"oriented toward animals, bestiality" ... "oriented toward corpses, toward children."


siiiiiighhhh....children, animals and corpse cannot consent. Full grown adults can consent to do things that you may not approve of, participate in, or even want to watch on youtube, but should not be illegal!!

Hobodeluxe: what a Gomer.

Seriously who votes for these inbred knuckledraggers?

(R-TX)

Hobodeluxe: Seriously who votes for these inbred knuckledraggers?

To be fair, he does represent his constituency of inbred knuckledraggers.

what_now: Full grown adults can consent to do things that you may not approve of, participate in, or even want to watch on youtube, but should not be illegal!!

So, by your rules, two full grown adults can CONSENT to HAVE SEX with a FOUR YEAR OLD BOY and his DOG. And it's all OK because they CONSENT! See, it's that kind of liberal LOOPHOLE that we need people like Gohmert to DEFEND us AGAINST.

Jesus shiatting god. Maybe we should give the house of reps the benefit of not filming them.

Pocket Ninja: what_now: Full grown adults can consent to do things that you may not approve of, participate in, or even want to watch on youtube, but should not be illegal!!

So, by your rules, two full grown adults can CONSENT to HAVE SEX with a FOUR YEAR OLD BOY and his DOG. And it's all OK because they CONSENT! See, it's that kind of liberal LOOPHOLE that we need people like Gohmert to DEFEND us AGAINST.

The four year old boy can't consent.


/the dog's a whore

Pocket Ninja: So, by your rules, two full grown adults can CONSENT to HAVE SEX with a FOUR YEAR OLD BOY and his DOG. And it's all OK because they CONSENT! See, it's that kind of liberal LOOPHOLE that we need people like Gohmert to DEFEND us AGAINST.

goddamnitsomuch.

His penis is out and hiding under that sign. I just have a feeling about this.

patrick767: Diogenes
(R-TX)

That explains a lot.

sweetmelissa31
His penis is out and hiding under that sign. I just have a feeling about this.

So that's what that weird grin on his face means.

/later he cut a hole in the sign

Cut a hole in a bill
Stick your dick in that bill
Make 'em vote on that bill
And that's when we'll have
Your dick in a bill.

So what we are saying here is that Louie Gohmert is a parchmentophile?

Isn't a sexual orientation toward children (pedophilia) a "sexual orientation"?

SkinnyHead: Isn't a sexual orientation toward children (pedophilia) a "sexual orientation"?

I think its more of a sexual fetish. Regardless it is non-consensual, so it isn't really important if its an orientation or a fetish.

patrick767: Barbigazi
So what we are saying here is that Louie Gohmert is a parchmentophile?

Yes, and some people would say that sounds like fun, but most of us would say it's a perversion.

/the parchment can't consent

He's a paper rapist.

SkinnyHead: Isn't a sexual orientation toward children (pedophilia) a "sexual orientation"?

Hve you recently become less subtle? I can't believe I fell for your schtick before.

cameroncrazy1984: No, that's a crime. Once again we'll go real slowly for you: Children cannot consent. Two adults can.

Children can consent. The idea that children cannot consent is a legal fiction.

And "consent" is not a part of the definition of orientation. A sexual orientation toward children exists whether or not the child consents.

SkinnyHead: cameroncrazy1984: No, that's a crime. Once again we'll go real slowly for you: Children cannot consent. Two adults can.

Children can consent. The idea that children cannot consent is a legal fiction.

And "consent" is not a part of the definition of orientation. A sexual orientation toward children exists whether or not the child consents.

I don't know what your lawyer told you, but you might want to get another one before the FBI looks on your computer.

SkinnyHead: The idea that children cannot consent is a legal fiction.

Man, that GED doesn't really even cover the basics.

SkinnyHead: cameroncrazy1984: No, that's a crime. Once again we'll go real slowly for you: Children cannot consent. Two adults can.

Children can consent. The idea that children cannot consent is a legal fiction.

