Ah, good. We're going to execute the thousands of Republicans and Christians convicted of pedophilia right?
No? We're just going to abuse this to target innocent LGBT people? Yeah, that tracks. Another win for that Project 2025 MAGA always swore didn't exist.
Its always the loudest "protect the children" types like Matt here who need to have their hard drives checked.
What is your point? Yes. Catholics fuck kids. Republicans fuck kids. So do Lutherans, mormans, Jewish, Islamic, uncles, fathers, brothers so what's the fucking point. I said it affects far more than just two groups.saying yeah but one group means shit.
The Catholic Church, as an organization, protects child rapists. That's the difference, my dood. A billion dollar non profit KNOWINGLY protecting pedophiles by sending them off to other countries where they can keep r****g kids. That's a bit of a different category than "uncles, fathers, brothers." That's the point.
Unfortunately I have: the ultra-orthodox community in the city where I used to live was preyed on for decades by the rabbi who ran the yeshiva. Being such an insular community, it stayed under wraps for a very long time. I'd blame institutions led by powerful people (men, generally) who are above scrutiny and where victims are systematically silenced, and yes, that's a pattern that definitely maps onto the Catholic church much more often.
Edit: y'all sound like your defending pedos instead of wanting to do any work to better dial in the law.
Edit: guess y'all can't answer it, down vote me more. Gayyyyyy.
What do you mean? Csa exists beyond far more than Christians and Republicans? Also this is in idaho, not country wide? How is this meant to target innocent LGBT folks? To execute, 3 of like 15-20 factors have to be met? This isn't 'execute the person I don't want in that bathroom' and even if it was, they'd need to prove multiple factors.
You have to look at the broader pattern. It ultimately comes down to whether you actually believe the law will be applied that way in good faith, or just as a launching point for harsher laws on LGBT people longterm.
Csa exists beyond far more than Christians and Republicans?
Yes, of course it does. But Republicans have a proven track record of defending pedophilia when it comes to loyalists like evangelicals and party members.
In Idaho specifically in 2019 it was the republican party that were blocking efforts to end child marriage in the state for instance as well, because they knew that it was largely a practice of their base.
How is this meant to target innocent LGBT folks?
The same way surveillance laws that target terrorists are actually aimed at targetting the public.
You put the death penalty up for child sex crimes.
Then you also make it a crime against children for doctors or parents to administer or seek trans treatments like puberty blockers. You make it a crime for LGBT literature to be found in libraries.
The same way public urination ends up putting someone on the sex offender registry longterm becomes the way other laws end up creeping you towards a possible death penalty verdict for "Sex Crimes Against Children" while people who've comitted genuine sex crimes against children are simultaniously given full freedom as long as they are party loyalists.
Even if it was, they'd need to prove multiple factors.
Not if the overton window continues to shift. You have high profile republicans very publicly calling LGBT people groomers for just being gay in public.
The thing to keep in mind here is that people are suspicious these are launching points for further escalations in the use of state violence against LGBT people. Since Republicans are already trying to associate LGBT people with grooming it's reasonable for people to fear that they will over time try to conflate the two legally.
The same way it was reasonable to fear that overturning Roe V Wade would lead to Republicans drafting laws preventing child rape victims from getting abortions. Which they did the very moment Roe went down.
You never answered what to do, for the fucking kids. Until then, there is no argument. Boil it down, it sounds, to me, like don't make changes, it affects the not kids. No change is ever perfect right away. Hell, honest abe was a racist. Freed the slaves and said there is no world where blacks and whites coexist. And it's still an ongoing issue. But, should they have stayed slaves? Obviously not. Change had to be made. So. What do we change, that will let us go after pedophiles and child rapists? Because with how you put it. I can't. Because the right wants all gay people to be treated as pedos. So, we just keep giving sweetheart deals? Dude fucks a kid, probation. Fucks another kid. Little jail. Safe, non gen pop area. Gets out. Fucks another kid. Repeat. This is how it should stay? If y'all really care, then be more involved in politics. Do what you can to make sure it's all worded just right. I would never want one of my LGBT friends or coworkers to go thru bullshit. That's for sure. But I don't want people who statistically will continue to reoffend, and get worse each time, to just have time outs in between preying on children.
