Berlin authorities placed children with pedophiles for 30 years

by Didgee Sun Aug 16, 2020 9:55 am

First topic message reminder :

The 'Kentler Project' in West Berlin routinely placed homeless children with pedophile men, assuming they'd make ideal foster parents. A study has found the practice went on for decades

Starting in the 1970s psychology professor Helmut Kentler conducted his "experiment." Homeless children in West Berlin were intentionally placed with pedophile men. These men would make especially loving foster parents, Kentler argued.

A study conducted by the University of Hildesheim has found that authorities in Berlin condoned this practice for almost 30 years. The pedophile foster fathers even received a regular care allowance.

Helmut Kentler (1928-2008) was in a leading position at Berlin's center for educational research. He was convinced that sexual contact between adults and children was harmless.

Berlin's child welfare offices and the governing Senate turned a blind eye or even approved of the placements.

Several years ago two of the victims came forward and told their story, since then the researchers at Hildesheim University have plowed through files and conducted interviews.

What they found was a "network across educational institutions," the state youth welfare office and the Berlin Senate, in which pedophilia was "accepted, supported, defended."

Kentler himself was in regular contact with the children and their foster fathers. He was never prosecuted: By the time his victims came forward, the statute of limitations for his actions had expired. This has also thus far prevented the victims from getting any compensation.

The researchers found that several of the foster fathers were high-profile academics. They speak of a network that included high-ranking members of the Max Planck Institute, Berlin's Free University, and the notorious Odenwald School in Hesse, West Germany, which was at the center of a major pedophilia scandal several years ago. It has since been closed down.

Berlin's senator for youth and children, Sandra Scheeres called the findings "shocking and horrifying."

A first report on the "Kentler experiment" was published in 2016 by the University of Göttingen. The researchers then stated that the Berlin Senate seemed to lack interest in finding out the truth.

Now Berlin authorities have vowed to shed light on the matter.

https://www.dw.com/en/berlin-authorities-placed-children-with-pedophiles-for-30-years/a-53814208

Utterly disgraceful. How many more children have been victims to abuse here?

by Original Quill Fri Aug 21, 2020 3:41 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:But in the real world... it's the other way round...

"Real world?" Is that like the silent majority the Nixon Republicans used to tout?

by Eilzel Fri Aug 21, 2020 3:51 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:

But in the real world... it's the other way round...

Not in western, northern, central and southern Europe; not in Candada, Australia, New Zealand or most of the USA.

So where then?

by Syl Fri Aug 21, 2020 3:54 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:

But in the real world... it's the other way round...

Well I live in the real world and I don't know many people who hold your views, they are outdated and extreme, and belong back in the day where women, homosexuals, blacks and Irish were treated like second class citizens.

by Tommy Monk Fri Aug 21, 2020 4:15 pm

What have I said that is that outlandish...?

Marriage is between a man and a woman.

The rights of adoptive children not to be placed with homosexuals but with a normal family structure recognising the child's needs for a mother and a father is paramount.

Homosexuality should not be promoted to children in schools or in general in society.

I don't see a problem with any of these things... I think it is sensible and reflects the opinion of vast majority of people.

by Original Quill Fri Aug 21, 2020 4:30 pm

Interesting revelation. When your position ceases to be popular, the losing political Parties and devotees invent pseudo constituencies. They confuse ancient beliefs and conservative ideas with voters and popular support who have gone underground, or wherever they huddle.

In fact, the electorate has changed its mind...it has moved out from underneath you, toms. People no longer support those ideas. Your "real world" has gone and decided to support gays while you weren't watching, I guess.

Now, you are a statue without a pedestal.

by Tommy Monk Fri Aug 21, 2020 5:16 pm

Not at all...

by Syl Fri Aug 21, 2020 6:00 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:

What have I said that is that outlandish...?

Marriage is between a man and a woman.

Marriage should ideally be between two adults who love each other.

The rights of adoptive children not to be placed with homosexuals but with a normal family structure recognising the child's needs for a mother and a father is paramount.

A mother and father who love each other living in a rose covered cottage with plenty of money sounds like the ideal fantasy scenario.
In truth, surely two adults who can offer a child love, be they male and female or same sex, should have the same opportunity to adopt as anyone else.

Homosexuality should not be promoted to children in schools or in general in society.

I dont believe any sexuality should be promoted in school.

