- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Alex Stein confronts armed antifa guarding drag queen story time in Denton, TX
Posted on 11/21/22 at 6:58 am to honeybadger07
Posted on 11/21/22 at 6:58 am to honeybadger07
quote:
Aww show us on the doll where he touched u hank
Pretty sure Hank's posting history indicates he's doing the touching.
0
Posted on 11/21/22 at 7:12 am to AggieHank86
quote:
I think you support revocation of the Constitution and its replacement with a theocracy.
Wanting to keep children away from Drag Queens = wanting a theocracy?
Jesus Hank, that's stupid even for you.....
Posted on 11/21/22 at 7:13 am to dafif
quote:
Hank has been abused and embarrassed on this board he is probably immune to reality.
Most Narcissists live in a fantasy world.
Posted on 11/21/22 at 7:15 am to AggieHank86
quote:
no, it is not. The ABA defines “grooming” as follows:
According to YOU, the meaning of words evolve over time.
Posted on 11/21/22 at 7:17 am to AggieHank86
quote:
apparently because the parents want to broaden their children’s minds.
OR maybe the parents are sick, perverted fks.
I mean, you CLAIM to be a Lawyer, so SURELY you are familiar with the concept of parents abusing children.
Of course, you are on record as being OK with children being abused as long as the parents consent.
Posted on 11/21/22 at 7:18 am to AggieHank86
quote:
You see it as YOUR role (acting thru the State) to prevent parents from making decisions that you would make differently.
So child abuse is OK with Hank, as long as the parents consent......just checking....
Posted on 11/21/22 at 7:22 am to TrueTiger
I member when the MSM was freaking out saying armed thugs with the AR-15s were violently preventing black and brown people from voting. (Which never happened incidentally) but that didn't stop them from reporting it.
Bet they are freaking out the same way about these clowns.
Bet they are freaking out the same way about these clowns.
Posted on 11/21/22 at 7:36 am to AggieHank86
quote:
I think you support revocation of the Constitution and its replacement with a theocracy. Now, defend that position.
There’s no need to defend that. It’s a straight up moronic take to anyone with even a modicum of common sense.
Using your logic, I should be able to legally stand out on the side of a public thoroughfare, whip out my dick and start waggling it at passing cars. Because once we go down your road, where does it end?
Wanting community standards for decency upheld =/= “establishing a theocracy”. Anyone with two brain cells to rub together knows that.
I’ve stayed away from all the “groomer Hank” stuff. Now I am starting to have questions about you.
Posted on 11/21/22 at 7:39 am to Godfather1
quote:
There’s no need to defend that. It’s a straight up moronic take to anyone with even a modicum of common sense.
And remember, Hank thinks wild hyperbole is childish....
Posted on 11/21/22 at 7:41 am to Snipe
quote:You are correct. This story presents two issues.
I member when the MSM was freaking out saying armed thugs with the AR-15s were violently preventing black and brown people from voting. (Which never happened incidentally) but that didn't stop them from reporting it.
First, the event itself, which has been beaten to death.
Second, antifa. Gun nuts on the Left DO seem to be treated differently than gun nuts on the Right.
Posted on 11/21/22 at 7:44 am to Godfather1
The theocracy point was NOT that he actually wants a theocracy. If I tried to argue that he actually wanted a theocracy, that would indeed be hyperbole.
The POINT was that it would be silly to demand that he defend a position which any thinking person can see that he does NOT hold.
Just as I have never argued 90% of the positions that your little teammates attribute to me. In this case, my only argument has been, that is the right of these parents to allow their children to attend these entirely-voluntary storytime events, if they wish to do so, and that government should have no role in the process.
If I were arguing that parents should have the absolute right to voluntarily take their children to a Bible reading (another position I support), everyone on this form would be agreeing with me.
Yes, I think that the hypocrisy is childish.
The POINT was that it would be silly to demand that he defend a position which any thinking person can see that he does NOT hold.
