Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Location: 23.7 million to 162 million miles North of Venus
23,837 posts, read 12,693,879 times
Reputation: 10574
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by ocnjgirl
Who is "they" that was responsible for pedophiles becoming priests or boy scout troop leaders??
There is zero connection between gay/trans and pedophilia.
Gmab, just because someone is gay/trans does not mean they cannot be pedophiles. They certainly can be and be and even drag queens can be pedophiles. And [at least] one convicted drag queen pedophile, and registered sex offender, had been known to have read to children at Drag Queen Storytime events over a couple of years.
Albert Alfonso Garza was convicted of sexually assaulting a boy in 2006, before taking part in "Drag Queen Storytime" in a Houston public library in 2017 and 2018.
It wasn't discovered that the drag queen who was reading to children was a pedophile by the event coordinator, they didn't even bother to do a background check on him. It was discovered and made public by those who were against drag queen storytime.
People like this pedophile and others(not just drag queens or lgb...) are reasons why there are laws to protect children, but there are some of you who do not want those laws to exist.
Per title, yes, it is legal for a parent to take someone under 17 to a rated R movie. Nobody has ever really blanched at that.
But, since the R rating was implemented (the 60s or 70s, iirc?), do you think there would have been uproar if elementary and middle schools were screening "The Exorcist", "A Clockwork Orange" or "120 Days of Sodom" for kids? Some parents might be cool as hell taking their 9 year old to see little Regan McNeil's head spin a 360, but there are probably a few parents who think "y'know...maybe they should be adults for stuff like that?"
As far as I know, there are no movie theaters being supported by public taxes and no movie theaters that the public is required to attend.
That is the reason why it's legal for parents to take children to R rated movies but parents want to ban Drag Queen Story Hour?
Now, if you're talking about the privately owned clubs where drag queens perform inviting parents to bring their children to their own Drag Queen Story Hour...that would be a different thing.
It's interesting how people who ask questions like this try to obscure the strikingly important distinction between government and privately owned entities.
I dont think the OP or the majority of posters care about this obvious distinction and answer to the question. They just want to argue their personal opinions on the effects DQSH has or does not have on children.
Per title, yes, it is legal for a parent to take someone under 17 to a rated R movie. Nobody has ever really blanched at that.
But, since the R rating was implemented (the 60s or 70s, iirc?), do you think there would have been uproar if elementary and middle schools were screening "The Exorcist", "A Clockwork Orange" or "120 Days of Sodom" for kids? Some parents might be cool as hell taking their 9 year old to see little Regan McNeil's head spin a 360, but there are probably a few parents who think "y'know...maybe they should be adults for stuff like that?"
Also, something that I haven't seen anyone bring up yet, is that R rated movies are largely different than they used to be..
R rated movies used to feature a lot of gratuitous nudity and sexual situations, whereas now, most movies get their R ratings from violence.
Not saying there's no sex in today's R movies, but just that it's not nearly as common as it used to be.
It's as if Hollywood has turned prude in some ways, which is kind of ironic, given the current 57 genders, anything goes culture of the Left.
Gratuitous nudity is frowned upon, while gratuitous violence is just fine.
Sort of makes the OP's entire analogy is sort of baseless if you think about it.
R rated does not always mean sex. History many times requires an R rating......However, drag queens is indicative of sex.....That is the whole point of a man dressed up and acting like a sex they are not. Not appropriate for kids.
As far as I know, there are no movie theaters being supported by public taxes and no movie theaters that the public is required to attend.
Who's requiring anyone to attend a story hour led by a drag queen?
Quote:
It's interesting how people who ask questions like this try to obscure the strikingly important distinction between government and privately owned entities.
It's interesting how people are unable to comprehend that publicly funded entities have sources of funding other than tax dollars, such as private donations and private foundation grants. These private monies often are used to support programming at parks and libraries.
Who's requiring anyone to attend a story hour led by a drag queen?
Quote:
On January 19, the City of Columbia, Missouri held its annual Columbia Values Diversity breakfast, an event that celebrates the civil rights legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King. This year, it ventured into new territory by concluding with a drag show in which adult attendees—as is common in these performances—tossed dollar bills at lip-syncing dancers.
But in addition to the public school officials, administrators, religious leaders, business people, and leaders of non-profits in attendance were 30 students who were bussed to the event by their public schools. And the schools had failed to inform their parents that their children would witness a drag show.
Children are required to attend school. If the school performs an action like this without giving parents an opportunity to opt out, they've made the attendance effectively mandatory.
Quote:
It's interesting how people are unable to comprehend that publicly funded entities have sources of funding other than tax dollars, such as private donations and private foundation grants. These private monies often are used to support programming at parks and libraries.
But the tax dollars are indeed in there...giving the taxpayers a voice in how they're used.
Who's requiring anyone to attend a story hour led by a drag queen?
And if a group of teachers wants to present "Birth of a Nation" to 8 year olds, nobody is forced to attend...so why would anyone care if that were to happen? What do you care if some folks want to show a bunch of kids a movie that was shown in the White House and has historical significance? Nobody is forced to watch, so who cares, right?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohiogirl81
It's interesting how people are unable to comprehend that publicly funded entities have sources of funding other than tax dollars, such as private donations and private foundation grants. These private monies often are used to support programming at parks and libraries.
Exactly right, so if the Aryan Nation sponsors Sieg Heil Day at the Kid's Korner of your local public library...why care? Private money, free speech, etc. No worries.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