I don't see a problem with any of these things... I think it is sensible and reflects the opinion of vast majority of people.

You don't see a problem because your mind is closed, and your views obviously dont reflect popular opinion.

by Syl Fri Aug 21, 2020 6:08 pm

But just a thought Tommy.
If you have children and one of them was gay, would you want him to go through life being denied the things that straight people have always taken for granted, like marriage and raising children.
Would you want him to hide his sexuality in order to compete fairly in the job market or fit into social situations as an equal?
Maybe you would approve if he married a woman and lived a lie in order to not be looked down on as some kind of freak...or if he lived an open gay life perhaps you would approve if he was tried and sentenced to a prison sentence...all because you as a father, gave birth to a gay son.

It's just that attitudes like yours were what made life intolerable for many gays as recently as the late 1960's.

by Tommy Monk Fri Aug 21, 2020 7:27 pm

If I had a son who turned out to be homosexual... Then I would love them unconditionally as being my offspring, as I would with any other of my children...

But I would still say/believe the same things that I posted above...

Marriage is between a man and a woman.

The rights of adoptive children not to be placed with homosexuals but with a normal family structure recognising the child's needs for a mother and a father is paramount.

Homosexuality should not be promoted to children in schools or in general in society.

by Syl Fri Aug 21, 2020 11:42 pm

If I had a gay son it would hurt me to think some people denied him the same rights as none gay people.

Is homosexuality promoted in schools?

The new curriculum last year taught that there can be differences in peoples relationships, which would include LGBT friendships and partnerships. The only people who seemed to object were schools where a high percentage of pupils were from Muslim backgrounds.

by Eilzel Sat Aug 22, 2020 12:42 am

Tommy Monk wrote:

What have I said that is that outlandish...?

Marriage is between a man and a woman.

The rights of adoptive children not to be placed with homosexuals but with a normal family structure recognising the child's needs for a mother and a father is paramount.

Homosexuality should not be promoted to children in schools or in general in society.

I don't see a problem with any of these things... I think it is sensible and reflects the opinion of vast majority of people.

In which countries are your views here mainstream?

by Maddog Sat Aug 22, 2020 12:52 am

Eilzel wrote:
Tommy Monk wrote:

What have I said that is that outlandish...?

Marriage is between a man and a woman.

The rights of adoptive children not to be placed with homosexuals but with a normal family structure recognising the child's needs for a mother and a father is paramount.

Homosexuality should not be promoted to children in schools or in general in society.

I don't see a problem with any of these things... I think it is sensible and reflects the opinion of vast majority of people.

In which countries are your views here mainstream?

Probably most of Eastern Europe and Russia. Huge swaths of Africa. Parts of Central America too I think. While I don't agree with what Tommy is saying, it's not very unusual on this planet. Just in the "West", whatever that is anymore.

by Maddog Sat Aug 22, 2020 12:57 am

https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2020/06/25/global-divide-on-homosexuality-persists/

South Korea sorta has me scratching my head. They seem to be an outlier for that part of the world.

by Eilzel Sat Aug 22, 2020 1:05 am

Maddog wrote:https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2020/06/25/global-divide-on-homosexuality-persists/

South Korea sorta has me scratching my head. They seem to be an outlier for that part of the world.

Asian countries tend to hold strong traditional views, though a few countries, especially those with heavy western influence (like Thailand) are much more accepting.

S. Korea is getting there too though, and all the Koreans I've net have been completely accepting.

by Maddog Sat Aug 22, 2020 2:53 am

Eilzel wrote:
Maddog wrote:https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2020/06/25/global-divide-on-homosexuality-persists/

South Korea sorta has me scratching my head. They seem to be an outlier for that part of the world.

Asian countries tend to hold strong traditional views, though a few countries, especially those with heavy western influence (like Thailand) are much more accepting.

S. Korea is getting there too though, and all the Koreans I've net have been completely accepting.

No doubt, but I assumed the Koreans would be about thr same as the Japanese.

My secretary is Vietnamese. While she's very open minded, her parents are not. She's forbidden from dating anyone not Vietnamese. So she dates her Filipino boyfriend behind their back.

by Tommy Monk Sat Aug 22, 2020 3:17 am

Maddog wrote:
Eilzel wrote:

In which countries are your views here mainstream?

