Sexual Predator Honored With U.S. Postage Stamp

[Slutter McGee]

I agree with you on no state-recognition. If there's going to be any recognition at all (which there shouldn't be) I believe the states should decide and not the Federal government. So, if Massachusettes wants to "legalize" (really codeword for "recognize") gay marriage, and South Carolina doesn't want to, that's fine with me.

Personally, at the state level? I wouldn't vote for "gay marriage" but I wouldn't vote for constitutional amendments that make "gay marriage" illegal either. But ultimately, I think this is just an issue that is used to divide where it shouldn't be. I believe homosexual contact is seriously immoral, but I respect their rights to do what they want. As long as no force is involved, no force should be used to prevent it There are also way more important issues at hand for any reasonable person, including war, the Fed, crippling tax rates (Funny that so many of those [not accusing you here, just to be clear] who say gay couples "deserve" tax cuts also want to raise taxes on everybody, homosexual or not) the war on drugs where people are actually being IMPRISONED for their personal choices, etc.

Wow, me and FF here agree completely outside of our vote regarding a state election and the immorality of homosexuality. well said. I just think I have a problem with your opinion that all gays are perverts. Doesn't matter in the long run. And this is why a federalist position can unite people like me and people like FF. It is also why we should support this position and get it out of the Federal Governments hands.

Slutter McGee

 

[FindLiberty]

Yetch! Who's gonna' be honored next? ...mercifully, postage stamps are all "peel and stick" these days.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Man/Boy_Love_Association

 

[Christian Liberty]

Wow, me and FF here agree completely outside of our vote regarding a state election and the immorality of homosexuality. well said. I just think I have a problem with your opinion that all gays are perverts. Doesn't matter in the long run. And this is why a federalist position can unite people like me and people like FF. It is also why we should support this position and get it out of the Federal Governments hands.

Slutter McGee

It's cool and no worries. And to be clear, I'm NOT saying all perverts are equally perverted either. I think homosexuality is always disordered and immoral, but obviously its not on the same scale as, say, pedophilia.

+rep.

 

[KurtBoyer25L]

It's cool and no worries. And to be clear, I'm NOT saying all perverts are equally perverted either. I think homosexuality is always disordered and immoral, but obviously its not on the same scale as, say, pedophilia.

+rep.

Considering the state of sexuality among normals in America, a "pervert" or a "deviant" is probably the best compliment you can give to someone. I applaud the post office for being open-minded enough to see, just this once, past the "a blank year old X with a blank year old Y" witch-huntery.

 

[Christian Liberty]

Considering the state of sexuality among normals in America, a "pervert" or a "deviant" is probably the best compliment you can give to someone. I applaud the post office for being open-minded enough to see, just this once, past the "a blank year old X with a blank year old Y" witch-huntery.

Don't get me wrong, if this was consensual, it was not "rape" and very well possibly should be legal ("Age of consent" is something I'm still a little shaky on, I expect a stateless society would come up with a reasonable solution, and until then I'm shooting blind) but I don't see why the heck it should be CELEBRATED.

 

[Origanalist]

Screw everybody. Screw the Dems who want to ignore these actions because a guy happens to share much of their political views. Screw the Republicans who want to demonize an entire class of people and imply that gay rights mean nothing because this guy liked underage boys. Screw the government who decided what underage means. Screw libertarians who think a grown adult can not take advantage of somebody who is underage.

Yeah, I become more of a cynic every day.

Slutter McGee

Well knock me over with a feather, + rep.

 

[Origanalist]

Considering the state of sexuality among normals in America, a "pervert" or a "deviant" is probably the best compliment you can give to someone. I applaud the post office for being open-minded enough to see, just this once, past the "a blank year old X with a blank year old Y" witch-huntery.

Whoo hooo

 

[Danke]

Like I give a fuck about a law in California?

I don't know. Can a 30 year old have sex with a 10 year old?

So what is your cut off point? And why is that any better than the state's cut off point?

 

[Danke]

Well knock me over with a feather, + rep.

-rep for giving McGee a +rep.

 

[Snew]

Serial Killers Honored with U.S. Postage Stamp:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._presidents_on_U.S._postage_stamps

winner.

 

[Origanalist]

-rep for giving McGee a +rep.

Ya well, positive reinforcement and all that.

 

[Christian Liberty]

I don't know. Can a 30 year old have sex with a 10 year old?

So what is your cut off point? And why is that any better than the state's cut off point?

This is a continuum issue, and exactly why I really don't engage this topic much. Should an 18 year old who sleeps with a 17 year old be criminally charged? Of course not. An 18 year old with an 8 year old? Of course. 18 with 16 is still pretty clearly "fine" (I use "fine" here to mean not criminal/coercion.) With a 9 year old is still pretty obviously not "fine". But at a certain point, you just don't know. Where does it stop being "statuatory rape" and start being "fine"?

