(08-30-2015 12:09 AM)Leargh! Wrote:  

(08-29-2015 11:11 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(08-29-2015 11:06 PM)firmbizzle Wrote:  

(08-29-2015 05:46 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  ESPN is dedicating an entire day -- and big prime time advertising -- to a piece about a gay 12 year old lacrosse player and his "struggles coming out".


I'll ignore for a moment the very questionable merits of a 12 year old knowing he is gay a half decade before he can even legally have sex.

What the **** is this doing on a sports channel? I hate ESPN for many reasons ... but it's increasing political bent of a decidedly "Hartford, CT" flavor is chief among them.

You keep saying that you are a Libertarian but everyday it is harder to believe. Get out of his sex life! Sound like another RINO to me.

It's hard to get out of peoples sex life when they parade it around and demand awards for it...

For realzzzzz!!!!!!!! I know what you mean... Just last week I was out watching a movie with my Godson when this couple proceed to KISS.... Right there in front of everyone! For **** sakes. You Would think they could keep that heterosexual **** to themselves for at least the evening.... To think I had to explain to a small child that some people don't always think and act the way EVERYONE wants them to. Such a hard lesson to learn, and at such a tender age.

Wow, you want to put people on blast and then you reveal that you perv on little kids like you're Michael Jackson or something. Creepy.

(08-30-2015 09:08 AM)Crebman Wrote:  

(08-30-2015 08:22 AM)VA49er Wrote:  Is someone high up at ESPN gay? Not that it matters just may explain the recent additions to the lineup.

Not only that, but isn't ESPN also owned by ABC/Disney? So the parent company is one that is well known for chasing the politically correct/liberal viewpoint.

Same liberal company that was screwing over american workers on the H1B visa program.

Funny how gay friendly companies like to screw over ordinary americans when it comes to their bottom line.

(08-30-2015 10:07 AM)Smaug Wrote:  I guess I was 10 or 12 when I first noticed that the sight of Suzanne McG across the street excited my senses in a way that the sight of her brother Jeff didn't.

At about 12...I did some things with the girl next door that would probably now put me in juvee.

The inconsistency here is just as irritating as the ESPN piece.

If it is normal for a kid to be aware of his sexuality -- and pursue it -- at 12 ... then why is the age of consent 17? We expect you to be already swinging at the plate at 12, but if you hit a home run go directly to jail for 5 more years? That doesn't make any sense. If you're for the normalcy of sexuality at 12, how can you also be for consent laws that are typically around 17? The lowest in the country is what ... Hawaii? Still at 14. And if you think it is normal to be taking swings at 12 but are okay with it being illegal to hit a homerun until 17 or so ... I suppose you also believe that abstinence only education works and that there are still in fact unicorns flying around on pixie dust rainbows?

(08-31-2015 12:16 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  The inconsistency here is just as irritating as the ESPN piece.

If it is normal for a kid to be aware of his sexuality -- and pursue it -- at 12 ... then why is the age of consent 17? We expect you to be already swinging at the plate at 12, but if you hit a home run go directly to jail for 5 more years? That doesn't make any sense. If you're for the normalcy of sexuality at 12, how can you also be for consent laws that are typically around 17? The lowest in the country is what ... Hawaii? Still at 14. And if you think it is normal to be taking swings at 12 but are okay with it being illegal to hit a homerun until 17 or so ... I suppose you also believe that abstinence only education works and that there are still in fact unicorns flying around on pixie dust rainbows?

You are right. The age of consent is totally arbitrary.

(08-29-2015 05:46 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  ESPN is dedicating an entire day -- and big prime time advertising -- to a piece about a gay 12 year old lacrosse player and his "struggles coming out".


I'll ignore for a moment the very questionable merits of a 12 year old knowing he is gay a half decade before he can even legally have sex.

What the **** is this doing on a sports channel? I hate ESPN for many reasons ... but it's increasing political bent of a decidedly "Hartford, CT" flavor is chief among them.

Well Isn't ESPN in Connecticut ? And isn't Connecticut a very Liberal state despite Many UConn posters on here Not being liberal ? Makes since to Me that ESPN's Far Left Liberal Agenda is showing through. Flavor of the Month Club.

This country lol.

(08-29-2015 09:47 PM)Leargh! Wrote:  Well, you were way behind the game. You were probably already thought of as "Questionable-sexual", but most of us gave you the benefit of the doubt. Personally, I wasn't worried about my sexuality at that age because I was in the "norm." But for you and those that are not in the norm, I have reserved judgement. In retrospect, I see that is not the Christian thing to do, but, **** it, I gave up Christianity long ago when I saw it being used to put everyday people, such as yourself, down. I hope you are someday able to come to terms with the fact that you are not what everyone thinks you should be, but exactly what you are. And I hope you learn to love that about yourself.