Probably most of Eastern Europe and Russia. Huge swaths of Africa. Parts of Central America too I think. While I don't agree with what Tommy is saying, it's not very unusual on this planet. Just in the "West", whatever that is anymore.

Marriage is between a man and a woman.

The rights of adoptive children not to be placed with homosexuals but with a normal family structure recognising the child's needs for a mother and a father is paramount.

Homosexuality should not be promoted to children in schools or in general in society.

If these 3 statements were put to the general public in any country... I strongly believe that the support in favour of all 3 would be overwhelming vast majority throughout the world...!!!

by Eilzel Sat Aug 22, 2020 3:41 am

Tommy Monk wrote:
Maddog wrote:
Eilzel wrote:

In which countries are your views here mainstream?

Probably most of Eastern Europe and Russia. Huge swaths of Africa. Parts of Central America too I think. While I don't agree with what Tommy is saying, it's not very unusual on this planet. Just in the "West", whatever that is anymore.

Marriage is between a man and a woman.

The rights of adoptive children not to be placed with homosexuals but with a normal family structure recognising the child's needs for a mother and a father is paramount.

Homosexuality should not be promoted to children in schools or in general in society.

If these 3 statements were put to the general public in any country... I strongly believe that the support in favour of all 3 would be overwhelming vast majority throughout the world...!!!

Marriage is between a man and woman, or a man and a man, or a woman and a woman.

The rights of adoptive children should be to have a normal family structure, of heterosexual or homosexual parents, recognising the child's needs for a stable family as paramount.

Homosexuality should not be ignored or unrepresented in schools or in society in general.

If these 3 statements were put to the general public in any western country and increasing numbers of Asian countries, I strongly believe that the support in favour of all 3 would be from the overwhelmingly vast majority.

Some African, Asian (esp the Middle East) and Eastern European countries are FAR behind in terms of acceptance and liberalisation - that's why most people, including you, wouldn't want to live there.

by Tommy Monk Sat Aug 22, 2020 2:59 pm

Eilzel wrote:
Tommy Monk wrote:

Marriage is between a man and a woman.

The rights of adoptive children not to be placed with homosexuals but with a normal family structure recognising the child's needs for a mother and a father is paramount.

Homosexuality should not be promoted to children in schools or in general in society.

If these 3 statements were put to the general public in any country... I strongly believe that the support in favour of all 3 would be overwhelming vast majority throughout the world...!!!

Marriage is between a man and woman, or a man and a man, or a woman and a woman.

No... It is between a man and a woman

The rights of adoptive children should be to have a normal family structure, of heterosexual or homosexual parents, recognising the child's needs for a stable family as paramount.

Homosexuals are not a normal family structure... a child needs a mother and a father, and for the most part needs a mother more...

Homosexuality should not be ignored or unrepresented in schools or in society in general.

Homosexuality should not be taught to children at schools any more than any other sexually deviant practices

If these 3 statements were put to the general public in any western country and increasing numbers of Asian countries, I strongly believe that the support in favour of all 3 would be from the overwhelmingly vast majority.

Some African, Asian (esp the Middle East) and Eastern European countries are FAR behind in terms of acceptance and liberalisation - that's why most people, including you, wouldn't want to live there.

I agree that some countries are wrong to persecute homosexuals and inprison them or even kill them... But some other countries have gone too far the other way too!

by Eilzel Sat Aug 22, 2020 4:27 pm

Those are just YOUR opinions.
I don't care about your opinions.

by Original Quill Sat Aug 22, 2020 4:29 pm

It’s amazing how familiar this sounds. I remember these same arguments used before.

Proponent wrote:No... It is between a Christian man and a Christian woman

Jews are not a normal family structure... a child needs a Christian mother and a Christian father, and for the most part needs a Christian mother more...

Judaism should not be taught to children at schools any more than any other deviant practices

I agree that some countries are wrong to persecute Jews and inprison them or even kill them... But some other countries have gone too far the other way too!

Whether Jews or homosexuals, all one has to do is adopt the arbitrary premise that the questioned group has no legitimacy, and off you go. The infection of bigotry is still around.

Scary, huh?

by Tommy Monk Sat Aug 22, 2020 4:30 pm

Quill waffle...

by Original Quill Sat Aug 22, 2020 4:32 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:Quill waffle...

Nonetheless...

by Maddog Sat Aug 22, 2020 4:34 pm

Eilzel wrote:Those are just YOUR opinions.
I don't care about your opinions.