Just as I have never argued 90% of the positions that your little teammates attribute to me. In this case, my only argument has been, that is the right of these parents to allow their children to attend these entirely-voluntary storytime events, if they wish to do so, and that government should have no role in the process.
If I were arguing that parents should have the absolute right to voluntarily take their children to a Bible reading (another position I support), everyone on this form would be agreeing with me.
Yes, I think that the hypocrisy is childish.
This post was edited on 11/21/22 at 7:51 am
Posted on 11/21/22 at 7:47 am to AggieHank86
quote:
The theocracy point was NOT that he actually wants a theocracy. The POINT was that it would be silly to denand that he defend a position which any thinking person can see that he does not hold.
Bonds is right.
I don’t know if it’s just your White Knight/Hero Hank syndrome at work or what. But this whole topic does indeed seem oddly personal to you.
Posted on 11/21/22 at 7:49 am to Godfather1
quote:
Using your logic, I should be able to legally stand out on the side of a public thoroughfare, whip out my dick and start waggling it at passing cars. Because once we go down your road, where does it end?
Democrats love this type of argument, especially when they're trying to push more gun control.
Posted on 11/21/22 at 7:53 am to AggieHank86
quote:
But it does not matter. The choice belongs to the parent, not to you, so long as the child is not facing imminent physical harm, and no one is claiming that kids are being raped at story hour.
This is a simple concept. Parents make parenting decisions for their own children, not YOU (
quote:
This is why libertarians do not see eye-to-eye with you on social issues. We think that the State fixes potholes, people make moral decisions for themselves, and parents raise their children.
So you think there are no societal/moral limits on what a child can do or be exposed to if the parents agree to it?
So according to your argument if a parent thinks it's ok for his/her child to be exposed to an adult's genitalia then the "state" should allow it?
This post was edited on 11/21/22 at 7:58 am
Posted on 11/21/22 at 7:54 am to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
Democrats love this type of argument, especially when they're trying to push more gun control.
So because I’m a gun owner who’s pro-2A, I should be able to stand by the side of the road and shake my dick at people?
Because same argument…right?
Posted on 11/21/22 at 7:54 am to Godfather1
quote:I would not say that it is “personal,“ but it does provide a rather obvious example of the point that I am making regarding the role of government versus the role of individuals.
But this whole topic does indeed seem oddly personal to you.
There is absolutely no evidence of even one instance in which a child has been subjected to any sort of physical harm at one of these storytime events. This is just an example of one group of people intent upon forcing their views (in this case, regarding childrearing) upon those to see the matter differently.
Posted on 11/21/22 at 7:54 am to AggieHank86
quote:
In this case, my only argument has been, that is the right of these parents to allow their children to attend these entirely-voluntary storytime events, if they wish to do so, and that government should have no role in the process.
Which is a stupid argument.
This is about sexualizing children and parental consent doesn't negate the damage being done.
Wanting people to step in and stop this creepy, dangerous, damaging shite is in no way shape or form advocating for a theocracy or wanting a Nanny State.
You're so far off on this that people are starting to wonder about your motives.
God help the people around you IRL.
Posted on 11/21/22 at 7:56 am to Godfather1
quote:
So because I’m a gun owner who’s pro-2A, I should be able to stand by the side of the road and shake my dick at people?
Because same argument…right?
No, it isn't the same argument. You think because A happens then potato must be next.
where DoEs It EnD!!!!!1!+!
Posted on 11/21/22 at 7:56 am to AggieHank86
quote:
There is absolutely no evidence of even one instance in which a child has been subjected to any sort of physical harm at one of these storytime events.
So "physical harm" is the only criteria we should consider?
Posted on 11/21/22 at 7:57 am to AggieHank86
quote:
There is absolutely no evidence of even one instance in which a child has been subjected to any sort of physical harm at one of these storytime events.
Yes, because when these creeps abuse a child, it is in a Library....in front of everyone, not afterwards behind closed doors.
You continue to post stupid, easily dissectable bullshite.
You take a blow to the head recently?
Page 6 of 26
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News