- Joined
- Feb 9, 2019
- Messages
- 238
- Reaction score
- 1
Im not surprised motherfuckers. Fuck these apologists.Bunch of pedophile apologists ITT
Im not surprised motherfuckers. Fuck these apologists.Bunch of pedophile apologists ITT
You're bafflingly stupid.Oh, i didn't see that McGregor pic and your location. That explains it! You should share a cell with Abel some day so you can tell him that you think that what he did wasn't pedophile behavior lmao. Or you can say the same to the victim, or for that matter any pedophile's victim and see what they respond. Fuck you and every sorry piece of shit pedophile and/or pedophile apologist.
Obvious bait is obvious. Who's going to take this comment seriously lmaowhat if she says no but her eyes say yes and that's what turns her on
wrongObvious bait is obvious.
Lmao dude is 35
I’d have a bit of remorse based off the whole “16 is legal the majority of places” but fuck that when there’s a 25 year difference and she can’t legally buy a damn lottery ticket
That you're a fucking creep?Point proven.
Not true at all. Almost all law has a moral or civil/ethical underpinning. I love talking about how you ground moral laws, but it’s above the pay grade of most Sherdoggies. This case is no exception. I would start by saying a real man isn’t sending sexually explicit photos to a girl he believes to be in high school, but I’m sure there’s little support for such a quaint notion here.Ok, well then I certainly hope you will not try to follow any moral conclusions about Mr. Truijo’s actions, given the criteria you have defined.
By your premises one could only conclude that he may have legally transgressed, but not morally transgressed, since the age of consent is only so strictly defined and enforced out of practical necessity.
One would then wonder what the point of the law is in the first place, if it is not underpinned by a greater, abstract impetus to satisfy a moral principle.
But I guess that’s not worthy for debate. In your mind.
Sure. If you can't understand what I said.That you're a fucking creep?
It absolutely does meet the requirement, bud.A 16 year old woman is legal age in many States, you can't call these people Pedos. Doesn't meet the requirement.
That said I like women in their early 30s. But I wouldn't call these guys Pedos.
should have sent back a video of Khabib taking Abel down 21 times
And I understood it just fine, and you need help.Sure. If you can't understand what I said.
Didn't realize sherdog had so many creepy pedos that enjoy looking at 16 y.o. girls. what fucking losers
I didn't know majority of the USA and all of the UK are classified as "third world dumps"........ (this is news to me)Sexual contact between a 35 yo and a 16 yo is pedophilia. I don't care what fucked up laws some third world dump decides to put in place