I think I sometimes you have to be satisfied with tolerance without acceptance.

I think Tommy is tolerant. That's better than others who are intolerant of people with different beliefs and cultures.

by Original Quill Sat Aug 22, 2020 4:42 pm

Maddog wrote:
Eilzel wrote:Those are just YOUR opinions.
I don't care about your opinions.

I think I sometimes you have to be satisfied with tolerance without acceptance.

I think Tommy is tolerant. That's better than others who are intolerant of people with different beliefs and cultures.

This is tolerance?

Tommy Monk wrote:No... It is between a man and a woman

Homosexuals are not a normal family structure... a child needs a mother and a father, and for the most part needs a mother more...

Homosexuality should not be taught to children at schools any more than any other sexually deviant practices

I agree that some countries are wrong to persecute homosexuals and inprison them or even kill them... But some other countries have gone too far the other way too!

If this is tolerance, you can see why blacks in the south live their lives in constant fear.

by Maddog Sat Aug 22, 2020 4:56 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Maddog wrote:

I think I sometimes you have to be satisfied with tolerance without acceptance.

I think Tommy is tolerant. That's better than others who are intolerant of people with different beliefs and cultures.

This is tolerance?

Tommy Monk wrote:No... It is between a man and a woman

Homosexuals are not a normal family structure... a child needs a mother and a father, and for the most part needs a mother more...

Homosexuality should not be taught to children at schools any more than any other sexually deviant practices

I agree that some countries are wrong to persecute homosexuals and inprison them or even kill them... But some other countries have gone too far the other way too!

If this is tolerance, you can see why blacks in the south live their lives in constant fear.

Yes, its tolerance.

It's not a acceptance.

A lot of liberals dont understand the difference.

Someone can have a religious belief that precludes them from accepting homosexuality or say abortion. They can still be tolerant of those that don't.

One if the greatest problems modern society faces is the insistence that one group thinks the same as another. We would be better off just running out lives by the NAP.

by Maddog Sat Aug 22, 2020 5:01 pm

Tolerance is a virtue. It is a version of the golden rule in that, insofar as we want others to treat us decently, we need to treat them decently as well. It is also a pragmatic formula for the functioning of society, as we can see in the omnipresent wars between different religions, political ideologies, nationalities, ethnic groups, and other us-versus-them divisions. It is a basis for the First Amendment protections that enabled the United States to avoid the religious strife that plagued Europe for centuries. (And it is a reason to be skeptical of slogans such as “Zero Tolerance.”)

Acceptance goes a step beyond tolerance. If a sign of tolerance is a feeling of “I can live with X (behavior, religion, race, culture, etc.),” then acceptance moves beyond that in the direction of “X is OK.” You can tolerate something without accepting it, but you cannot accept something without tolerating it. For example, when a son or daughter tells a parent about an unwelcome career choice, marital partner, or sexual identity, he or she wants that information not just to be tolerated, but to be accepted.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/looking-in-the-cultural-mirror/201402/tolerance-acceptance-understanding

by Original Quill Sat Aug 22, 2020 5:17 pm

Maddog wrote:A lot of liberals dont understand the difference.

The point is, there is no difference if you live in a society that, holistically, does not ‘accept’. On the individual level there may be a difference between ‘tolerance’ and ‘acceptance’, but when everybody refuses 'acceptance', they do not 'tolerate'.

Whether homosexuals, Jews or blacks, when the whole society does not accept, I'll guarantee you they don't tolerate. A white man can kill a black man in the deep south, and the white jury will acquit him. Take the death of Treyvon Martin, for example, in Sanford, Fl.

I know that we live in transitioning times, but my bet is that white Americans will go back to sleep again on racism. It will be interesting to see what a jury in Brunswick, GA,--deep, rural south--does with the death of Ahmaud Arbery.

by Maddog Sat Aug 22, 2020 5:21 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Maddog wrote:A lot of liberals dont understand the difference.

The point is, there is no difference if you live in a society that, holistically, does not ‘accept’. On the individual level there may be a difference between ‘tolerance’ and ‘acceptance’, but when everybody refuses 'acceptance', they do not 'tolerate'.

Whether homosexuals, Jews or blacks, when the whole society does not accept, I'll guarantee you they don't tolerate. A white man can kill a black man in the deep south, and the white jury will acquit him. Take the death of Treyvon Martin, for example, in Sanford, Fl.

