"Based on our research, viral claims about SB-145 as "pro-pedophilia" legislation are FALSE. It is intended to strengthen the sex offender registry and end discrimination against LGBTQ youth." I'd love to know who wrote this article. Fucking sick ?
I think I better understand this now and see some of the reasoning. There was an example of a 17 year old girl who had sex with their 18 year old lesbian partner. The age of consent is still 18, so 18 yo lesbian was given a misdemeanor charge. But, because the sex was oral and not vaginal intercourse, the judge has no discretion on whether she has to register in the sex offender list. She automatically has to register in the sex offender list.
The goal of the bill is to expand "sex" to include oral, anal so that it would be more fair to LGBTQ.
Now, the thing I'm confused by is why the hell did they make the amendment so confusing? I feel like there's a backdoor they snuck into the bill to enable pedophilia.
"If the person is not more than 10 years older than the minor they do not have to register" how does this strengthen anything at all. What the fuck is this
Yea. That's what I mean by they made the text of the bill so damn confusing. The legal text of the bill references other articles they are amending, and those take care of the age of consent, etc... but I don't understand how the text they added at the beginning interacts with the amendments.
The goal they stated I understand, but the law they wrote in, it is too damn confusing and it implies pedophilia. That's why I think there' probably is a backdoor clause to pedophilia in the amendment.
Consent...the magic word that has allowed so many rapists to walk free. Better educate your young girls in calif cuz there is gonna be a flood of gradeschool "consent" defenses in crime court.
Well the example provided is just a nice cover for what the text actually says. It's "confusing" because they have nothing/little to actually do with each other. The example that they provided to show what they "intend" to do is simply a lie. The example actually means jack shit, doesn't mean anything. What the law they passed says is what actually matters. What they have done is make a little step towards their end goal, full legalization of raping children.
I could understand if the age gap is only 1-2 years (e.g. an 18 year old guy has sex with his 17 year old gf, and 17 y.o. parents find out and press charges on the 18 y.o... seen this happen and heard news of this happening many times. 18 y.o. has to register as a sex offender for rest of his life).. but 10 year gap is criminal. Also, why does it say Wiener in the first few lines of the text?
I think the threshold should be 5 years starting at 13. But we also need to change our education system to have our "children" be capable of being responsible adults by 13 as it used to be many years ago... Why we added 5 years to childhood is beyond me...
That referenced verse isnt about kids, its about his disciples (the little ones are his disciples) dont ask why, idk why, but that what its actually referencing.
That said, one can certainly apply it to pedos if they want, its just not the original meaning.
The disciples and followers of Christ were considered Wheat (vs tares) and the enemy grinded them down (mill stone)
So Jesus was saying that the method of causing distress to his followers should be cast back on the enemy, to grind them down.
And to throw into the sea means to throw into the people. Meaning 'it wont be safe for them to walk the streets'.
The sea means 'multitudes of people, tribes, languages, etc' just basically massive amounts of people.
This is verse 5..........5 Whoever receives one little child like this in My name receives Me." He s not talking about his disciples, don't be a pedo apologist, be a Jesus apologist. Just forget it man, HES NOT TALKING ABOUT KIDS. ok. I hate conversations like this.....if your a Christian...then we have nothing to squabble about. Your splitting hairs.
if you where a Christian, you would never speak the way you do, or come at me the way you are...I really have nothing to learn from a shill. especially a rude one bye bye
He had a little child in his lap as he was telling the deciple how to be like a child and how to treat them, READ THE BIBLE before you speak on it and curse people who know what they are saying. Nuff said shill
Look you dont even read the Bible bro, let alone Matthew 18.....heres why you need to read your Bible and why Im messing with you...,..read it all 1 At that time the disciples came to Jesus, saying, "Who then is greatest in the kingdom of heaven?" 2 Then Jesus called a little child to Him, set him in the midst of them, 3 and said, "Assuredly, I say to you, unless you are converted and become as little children, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven. 4 Therefore whoever humbles himself as this little child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. 5 Whoever receives one little child like this in My name receives Me. 6 "But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to sin, it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were drowned in the depth of the sea. BOOOM shil
Piss off. I never claimed to be a Christian. Don't assume. I just happen to know a SHIT LOAD about it. I just don't believe it the way the mainstream teaches. I don't believe dogma.
I can speak, therefor, how ever i want.
What's YOUR excuse?
Prayers in one side or your mouth, cursing with the other?
You, if youre a christian, should be ASHAMED if yourself to the standard you hold others to.
Im all for peace, but have zero tolerance for hypocritical shills like yourself. You're double minded.
btw I never said I was perfect..I just knew you arent a Christian,,,cause you act like THIS..I have nothing to be ashamed of....I have been working on cursing, and I know Im forgiven.....DO YOU? you have anger issues... I will prey for you SHILL.
I do not even want to think about what awaits these monsters on judgement day. They will absolutely deserve what they will be condemned to, but we need to pray they will repent of these horrific deeds.
California is finished...
https://sd11.senate.ca.gov/news/20200909-fact-check-californias-sb-145-eliminates-inequality-sex-offender-registration
"Based on our research, viral claims about SB-145 as "pro-pedophilia" legislation are FALSE. It is intended to strengthen the sex offender registry and end discrimination against LGBTQ youth." I'd love to know who wrote this article. Fucking sick ?
Looks like senator wiener. Also answered my own question
https://sd11.senate.ca.gov/sb145
Yeah I didn't notice that at first.
I think I better understand this now and see some of the reasoning. There was an example of a 17 year old girl who had sex with their 18 year old lesbian partner. The age of consent is still 18, so 18 yo lesbian was given a misdemeanor charge. But, because the sex was oral and not vaginal intercourse, the judge has no discretion on whether she has to register in the sex offender list. She automatically has to register in the sex offender list.
