Terthna
Professional Lurker
Assuming the church in question isn't one of those regressive leftist churches.
Leftist Child Grooming
- Thread starter Captain X
- Start date
Assuming the church in question isn't one of those regressive leftist churches.
mrttao
Well-known member
Also assuming it isn't a false accusation.
Obviously but this topics title is Leftist Child Grooming.
It's not like there's a dearth of coverage of how sexual abuse transpiring in or related to 'the Church' has been covered extensively in the mainstream media, rightly so... while ignoring the far larger issues of child sexual abuse in say... public schools... for some reason.
Bear Ribs
Well-known member
Possibly. Apostolic churches in general do tend to encourage older men to marry younger women though not as extreme as these cases are implying.
Looking at the actual articles (what little isn't paywalled) it looks like a 14-year-old was molested by a 26-year-old teacher who taught at an academy associated with the church several years ago, which is awful but not quite the same as the church itself being a grooming operation.
The "Church culture" bit is more of a hit piece as it looks like a 12-year-old was molested by an 18-year-old boy. The reason the church is being sued is that Tennessee is a Mandatory Report state and the family claims the church should have known the boy was up to no good.
Overall I don't feel I have enough information to have an informed opinion, the first case feels significantly firmer as at least the molester was associated with the church and participated in church activities, so a connection exists. The second case is pretty flimsy guilt by association. However, there are huge holes in what I've been able to uncover and any of the facts not yet in evidence could swing things completely around.
prinCZess
Warrior, Writer, Performer, Perv
I dislike giving authorities broad, unparticular powers hinging on definitions that can...somewhat range. One can point out a lot of public advertising, for instance, appeals to the 'prurient interest in sex', and overlarge defining of what constitutes 'sexually oriented' could be wielded against considerably more targets than just burlesque-y drag shows and the other objectionable items people writing it might have in mind.Texas Governor Greg Abbott Signs Ban that targets sexually oriented performances in the presence of children.
Tennessee, Montana and Florida have all recently passed similar legislation which in part helps target the Leftist desire to engage in sexual performances in front of children.
Abbott signs bill banning ‘sexually oriented performances’ in Texas
Texas has become the latest in a growing number of states to pass legislation that LGBTQ rights groups say targets drag shows, banning “sexually oriented performances” that take place in the presen…thehill.com
That said, public venues showing sexually explicit or burlesque type shows should all be covered under a universal 'no minors allowed' policy. Seems like they might've been able to narrow it down in the writing, because courts might be doing the defining and, by the nature of the first amendment, they'll probly-rightly be more expansive in definition.
I always wait for more context/information because, frankly, Americans can go batshit over the smallest of things which are considered inconsequential everywhere else. A lot of stories end up being nothingburgers or witch hunts when more details come out/context is understood.
For example, a lot of Americans would react with the same level of hysterics as, say, a 16 year old girl consensually dating her 19/20 year old boyfriend and a 40 year old man raping a 14 year old girl (except if the aforementioned 16 year old turned 18 in time; then they'd ask if she were on Only Fans or something in the same breath/change their tune).
Funniest thing was when a 19 year old dude was asking for help on Reddit (I know, that's a shit-pit) with breaking up with his manipulative, truly horrid 17 year old girlfriend (she was really toxic); he had Americans calling him a "pedophile". smh
Blasterbot
Well-known member
What? A "progressive" church is trying to show a public face of being one of the good nice churches to the LGBTQAIP2+ community to hide that they are a bunch of degenerates? I am shocked.
King Arts
Well-known member
That’s not what I said. I don’t know if that church are liberal heretics or not. I said backed source the Tennessean holler is liberal, they are anti republican.
mrttao
Well-known member
You misread. He did not say the church is a lefty church.
He said the news site writing the article is actively pro drag queen shows for kids.
This is why they and their followers keep on going on about drag queens in the comments. Or attacking all churches.
Basically, their argument is that all churchs are full of groomers who are pouring massive amounts of money into falsely accusing poor innocent drag queens of being groomers to deflect suspecion from their own grooming.
Blasterbot
Well-known member
holy shit. J.K. Rowling has a time turner. weird to use it to read studies from 5 years in the future but neat.
Doomsought
Well-known member
There is a correction further down that says it should be 2018
Progressive or Traditional Priests. Vatniks or Voyeurs. Alpha Males or Antifa. There should be room on the helicopter for all the felonious groomers. This is what equity and inclusion is all about. ❤️
🚁
⬇️
💕
🔥
mrttao
Well-known member
I went over it a bit more depth...
> Groomer media (who openly support the worst of the worst alphabet grooming) alleges that
> 2 women allege that
> When they were 17, they dated a man in their 30s and had sex with them.
> They told their priest, and the priest did not call the cops
> Groomer media says this is proof that trans never committed a sex crime ever and that the true groomers were all christians all along.
> Groomer media also says christians parents are groomers too...
> because the parents of those 17 year old girls knew the girls were dating older men...
> the parents explicitly thoughts the girls were NOT having sexual relationship with those men. But the fact they allowed them to date at all makes them groomer parents.
very stupid.
he just misread the article
Last edited:
Okay, while it was utterly repugnant that a dude in his thirties was hitting on seventeen year olds (though, ironically if they were one or three years older, Americans would then be polarized between still calling him a predator and just not giving a shit since they'd be over eighteen), this is a far cry from, say, a dude in his thirties fucking two thirteen year olds and the local church covering it up "because religion/community".
Also, since they were seventeen, it's highly likely they were above the age of consent for that state, meaning the guy actually did nothing legally wrong (again, ethically is a different matter), so there was nothing the priest in question could really do?
This isn't like a guy fucking two preeteens/barely teens, despite the same energy of hysteria being generated by people.
Basically, while his age and actions are repugnant, it's mostly just Americans being goddamn hysterical again.
mrttao
Well-known member
Yea. although small correction to my initial post. They dated AND had sex with. It was not chaste dating.
Less americans being hysterical and more like woke media writing a hit piece.
Also, the parents are apparently also groomers because... the parents of the girls allowed them to date the men in their 30s, because they believed that they were being chaste and saving it for marriage. Little did the parents know, the girls were actually fucking their boyfriends.
Huh, I presumed they were already banging when he was "dating" them.
Oh, believe me -- I have no doubt that a lot of Americans looking at this article went full on hysterical batshit anyway. It's why it was written, after all (clicks, outrage, money).
This is one of those times where the average Americans deserves the stereotype.
LordsFire
Internet Wizard
You know, it gets really old the way you constantly trot out this stereotype.
Like a lot of stereotypes, the issue is mostly a small minority of extremely loud people. There's a reason some states specifically have laws saying 'it can't count as statutory rape if a 17 and a 16 year old are in a relationship, and he suddenly turns 18,' etc, etc.
Would you like it if people constantly ragged on Brits for forcing Opium on foreigners?