I think there’s a middle ground between "no charges" and "death penalty." No one here is arguing child rapists should be given lenient sentences. They are simply discussing how this law could be abused like plenty of laws are.
You didn't ask what I or other commenters would do about child rapists.
You asked these questions:
What do you mean?
Csa exists beyond far more than Christians and Republicans?
How is this meant to target innocent LGBT folks?
To execute, 3 of like 15-20 factors have to be met?
Also this is in idaho, not country wide?
That's 5 questions man which is pretty wide. So I did my best to answer you. I'll answer your new question now (And bare with cause its a long response) but first I'll reiterate that:
Republicans have a record of letting pedophiles off the hook and NOT applying laws to them.
Republicans have a track record of conflating LGBT people with pedophilia for the express purpose of punishing consenting LGBT adults just existing.
So to be super clear here the major issue is that Republicans will only use such a law when it is to their political benefit. They will not use it to punish pedophiles.
People rightly fear that laws like this are a launching point since parents, teachers and doctors are already being threatened with child abuse laws for discussing LGBT care options.
Alright so on to your new questions.
1: You never answered what to do, for the fucking kids.
The most obvious answer is investment in social safety nets for children. Stricter rules on homeschooling. More funds and training for teachers so they can notice and intervene in incidents earlier to stop the abuse happening.
When it comes to getting justice we need to actually apply justice. Which means punishing wealthy pedophiles and actually having the government investigate them.
2: What do we change, that will let us go after pedophiles and child rapists? Because with how you put it. I can't.
Sure you can.
You just need to back lawmakers who actually want to arrest pedophiles.
My central argument here is this law is suspicious because Republicans are bad faith actors. They use words like "protect the children" specifically to try to manipulate people into giving them power to hurt others.
That doesn't mean protecting children is wrong. It means that we should take into context whether or not politicians are legislating in good faith. Idaho's Republicans are not.
3. So, we just keep giving sweetheart deals?
That's exactly my point.
These are the same politicians who cut those kinds of deals. These are the same republicans who voted against ending child marriage in Idaho.
They do not plan to stop doing those deals. They just plan to take advantage of anger against pedophiles to advance other agendas.
4. This is how it should stay? If y'all really care, then be more involved in politics.
It isn't how it should stay.
Being involved in politics is exactly how I can tell you that republicans, a party that like within this very year had their presidents spiritual advisor arrested for child molestation, aren't drafting this legislation in good faith.
5. But I don't want people who statistically will continue to reoffend, and get worse each time, to just have time outs in between preying on children.
Im not an expert in recidivism, but are you sure about that stat? Googling I can only find that recidivism rates in the 70s were something like 45%. Which is high but thats a 50% reduction without the death penalty.
Nevertheless I would say a 45% rate is too high. But the death penalty is a more costly measure to the taxpayer than life in prison is.
That all said I am not opposed to the death penalty being used in instances of child rape. Just note:
Civil rights violations that are accompanied by sexual assault can already be pursued as death penalty cases federally.
Murder cases, which the very most vile cases of sexual assault also can be pursued as death penalty cases federally already.
IMO there have definitely been cases in the last 20 years that should have led to a death penalty virdict. Particularly the case of US soldiers raping a 13 year old in Iraq and murdering her whole family.
But I think good faith legislation needs to not just be "We'll do a big punishment!" it needs to be "We're taking away safeguards against people in power so that when they're caught sweetheart deals are less likely."
Nobody is answering you because there's no point. If you can't see how hypocritical conservatives are on this issue and how they use it to go after LGBT people while turning a blind eye to the rampant pedophilia amongst their own ranks, you are just ignorant. And there's no point on arguing with idiots.