(08-31-2015 12:16 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  The inconsistency here is just as irritating as the ESPN piece.

If it is normal for a kid to be aware of his sexuality -- and pursue it -- at 12 ... then why is the age of consent 17? We expect you to be already swinging at the plate at 12, but if you hit a home run go directly to jail for 5 more years? That doesn't make any sense. If you're for the normalcy of sexuality at 12, how can you also be for consent laws that are typically around 17? The lowest in the country is what ... Hawaii? Still at 14. And if you think it is normal to be taking swings at 12 but are okay with it being illegal to hit a homerun until 17 or so ... I suppose you also believe that abstinence only education works and that there are still in fact unicorns flying around on pixie dust rainbows?

Typically "age of consent laws" are to keep pros (adults) from playing in the farm system (kids). No 14yo boy gets charged for hitting off of a 14yo girl (to extend your analogy)..

But when you have a major league all star playing at the A level something is wrong.

that being said...

I think you will find a lot of the very vocal opponents of Age of consent are activist who scream such laws are homophobic. So if you had to poll it most of the people who would want OAC laws gone are also the ones who think we should be having a parade for a 12 year old who is not tickled by the other gender.

Personally as one of the "right wing prudes" I am fine with AOC laws as long as there are reasonable provisions for romeo and Juliette situations. 18YO with a 16YO or two kids who were in a consenting rage before one had a birthday. those types of situations.

(08-31-2015 11:39 AM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  Typically "age of consent laws" are to keep pros (adults) from playing in the farm system (kids). No 14yo boy gets charged for hitting off of a 14yo girl (to extend your analogy)..

That may have been the intent, but they are not enforced that way. There are many people on the registered sex offender list who were 15 and banged a 14 year old, and their parents flipped out, or similar.

(08-31-2015 02:33 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  

(08-31-2015 11:39 AM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  Typically "age of consent laws" are to keep pros (adults) from playing in the farm system (kids). No 14yo boy gets charged for hitting off of a 14yo girl (to extend your analogy)..

That may have been the intent, but they are not enforced that way. There are many people on the registered sex offender list who were 15 and banged a 14 year old, and their parents flipped out, or similar.

No doubt which is why I said most even prudish people like me would say there should be reasonable Romeo and Juliette clauses.

(08-30-2015 01:27 AM)Leargh! Wrote:  

(08-30-2015 01:15 AM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(08-30-2015 12:43 AM)Leargh! Wrote:  I simply want to enjoy a movie without wondering where the next bullet is coming from. Friend or foe... Both are likely to end my life.

wow you live your life in fear. No matter your so angry...

Nope. Not angry or fearful at all..

Eta:you really should address your subject/verbs..... I really don't know if you're just freeballin' or if you are actually trying to make point.

Paraphrasing you:

(speaking of butt *******) "I've refused virtually all my partners to engage their gay fantasies."

"I'm bi."

You have far more pressing matters in your own life to figure out than being concerned with someone else's syntax.

This has taken an interesting turn.

I could have sworn a particular poster was a female.

I knew what sex I was into at 5, I first had a sexual relationship with someone at 14. But I'm with GTS on this, it's a sports network, I congratulate the kid on coming out on national television, but it was on the wrong channel. ESPN, Fox Sports, CBSsports, NBCsports are all sports channels and should be kept to such. Leave the rest to MTV, E!, and the bunch.

(08-31-2015 07:11 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  This has taken an interesting turn.

I could have sworn a particular poster was a female.

Yeah, she's female.

(08-30-2015 12:43 AM)Leargh! Wrote:  

(08-30-2015 12:32 AM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(08-30-2015 12:09 AM)Leargh! Wrote:  For realzzzzz!!!!!!!! I know what you mean... Just last week I was out watching a movie with my Godson when this couple proceed to KISS....

Not seeing the difference between national "courage" awards and what people do in a movie theater.

Not too bright, are you..

Youn may need to diagram your sentence, because I'm am not seeing a subject and verb. As far as courage.... Whatever. If an award is what you're seeking, I doubt an award is what you'll receive. But, by all means, keep up the good fight, it can happen.

I simply want to enjoy a movie without wondering where the next bullet is coming from. Friend or foe... Both are likely to end my life.

You should move to Las Cruces N.M. They're checking purses and backpacks for weapons at their theaters. I think it's a good idea actually. Just the other day this lone fellow with a backpack sat behind my wife and me and I was just waiting for that bullet behind my head. It's a crazy world and you can't be sure anymore.