And "consent" is not a part of the definition of orientation. A sexual orientation toward children exists whether or not the child consents.

Does it in any way affect your sexual orientation if you go f*ck yourself? Because I really think you should, you frkking troll.

There are all kinds of perversions, what most of us would call perversions, some would say it sounds like fun, but most of us would say were perversions

Wow.

tnpir: Seriously, Skinnydumbass, just cut it out. The schtick is worn out and there's enough rampant stupidity going on around here without you deliberately adding to it.

Sure there is a lot of stupidity in threads like this. That's because liberal dimwits don't have the intellect to seriously address the actual topic.

Seriously, how can so many words come out of someones mouth and say so little

I like this quote from his little monologue:

"I've heard some people say that if you question our President because he happens to be black, then, gee you must be a racist."

Umm, let me see if I can explain this to you slowly, you farking retard. If you question "our President," or any other person, just "because he happens to be black," then yes, by the very definition of the term it does in fact mean you're a racist, in that you're being critical of him just because he happens to be black. If you question him because you disagree with him for any reason other than that he happens to be black--e.g., because you disagree with his views on their merits--then it does not mean that you're a racist. Got it?

I guess you've tipped your hand about one reason why you apparently disagree with him, though.

SkinnyHead: tnpir: Seriously, Skinnydumbass, just cut it out. The schtick is worn out and there's enough rampant stupidity going on around here without you deliberately adding to it.

Sure there is a lot of stupidity in threads like this. That's because liberal dimwits don't have the intellect to seriously address the actual topic.

We did, we all agreed that Louie Gohmert molests legal pads. Your assertion that you can legal f*ck children because they can consent is off topic, and sick and wrong.

Barbigazi: SkinnyHead: tnpir: Seriously, Skinnydumbass, just cut it out. The schtick is worn out and there's enough rampant stupidity going on around here without you deliberately adding to it.

Sure there is a lot of stupidity in threads like this. That's because liberal dimwits don't have the intellect to seriously address the actual topic.

We did, we all agreed that Louie Gohmert molests legal pads. Your assertion that you can legally f*ck children because they can consent is off topic, and sick and wrong.

My bad.

Now with bonus Godwinization of the issue about 2:50 in . . .

Barbigazi: Your assertion that you can legal f*ck children because they can consent is off topic, and sick and wrong.

That's not what I said. If you favor giving legal protection based on "sexual orientation," then you're the one who wants to give legal protection to those who have a sexual orientation toward children (i.e., pedophiles.)

tnpir: Children "consenting"? A "sexual orientation towards children"? Even your trolling is total bullshiat. And your comment on children consenting being a "legal fiction" is wrong on so many levels.

If it was wrong, you would be able to state your reasons why you think it is wrong, rather than just make noises.

SkinnyHead: Barbigazi: Your assertion that you can legal f*ck children because they can consent is off topic, and sick and wrong.

That's not what I said. If you favor giving legal protection based on "sexual orientation," then you're the one who wants to give legal protection to those who have a sexual orientation toward children (i.e., pedophiles.)

Well shiat dude, according to you it's already legal. So my concern is, if you've know that f*cking children has been legal this whole time then why are you so concerned about what two consenting adults do?

Sounds like if you were really against f*cking children you'd be arguing against it, not using it to argue against gays. But you aren't really against f*cking children are you?

known

again with that shiat.

This clown, again?

...I guess some folks never get tired of looking like ignorant jackasses.

Pocket Ninja: what_now: Full grown adults can consent to do things that you may not approve of, participate in, or even want to watch on youtube, but should not be illegal!!

So, by your rules, two full grown adults can CONSENT to HAVE SEX with a FOUR YEAR OLD BOY and his DOG. And it's all OK because they CONSENT! See, it's that kind of liberal LOOPHOLE that we need people like Gohmert to DEFEND us AGAINST.

What would be even cooler is if you could get all the capitalized words to say something else. That would take you to the next level, I think.