The goal of the bill is to expand "sex" to include oral, anal so that it would be more fair to LGBTQ.
Now, the thing I'm confused by is why the hell did they make the amendment so confusing? I feel like there's a backdoor they snuck into the bill to enable pedophilia.
"If the person is not more than 10 years older than the minor they do not have to register" how does this strengthen anything at all. What the fuck is this
Yea. That's what I mean by they made the text of the bill so damn confusing. The legal text of the bill references other articles they are amending, and those take care of the age of consent, etc... but I don't understand how the text they added at the beginning interacts with the amendments.
The goal they stated I understand, but the law they wrote in, it is too damn confusing and it implies pedophilia. That's why I think there' probably is a backdoor clause to pedophilia in the amendment.
Also "only protects voluntary sex", so if a 13 year old says it was voluntary it counts as consent? Again, the fuck is thiis
Consent...the magic word that has allowed so many rapists to walk free. Better educate your young girls in calif cuz there is gonna be a flood of gradeschool "consent" defenses in crime court.
I believe I the age minimum to receive protection from this bill is 14 years old. But yes, your point stands. The fuck is this?!
Well the example provided is just a nice cover for what the text actually says. It's "confusing" because they have nothing/little to actually do with each other. The example that they provided to show what they "intend" to do is simply a lie. The example actually means jack shit, doesn't mean anything. What the law they passed says is what actually matters. What they have done is make a little step towards their end goal, full legalization of raping children.
wow these people are loony
Thats where this is headed for sure
I could understand if the age gap is only 1-2 years (e.g. an 18 year old guy has sex with his 17 year old gf, and 17 y.o. parents find out and press charges on the 18 y.o... seen this happen and heard news of this happening many times. 18 y.o. has to register as a sex offender for rest of his life).. but 10 year gap is criminal. Also, why does it say Wiener in the first few lines of the text?
SB 145, Wiener.
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201920200SB145
I think the threshold should be 5 years starting at 13. But we also need to change our education system to have our "children" be capable of being responsible adults by 13 as it used to be many years ago... Why we added 5 years to childhood is beyond me...
Pedophilia has been legal in CA, it's just that it's now more inclusive of LGTBXYZ also being pedophiles
Tidal waves any time now. Learn to swin
Unreal.
Old news, however to clarify;
That referenced verse isnt about kids, its about his disciples (the little ones are his disciples) dont ask why, idk why, but that what its actually referencing.
That said, one can certainly apply it to pedos if they want, its just not the original meaning.
The disciples and followers of Christ were considered Wheat (vs tares) and the enemy grinded them down (mill stone)
So Jesus was saying that the method of causing distress to his followers should be cast back on the enemy, to grind them down.
And to throw into the sea means to throw into the people. Meaning 'it wont be safe for them to walk the streets'.
The sea means 'multitudes of people, tribes, languages, etc' just basically massive amounts of people.
So now, does Rev 18:21 make more sense?
You are splitting hairs. There is more to it than you say.
Splitting hairs?
No. Im clarifying the actual intent and audience of that specific verse. Care to correct me, or just criticize me..
This is verse 5..........5 Whoever receives one little child like this in My name receives Me." He s not talking about his disciples, don't be a pedo apologist, be a Jesus apologist. Just forget it man, HES NOT TALKING ABOUT KIDS. ok. I hate conversations like this.....if your a Christian...then we have nothing to squabble about. Your splitting hairs.
Pedo apologist? You can fuck right off with that shit.
Just one example.
https://hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/19071/why-are-the-disciples-called-little-in-matthew
if you where a Christian, you would never speak the way you do, or come at me the way you are...I really have nothing to learn from a shill. especially a rude one bye bye
He had a little child in his lap as he was telling the deciple how to be like a child and how to treat them, READ THE BIBLE before you speak on it and curse people who know what they are saying. Nuff said shill
Look you dont even read the Bible bro, let alone Matthew 18.....heres why you need to read your Bible and why Im messing with you...,..read it all 1 At that time the disciples came to Jesus, saying, "Who then is greatest in the kingdom of heaven?" 2 Then Jesus called a little child to Him, set him in the midst of them, 3 and said, "Assuredly, I say to you, unless you are converted and become as little children, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven. 4 Therefore whoever humbles himself as this little child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. 5 Whoever receives one little child like this in My name receives Me. 6 "But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to sin, it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were drowned in the depth of the sea. BOOOM shil
Hey shill, i checked YOUR comment history.
You are a shill. You speak just as bad.
Piss off. I never claimed to be a Christian. Don't assume. I just happen to know a SHIT LOAD about it. I just don't believe it the way the mainstream teaches. I don't believe dogma.
I can speak, therefor, how ever i want.
What's YOUR excuse?
Prayers in one side or your mouth, cursing with the other?
You, if youre a christian, should be ASHAMED if yourself to the standard you hold others to.
Im all for peace, but have zero tolerance for hypocritical shills like yourself. You're double minded.
your just mad you dont know what your talking about..and I proved it
btw I never said I was perfect..I just knew you arent a Christian,,,cause you act like THIS..I have nothing to be ashamed of....I have been working on cursing, and I know Im forgiven.....DO YOU? you have anger issues... I will prey for you SHILL.
Can we the people vote for California to be removed from being a state of the United States?
Am I the only one seeing this age gap increased in at least 50% in the coming years ?
This isn’t true.
its actualy worse https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201920200SB145
name the guy who wrote this law...
he's a pedo and his religion says it's ok.
IDK but here is the law https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201920200SB145
the guy's last name is wiener...
I do not even want to think about what awaits these monsters on judgement day. They will absolutely deserve what they will be condemned to, but we need to pray they will repent of these horrific deeds. California is finished...