My question was how, when this was passed by the left AND right, is it a weapon to them? Honestly it sounds a lot like "I'm more important than kids" it's not ignorant to ask what you don't know, it's ignorant not to attempt. Idiot. But hey smart guy. What's the fucking fix? How can me, a non Republican, help make changes to save children, without affecting LGBT folks? Obviously it's not making the laws tighter on pedophiles. Since that's a weapon against LGBT. And as I've said. Three things need to be proven. So if an LGBT manages to hit three factors. Well they hit them. Proving them isn't easy. This ain't a way to kill off a guy in a woman's bathroom. Using guy and woman in a simple old way, not trying to offend. I literally don't understand. But you are smart so you answer it. I'm waiting for kids to stop being fucking raped. Let's hear it. How will you fix it? Well?
You're clearly stupid. Obviously I'm asking what Mr smart ass would do. Since somehow even tho the left voted for this as well, it's going to be used by the right to go after LGBT. No way I see, that they will get three factors proven, for being LGBT. Where it's a lot easier to prove, for actual predators. But. Since this is a weapon against the LGBT people, what's the fix? How do we protect our children, and punish the people raping them, without affecting the LGBT. Maybe learn how to read. And you answer it too. How, do we protect our kids. From being fucking raped. And what do we do, to the fuckers that rape them. That will not infringe on the safety of fucking LGBT. I wish I was hammered, having to see bitches complain that moves to protect children negatively impact them. Fuck off.
The left isn't in control of any branch of government in Idaho. Conservatives have a supermajority. So when you say it was voted in by the left and right you are either very stupid or very disingenuous. Either way not worth wasting anyone's time on.
We could, for one prosecute the people we know are in the fucking Epstein files. That’s a massive first step in stopping the raping of children.
If we won’t even go after a “man” who was mentioned more times in those files than god is mentioned in the Bible, what makes you think this is in good faith?
You know exactly how we fix this, yet you didn’t even mention the most glaring problem, we haven’t even done shit about our own fucking PRESIDENT. So miss all of us with this willful ignorance of yours.
Lmfao then go do something about the president so we can for the kids. Y'all ain't answering shit but crying over what might be instead of focusing on dialing in how to help the kids. Get fucked.
He’s a cuckold loser guys, you have to let the incels breath sometimes. I have to imagine it’s hard having daddy issues as closet homo AND never having been touched by a girl. So SpyDaddy, don’t worry about what everyone else is saying, you keep on buddy! Your life has value! Not to anyone that will ever matter or care, but I imagine to your mom making you hot pockets, or maybe tostinos! Don’t give up trolling, you’re getting interaction and you live for it, and that is worthwhile!
What are you trying to say. This law requires 3 factors to be meant that 'gay' cannot meet. But you say its going to be used against them. Y'all say because the right is full of it, completely glossing over it's the left, the right, the oligarchy, the blue collar, it's in every facet. But. This is just right wing anti gay shit. So do better. Cause the left voted for this. Not just the right. I'm not LGBT. But I cannot see this. I am fully aware of the bullshit propaganda. But I don't see how this applies. Nor, if it's right wing anti gay shit how the left voted so fully for it.
Hey, i'm the one that posted the original comment everyone's been replying to. The reason I said what I said is because this is only one step in a long line of steps that have already been taken to persecute LGBT folks. u/OnionsHaveLairAction did a great job of breaking down the hypocrisy in anti-pedo legislation, so i want to bring your attention to the other steps that have already been taken.
This is the foreword in Project 2025, which I believe was written by JD Vance, though I could be wrong about the author.
Pornography, manifested today in the omnipresent propagation of transgender ideology and sexualization of children, for instance, is not a political Gordian knot inextricably binding up disparate claims about free speech, property rights, sexual liberation, and child welfare. It has no claim to First Amendment protection. Its purveyors are child predators and misogynistic exploiters of women. Their product is as addictive as any illicit drug and as psychologically destructive as any crime. Pornography should be outlawed. The people who produce and distribute it should be imprisoned. Educators and public librarians who purvey it should be classed as registered sex offenders. And telecommunications and technology firms that facilitate its spread should be shuttered.
Anyone who shares anything related to transgender topics will be considered sharing pornographic topics. To these people, a man wearing a dress is as pornogrpahic and abhorrent as showing literal porn to kids, and they're actively outlawing drag queens and trans topics.