I know that we live in transitioning times, but my bet is that white Americans will go back to sleep again on racism. It will be interesting to see what a jury in Brunswick, GA,--deep, rural south--does with the death of Ahmaud Arbery.

Yes, there is a difference and you dont get it.

Thanks for making my point.

by Tommy Monk Sat Aug 22, 2020 5:24 pm

I'm more than tolerant...

by Original Quill Sat Aug 22, 2020 5:37 pm

Maddog wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

The point is, there is no difference if you live in a society that, holistically, does not ‘accept’. On the individual level there may be a difference between ‘tolerance’ and ‘acceptance’, but when everybody refuses 'acceptance', they do not 'tolerate'.

Whether homosexuals, Jews or blacks, when the whole society does not accept, I'll guarantee you they don't tolerate. A white man can kill a black man in the deep south, and the white jury will acquit him. Take the death of Treyvon Martin, for example, in Sanford, Fl.

I know that we live in transitioning times, but my bet is that white Americans will go back to sleep again on racism. It will be interesting to see what a jury in Brunswick, GA,--deep, rural south--does with the death of Ahmaud Arbery.

Yes, there is a difference and you dont get it.

Thanks for making my point.

It's right before your eyes. The south does not accept the equality of blacks, so they kill them with impunity. The spirit of Lynching still goes on, tho they might use guns today.

When you are talking about whole communities—whether Nazi Germany or the American south—if the community doesn't accept it, it doesn't tolerate it. Maybe this eludes your understanding because you are a part of the problem, living in the south. But a detached, rational person would get it right off. Non-acceptance and intolerance are hand maidens on the community level.

by Original Quill Sat Aug 22, 2020 5:38 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:I'm more than tolerant...

You appear to be suggesting answers that are intolerance in the extreme.

by Maddog Sat Aug 22, 2020 5:53 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Maddog wrote:

Yes, there is a difference and you dont get it.

Thanks for making my point.

It's right before your eyes. The south does not accept the equality of blacks, so they kill them with impunity. The spirit of Lynching still goes on, tho they might use guns today.

When you are talking about whole communities—whether Nazi Germany or the American south—if the community doesn't accept it, it doesn't tolerate it. Maybe this eludes your understanding because you are a part of the problem, living in the south. But a detached, rational person would get it right off. Non-acceptance and intolerance are hand maidens on the community level.

Since you missed it the first time. You cant be tolerant of someone and then harm them. You're confused. Let me help you.

"Tolerance is a virtue. It is a version of the golden rule in that, insofar as we want others to treat us decently, we need to treat them decently as well. It is also a pragmatic formula for the functioning of society, as we can see in the omnipresent wars between different religions, political ideologies, nationalities, ethnic groups, and other us-versus-them divisions. It is a basis for the First Amendment protections that enabled the United States to avoid the religious strife that plagued Europe for centuries. (And it is a reason to be skeptical of slogans such as “Zero Tolerance.”)

Acceptance goes a step beyond tolerance. If a sign of tolerance is a feeling of “I can live with X (behavior, religion, race, culture, etc.),” then acceptance moves beyond that in the direction of “X is OK.” You can tolerate something without accepting it, but you cannot accept something without tolerating it. For example, when a son or daughter tells a parent about an unwelcome career choice, marital partner, or sexual identity, he or she wants that information not just to be tolerated, but to be accepted."

by eddie Sat Aug 22, 2020 10:51 pm

Tommy, paedophiles are people who have sex or sexually molest children. What on earth don’t you understand about that?
How do you link homosexuality with paedophiles?

by Ben Reilly Sat Aug 22, 2020 11:34 pm

The problem Tommy always runs into on the topic of homosexuality is that he ends up having to set himself up as the person who gets to set the definition for the word "normal." Nobody has the natural right to deem something "normal" for the rest of us.

If he were to say "in my opinion" first, it wouldn't be such a sticking issue. "In my opinion, people who put chips on sandwiches aren't normal." That's fine. But if I flatly declare people who eat like that to be abnormal, people will always challenge me, and rightly so.

Homosexuality is relatively rare, but it's totally normal for some people to be gay -- as gay people have been attested throughout history, in every culture on the planet.

