>>2102416 (previous bread)
Since when? Since the time the picture of 2 underage children was taken. Awareness is a concept you might wanna look into. If you can't see they are kids, you might need some therapy....or, you're a pedo
>>2102416 (previous bread)
Since when? Since the time the picture of 2 underage children was taken. Awareness is a concept you might wanna look into. If you can't see they are kids, you might need some therapy....or, you're a pedo
This is typical liberal bullshit. Somehow, you find a way to justify it. You're a liberal that will expand the limits of decency until there is no decency. It's what you do.
You're delusional or, more likely, indoctrinated. In any of my posts will you not see a hint that I am sexualizing children. You are doing that by stating that naked children are OK as long as one doesn't have sexual thoughts about the nakedness. You are totally wrong. You are a liberal indoctrinate and you try to justify it with the self-righteousness of "if I don't think sexual thoughts, it's OK for me to see children naked". You're perverse and a sexual deviant.
I am a parent. 2 grown boys. Never did I let them run around in public naked. Why? Cause it's not normal behavior. Yes, they escaped during a diaper change or after a shower and ran around like goofs. But, never did they run outside, never were they naked in public (yard, beach, etc.), AT ANY AGE!!!….What kind of parent allows that?
I agree with you, anon. Unfortunately, I realized it too late; my passion overtook my intellect. I apologize….and I thank you for bringing me back to the purpose. I love you (no homo, no lesbo)
Life is a carnival and the clowns make it happen…:)
"Talks Much Woman" ain't got the guts to accept. I love how POTUS has put her between a rock and a hard place. She may need that Indian heritage to talk to the "rock and a hard place spirits" for guidance.