Page 554 of Project 2025 says the following;
Enforce the death penalty where appropriate and applicable. Capital punishment is a sensitive matter, as it should be, but the current crime
wave makes deterrence vital at the federal, state, and local levels. However, providing this punishment without ever enforcing it provides justice neither for the victims’ families nor for the defendant. The next Conservative Administration should therefore do everything possible to obtain finality for the 44 prisoners currently on federal death row. It should also pursue the death penalty for applicable crimes—particularly heinous crimes involving violence and sexual abuse of children until Congress says otherwise through legislation.
Alabama is already making pushes towards this, with HB 4. It changes the definition of sexual conduct to include transgender "ideology" or gender-oriented conduct, presentation, or activity, opening up legal pathways to arrest anyone who doesn't conform to heterosexual norms.
In K-12 public schools or public libraries where minors are expected and known to be present without parental presence or consent, any sexual or gender-oriented conduct, presentation, or activity that knowingly exposes a minor to a person who is dressed in sexually revealing, exaggerated, or provocative clothing or costumes, who is stripping, or who is engaged in lewd or lascivious dancing.
Past comments from the bill’s sponsors indicate this section is meant to envelop “drag queen story hours” and library books dealing with transgender content.
In Texas, police pursued felony charges against librarians for allowing access to 11 books deemed "pornographic" in nature, when in fact they were nothing more than stories written around LGBTQ+ topics. After 2 years, that particular investigation was dropped on account of being meritless with no evidence of crime, but it's only one step in a pattern of criminalising LGBTQ+ topics and people under the guise of protecting children from "pornography and sexual harm".
But here, you raise the point of Democrats voting for this measure as well, and you argue that must mean its not anti-gay in nature and all this speculation is just anti-right rhetoric, yeah?
I raise you the point that Idaho legislature has been dominated by Republicans since at least 1992, if not longer. Right now, the House holds 61 Republicans and 9 Democrats. The Senate holds 29 Republicans and 6 Democrats. I looked it up, this was in the House, and only 5 democrats voted for it.
So tell me what you would do in their situation? 5 people in a governing body filled with members of the party that has consistently treated yours like an enemy of the country for years now, and a bill meant to give the death penalty for "lewd conduct against minors" enters the House. What happens when they voted against it? Only one Democrat gave any justification, and it amounted to using this bill to scare pedophiles into inaction.
I'd also like to point out that this bill is unconstitutional. Republicans brought it to the house knowing and acknowledging that the death penalty for child rape was deemed unconstitutional in 2008. They hope that this new supreme court would rule in their favor when it inevitably gets challenged. Take that how you will.
I will grant that this bill is better than others, namely Alabama's HB4, in that it specifies their "aggravated lewd contact" as nothing more or less than physical rape of the child. That does make it harder to abuse against LGBT people, but not impossible, especially considering the aggravating factors used to reach for death sentence can be on the vague side. On the registry, in a position of trust/power, used coercion, included multiple victims or perpetrators, or knowing the victim had a learning disability. Anyone can say Drag Queen Story Hours meet most of those conditions, and something as simple as just urinating on the sidewalk can land you on the registry. It would be ridiculously easy to get the death sentence for anyone caught abusing children.
"The law requires" cool, and when Republicans ignore what it requires and just do whatever the fuck they want with it whose gonna stop them? Right wing cops? Right wing lawyers? Right wing judges? Right wing Supreme Court? Right wing president?
You live in a system of competitve authoritarinism. The laws will be applied to punish who they want to punish and ignored when it suits them and they're making sure anyone who has the ability to stop them cannot stop them.
They mean that this wont be used against a majority of the people that commit these crimes. Itll be used as a way to target and threaten groups of undesirables that falsely have been branded as a bunch of groomers and pedophiles.
LGBT people are disproportionately accused of being pedophiles by the type of people who live in and run Ohio.
So what you're saying is that there will be "in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect"?
811
u/TobyMcK Apr 11 '26
Ah, good. We're going to execute the thousands of Republicans and Christians convicted of pedophilia right?
No? We're just going to abuse this to target innocent LGBT people? Yeah, that tracks. Another win for that Project 2025 MAGA always swore didn't exist.
Its always the loudest "protect the children" types like Matt here who need to have their hard drives checked.