LGBT Calls 4 year old boy "gay icon"? How pedo is this statement?

Or people who want universal healthcare, affordable college and environmental protection...

True universal healthcare (not "Obamacare") isn't a matter of desire, it's a matter of feasibility. Even ultra-liberal CA doesn't consider it currently feasible in practice, at least not while maintaining current quality expectations. Many of the systems you envy in Europe -- feasible for their small homogeneous populations -- will probably become unsustainable as well given the transformation of that continent.

If you have decent grades (as in decent enough to be admitted in the first place) and your parents don't make six figures, then bachelor's tuition is essentially covered in the US. My state paid my tuition + 4k left over for misc. study expenses. No scholarship, just standard aid. To be accurate: People want their rent and meals paid while they're in college because we've changed as a culture and working while studying is now considered inhumane.

We already have abundant environmental protections and it isn't really a partisan issue in a broad context. Many of the largest wildlife stewardship groups are conservative gun/hunting organizations and clean air/water are fairly universal desires. The nationalist/populist right tend to favor sustainable energy investment for the sake of weakening foreign control over our infrastructure. The country does need to be gradually weened off of the coal/oil economies. I think you mean specifically that leftists want to intermingle environmentalism with "social theory"/class conflict, hence nearly all of their fake environmentalism revolves around interpreting climate change as a war on equatorial peoples.

"Liberals" with illiberal ulterior motives (Linda Sansour, BLM, etc.) know what they're doing, but I really do think what's left over is a bunch confused peer-pressure victims, people rebelling against their overly religious childhoods, and masochistic sexual fetishists.

I am a reasonable man but lets be honest, the right-wing is superior in all aspects and you should join up ASAP! Before you become a pedo!
 
Last edited:
Universal healthcare isn't a matter of opinion, it's a matter of feasibility. Even ultra-liberal CA doesn't consider it currently feasible in practice. Many of the systems you envy in Europe -- feasible for their small homogeneous populations -- will probably become unsustainable as well given the transformation of that continent.

If you have decent grades (as in decent enough to be admitted in the first place) and your parents don't make six figures, then bachelor's tuition is essentially covered in the US. In California, they paid my tuition + 4k extra. No scholarship, just standard aid. To be accurate: People want their rent and meals paid while they're in college because we've changed as a culture and working while studying is now considered inhumane.

We already have abundant environmental protections and it isn't really a partisan issue in a broad context. Many of the largest wildlife stewardship groups are conservative gun/hunting organizations and clean air/water are fairly universal desires. The nationalist/populist right tend to favor sustainable energy investment for the sake of weakening foreign control of our infrastructure. The country does need to be gradually weened off of the coal/oil economies. I think you mean specifically that leftists want to intermingle environmentalism with "social theory"/class conflict, hence nearly all of their fake environmentalism revolves around interpreting climate change as a war on equatorial peoples.

"Liberals" with illiberal ulterior motives (Linda Sansour, BLM, etc.) know what they're doing, but I really do think what's left over is a bunch confused peer-pressure victims, people rebelling against their overly religious childhoods, and masochistic sexual fetishists.
I'll give a like b/c I enjoyed the read and appreciate the effort. Food for thought. But I disagree at present.
 


Like seriously fuck an a. You might as well take off your top shirt that has a rainbow on it and reveal the second shirt---they one touching your skin and surrounding you sick fucking black heart which reads: NAMBLA

I am sorry, but if you post a pervy picture of a 4 year old boy and call him a gay icon then you for sure find him sexually attractive and are a pedophile.

http://www.dailywire.com/news/19611...d-prince-george-gay-icon-amanda-prestigiacomo
^ here is the story, but I think this disgusting tweet is 'nuff said

1) you are insinuating that the boy is something sexual, and even deviant in his sexuality, when in real life the boy is just happy he looks so fucking silly.

2)


3) never bow down to the Gaystapo (or over for that matter)

:eek:


I don't think it's really a pedo thing as the kid does have the mannerisms of a little homo, but it's not fair to label him gay. He might not turn out that way. There are plenty of sissified kids that don't end up being gay. They either grow out of it or are just uncoordinated and have spastic mannerisms.

It's not fair to label a four year old kid as gay. For one he's not at the age to even know that about himself yet. For another that's kind of a shitty thing to label a kid publicly. It's probably different because he's royalty, but those people are just opening him up to being bullied.

I know being gay is a lot more socially accepted than it was 20 years ago, but I would imagine that it is still a hard way to grow up.
 
I don't think it's really a pedo thing as the kid does have the mannerisms of a little homo, but it's not fair to label him gay. He might not turn out that way. There are plenty of sissified kids that don't end up being gay. They either grow out of it or are just uncoordinated and have spastic mannerisms.

It's not fair to label a four year old kid as gay. For one he's not at the age to even know that about himself yet. For another that's kind of a shitty thing to label a kid publicly. It's probably different because he's royalty, but those people are just opening him up to being bullied.

I know being gay is a lot more socially accepted than it was 20 years ago, but I would imagine that it is still a hard way to grow up.

Exactly. The kid has no sexual desire. That is why I see calling him a "gay icon" as trying to sexualize him which is disgusting.

I don't think it's really a pedo thing as the kid does have the mannerisms of a little homo

oh no, LBGT has already dubbed him Li'Mo
 
Last edited:
I don't think it's really a pedo thing as the kid does have the mannerisms of a little homo, but it's not fair to label him gay. He might not turn out that way. There are plenty of sissified kids that don't end up being gay. They either grow out of it or are just uncoordinated and have spastic mannerisms.

It's not fair to label a four year old kid as gay. For one he's not at the age to even know that about himself yet. For another that's kind of a shitty thing to label a kid publicly. It's probably different because he's royalty, but those people are just opening him up to being bullied.

I know being gay is a lot more socially accepted than it was 20 years ago, but I would imagine that it is still a hard way to grow up.

The thing is there's someone with a quick frame camera capturing every split-second of movement so that pic is hardly representative of anything at all. I mean enough frames and there could be one where he looks like he has a halo over his head from a sun reflection or something else odd. But that's not as pervy.
 
Or people who want universal healthcare, affordable college and environmental protection...
What do you do when you want that but also law and order, no mass immigration, no sexualization of children and no affirmative action?
 
Being libertarian..?
1472667013020.gif
 
you think one tweet is thread worthy? how is one guy on the internet representative of the who lgb community?

though i agree its an inappropriate thing to say and sexualizing children/teens is a serious problem.
 
He's not gay, he's British.
 
And they wonder why people don't support them more when they come out with stupid shit like this.
 
Given the left's love affair with the pedo death cult of Islam, along with their own natural desire to tear down decency laws, and for the legalization or normalization of what most societies deem indecent sexual degeneracy it seems like pedophilia is a normal continuation of their underlying philosophies. If a kid can chemically castrate himself (or at the very least hugely fuck his bodies hormones up), why can't he give a blow job? Because Jon Stewardt told you one is ok and the other obviously wrong? Well why is it obviously wrong? Apparently toddlers can make life altering decisions now. So why must they wait til 16 to have sex? Why not on their first blood for example? What difference does it make? If they have their first blood that's evolution telling them to reproduce. What are you an evolution deniar? Lols
 
I am beyond tired of the LGBT community. I am starting to think there is a reason societies of the past condemned homosexuality.

Dear LGBT community,

Keep your perversions in the privacy of your own home and leave children out of it.
 
Back
Top