Anonymous ID: 7d5fbd July 10, 2018, 8 p.m. No.2112596   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>2692

>>2112494

the intent is to eliminate gender Anon, and no mention of changing the age as written, 12 years…clearly she has no issue with the age of 12, but rather the assertion of sex

Anonymous ID: 7d5fbd July 10, 2018, 8:21 p.m. No.2112796   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>2836

>>2112692

I think the entire piece speaks to the fact that she is more concerned with elimination of anything that references either normal gender, which I find disturbing, as the SCOTUS is supposedly representative of the peoples intent within the law. There are other issues I have with her, but overlooking that age of consent is like not seeing the forest for the trees when trying to make a point of law - it misses intent and removes context. THAT is common when trying to legislate from the bench.

Anonymous ID: 7d5fbd July 10, 2018, 8:30 p.m. No.2112885   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>2112836

neither you nor I will be able to stahp folks taking things out of context We can only push back with facts. Unfortunately, setting the context is not sexy and doesn't make for an exclamatory sound bite - so it is lost in the maelstrom of shit we call modern media.