The bottom line is there are going to be different situations and gray areas here. I don't know all the answers. Maybe some 16 year olds can consent to sex with a 33 year old. Maybe others can't. I get why that's kind of a "gray" area. I'm not saying this guy should have gone to jail (Well, except for the fact that he's a freaking politician) but I don't see what exactly is praiseworthy about him. If you really have to put a gay person on a stamp, there's always Justin Raimondo

 

[Origanalist]

Wasn't that in a movie? Either way--that's awesome.

How is that awesome? Please explain.

 

[dannno]

I don't know. Can a 30 year old have sex with a 10 year old?

No.

So what is your cut off point? And why is that any better than the state's cut off point?

Would the state's cutoff point be better if it were 21? Why not 25? Why don't we make people wait until they are 50 before we recognize that they have their own volition and can have sex with whoever they want, as long as they are over 50?

I would say a good age would be one where all or nearly all that age are physically mature enough to have sex, which is about 14 or 15. Maybe a good rule would be when you are under 14 you can only have sex with others under 18, when you are 14 there should be an 8 or 10 year maximum spread and by age 15 a 14 year spread and after that it should pretty much be their decision.. However parents should play a very strong role and provide advice and persuade their children to act responsibly and as a later resort may restrict their activities as long as they want to continue living in their house.

 

[Origanalist]

This is a continuum issue, and exactly why I really don't engage this topic much. Should an 18 year old who sleeps with a 17 year old be criminally charged? Of course not. An 18 year old with an 8 year old? Of course. 18 with 16 is still pretty clearly "fine" (I use "fine" here to mean not criminal/coercion.) With a 9 year old is still pretty obviously not "fine". But at a certain point, you just don't know. Where does it stop being "statuatory rape" and start being "fine"?

The bottom line is there are going to be different situations and gray areas here. I don't know all the answers. Maybe some 16 year olds can consent to sex with a 33 year old. Maybe others can't. I get why that's kind of a "gray" area. I'm not saying this guy should have gone to jail (Well, except for the fact that he's a freaking politician) but I don't see what exactly is praiseworthy about him. If you really have to put a gay person on a stamp, there's always Justin Raimondo

The point is this guy repeatedly honed in on under aged young men who were vulnerable. It's not like he fell in love with one and lived with him for decades.

 

[Danke]

No.




Would the state's cutoff point be better if it were 21? Why not 25? Why don't we make people wait until they are 50 before we recognize that they have their own volition and can have sex with whoever they want, as long as they are over 50?

I would say a good age would be one where all or nearly all that age are physically mature enough to have sex, which is about 14 or 15. Maybe a good rule would be when you are under 14 you can only have sex with others under 18, when you are 14 there should be an 8 or 10 year maximum spread and by age 15 a 14 year spread and after that it should pretty much be their decision.. However parents should play a very strong role and provide advice and persuade their children to act responsibly and as a later resort may restrict their activities as long as they want to continue living in their house.

So you have an arbitrary cut off point just like the state has now. That was my point.

 

[Christian Liberty]

The point is this guy repeatedly honed in on under aged young men who were vulnerable. It's not like he fell in love with one and lived with him for decades.

Not sure that distinction can really mean anything legally, though it certainly does morally.

Then again, morally the idea that a man would ever fall in love with another man disgusts me by itself. Sorry, but that's just how it is.

 

[Christian Liberty]

So you have an arbitrary cut off point just like the state has now. That was my point.

I think its hard to deny that 18 is better than 25 though. I mean, I guess you COULD deny it, I get that its all arbitrary, but why would you deny it?

I think the teens is where it starts to get tricky. Maybe at younger ages for people close in age (I wouldn't arrest a 13 year old who had sex with a 12 year old, however strongly I would advise them NOT to do that) but as far as adults go, I think its clear that an 18 year old can consent and that a 12 year old really can't. But again, its all really arbitrary to begin with.

 

[Origanalist]

Not sure that distinction can really mean anything legally, though it certainly does morally.

Then again, morally the idea that a man would ever fall in love with another man disgusts me by itself. Sorry, but that's just how it is.

It's really not our place to say. My point is that he is a predator and deserves no honor at all.

 

[KurtBoyer25L]

Don't get me wrong, if this was consensual, it was not "rape" and very well possibly should be legal ("Age of consent" is something I'm still a little shaky on, I expect a stateless society would come up with a reasonable solution, and until then I'm shooting blind) but I don't see why the heck it should be CELEBRATED.

Thanks for the smirk & the eyeroll, Fox News.

They're not celebrating his taboo love relationships, they're celebrating the acceptance of non-heterosexuals into public service.