, these are two different subjects. The law calls someone attracted to young children as a pedophile. The definition of young children is quite vague. There are quite a few 13 year olds running the streets today who I would be hard pressed to call young children.

    Leave a comment:


  • radcentr
    replied
    Originally posted by OldmanDan View Post

    What is magic about the number 17? I've watched a lot of 17 year old friends of my daughter who do not act responsibly at all and should not be allowed to make sexual decisions.. Maybe 25 would be a more appropriate age.
    The magic number in the US is usually 18 for sexual consent, but that varies depending on who the "adult" in the relationship. Some states have laws permitting an adult of 19, "dating" a 17 year old. Your point about 25 being a more appropriate age is taken; that tended to be the "age of consent" for most transactions (from sexual to business contracts) a century or two ago, unless parents arranged a marriage.

    Oddly enuf, that number (25 yrs old) seems to be a point of study for modern-day psychology. Seems the human brain tends to wait that long before achieving more control over impulse and a developed conscience, among other traits. Link:
    "Neuroscience has made these massive advances where we now don't think that things just stop at a certain age, that actually there's evidence of brain development well into early twenties and that actually the time at which things stop is much later than we first thought," says Antrobus.
    http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-24173194

    -Aside from parents legally marrying off their 14-year old daughter to a 30-year old farmer, I have to give credit to the those who formed laws about the age of majority, circa 1800. They knew by experience what psychology is just now re-discovering.

    Leave a comment:


  • OldmanDan
    replied
    Originally posted by radcentr View Post
    I believe we can all come to an agreement on this touchy subject. The French who support the age of consent at 13, Roy Moore, certain muslims (and anyone else) who also condone age of consent under 17 yrs., are all pedophiles.
    What is magic about the number 17? I've watched a lot of 17 year old friends of my daughter who do not act responsibly at all and should not be allowed to make sexual decisions.. Maybe 25 would be a more appropriate age.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X