If homosexuality weren't normal, we'd expect to see entire societies in which nobody ever was gay. Instead, we see it appearing everywhere people live, which means that it's quite normal, albeit simultaneously rare, for people to be gay.

by Ben Reilly Sat Aug 22, 2020 11:48 pm

Here's what I think is a good way to put it -- gold makes up only a tiny fraction of one percent of the Earth, making it far more rare than homosexuality in humans -- but it's not at all abnormal to come across an object made of gold.

by Eilzel Sun Aug 23, 2020 1:21 am

Maddog wrote:
Eilzel wrote:Those are just YOUR opinions.
I don't care about your opinions.

I think I sometimes you have to be satisfied with tolerance without acceptance.

I think Tommy is tolerant. That's better than others who are intolerant of people with different beliefs and cultures.

If he had the ability, he would reverse all the laws that allow marriage, adoption and mentioning of homosexuality in schools.

If he ever did that, it'd be crossing the line into actively trying to impact my life. That would not be tolerance.

by Syl Sun Aug 23, 2020 12:12 pm

It's not the norm for a woman to be over 5'8'' or a man to be under 5'5"....so can you imagine if people who over or under reached those height requirements were denied the same liberty that people of "normal" height took for granted?

Sounds daft doesn't it.

by Tommy Monk Sun Aug 23, 2020 3:02 pm

That is daft because we are not talking about height here...

by Maddog Sun Aug 23, 2020 3:22 pm

Eilzel wrote:
Maddog wrote:

I think I sometimes you have to be satisfied with tolerance without acceptance.

I think Tommy is tolerant. That's better than others who are intolerant of people with different beliefs and cultures.

If he had the ability, he would reverse all the laws that allow marriage, adoption and mentioning of homosexuality in schools.

If he ever did that, it'd be crossing the line into actively trying to impact my life. That would not be tolerance.

That could be true too.

I think Tommy is more of a live and let live guy than that though. But I'm only speculating.

No doubt history is full of people that have oppressed marginalized groups in lieu of tolerating them.

by Syl Sun Aug 23, 2020 5:07 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:

That is daft because we are not talking about height here...

We are talking of peoples differences, whether they be sexual or physical, and you think that people who are born with sexual differences to yourself should be given less legal and social advantages.

by Tommy Monk Sun Aug 23, 2020 5:11 pm

You are grasping at straws there Syl...

by Original Quill Sun Aug 23, 2020 6:00 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:But in the real world... it's the other way round...

There you go with that faux real world, again. What? Does the real world have no people in it? Because they seem to have accepted homosexuality, and gone beyond to promote its recognition.

Your anticipated anti-homosexuality, tom, has no citizens, no popular vote, no support. Berlin authorities placed children with pedophiles for 30 years - Page 2 2190311264

Berlin authorities placed children with pedophiles for 30 years - Page 2 2190311264

by Tommy Monk Sun Aug 23, 2020 6:24 pm

Are you drunk...?

You are pulling up a quote from ages ago and making out it was just posted by me agan...!

by Syl Sun Aug 23, 2020 7:44 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:

You are grasping at straws there Syl...

I dont think so Tommy, live and let live, as long as people are acting within the law and not deliberately hurting others, why want to punish people simply because they are different to you, either sexually or physically?

by Tommy Monk Sun Aug 23, 2020 8:15 pm

I'm not advocating punishment...

by Original Quill Sun Aug 23, 2020 8:45 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:I'm not advocating punishment...

But you are implying that homosexuals are paedophiles. That's not very rewarding, is it?

by Maddog Sun Aug 23, 2020 9:04 pm

Pedophile.

You're American.

by Syl Mon Aug 24, 2020 12:37 am

Tommy Monk wrote:

I'm not advocating punishment...

Withdrawing rights that straight people take for granted is punishment for being gay.

by Original Quill Mon Aug 24, 2020 1:35 am

Maddog wrote:Pedophile.

You're American.

Actually, I'm also British. My grandfather was born in Scotland, and educated at the University of Glasgow. Within two degrees of sanguinity, under British law, one is a British citizen.

by Syl Mon Aug 24, 2020 7:19 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Maddog wrote:Pedophile.

You're American.

Actually, I'm also British. My grandfather was born in Scotland, and educated at the University of Glasgow. Within two degrees of sanguinity, under British law, one is a British citizen.

And....you have a castle in Scotland don't forget. cheers

by Sponsored content