English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I thought the democrats/liberals were all about freedom of choice, low age limits on sexual consent, pro gay, teenagers being able to make their own choices as adults, etc? I am confused as to why they are not embracing Foley as one of their own....like a brother coming home?

2006-10-03 08:12:52 · 18 answers · asked by kellettgal 3 in Politics & Government Politics

I guess you libs are too ignorant to understand inferred sarcasm

2006-10-03 08:17:09 · update #1

But democrats think girls can get abortions and teens can consent to sex at the age of 16 (or less) and pedophilia involves children/those unable to consent. So how is this pedophilia when according the dems, these guys were old enough to consent. I don't understand how what he did is considered wrong by the dems when he is not doing anything against their standard of morals?

Personally, I'm grossed out by the guy.

2006-10-03 08:26:52 · update #2

18 answers

My understanding is the liberals actually have no problem with a 16 y.o. and an adult. They are just enjoying slamming our own values down the throats of conservatives...

I think they think Americans are stupid enough to elect them based solely on this...

2006-10-03 08:22:25 · answer #1 · answered by ? 7 · 2 1

You mean "implied" sarcasm, not "inferred."

A speaker "implies." A listener "infers."

And as far as what you thought "democrats/liberals were all about". . . you're wrong, there, too.

I can only speak for myself, and those friends whose opinions I personally know, but I absolutely do not seek low age limits on sexual consent. And as a former teacher, I'm well aware of the folly of letting teenagers make adult choices (unfortunately, the way kids are these days, there's not much "letting" to it).

As far as being pro-gay. . . well, sure why not? It's none of my business what anyone does in his/her home, as long as it is between consenting adults.

Last, but not least--the supposed Democratic characteristics you've listed have NOTHING to do with the fact that Foley inappropriately abused his position & power with those young men. He might not have had sexual relations with those boys, but he crossed a very real line between what is right & proper and what is scummy & immoral.

2006-10-03 08:28:01 · answer #2 · answered by missusjonz 4 · 0 0

democrats have no problem as far as their official platform, with homos, they dislike age discrimination, but they do not advocate or favor child molesting. Most decent folks, be they republican or democrat or libertarian or even communist, do not advocate for the right to molest children. it is not a political issue.
However, honesty is something we all need to insist upon in politics and it is dishonest to say you are christian and then cover-up a case of child molesting for political reasons. that is what the democrats are complaining about and many other honest people too. not just democrats. It is the hypocrisy.
I think the christian right should form their own political party and then they can advance their interests honestly and openly . They would lose their tax exemptions and pay taxes like the rest of us that have to obey their laws they make with their political influence. That would be fair and American and Christian.

2006-10-03 08:21:25 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

And people like you are the reason the Repubs are accused of being gay bashers and generally hateful. First the freedom of choice applies to abortion rights which as nothing to do with what Foley did. What Foley did was abuse his power over congressional pages, not to mention that the Republican leadership knew about this for YEARS and not only did NOTHING about it, but actually made Foley chairman of a House committee on Exploited Children. Finally, Gays are NOT pedophiles! Foley happened to be a gay pedophile, but there are many more pedophiles who are straight men and women.

2006-10-03 08:19:46 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1 2

LOL They're not mad, they're eating this up! It's ALL about politics and nothing else. The Dems knew all about this three years ago and did NOTHING about it until after it was too late for Foley to back out of the election.
If it were really about 'morality', they would have also gone after their OWN immoral representatives. Like that could happen...

2006-10-03 08:33:17 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

Democrats mad? Never.
You have to look at the inappropriateness of the situation, even to where the letter of the law is concerned. Foley was sending sexually explicit e-mails to underage individuals. That's illegal. Despite what the democrats stand for, they would never allow a rival a moments peace when he/she does something of this nature, especially this close to election time. So, they aren't really mad, they are seizing the moment as all politicians are want to do.

2006-10-03 08:18:17 · answer #6 · answered by Blind Sighted 3 · 4 1

traditionally, people who call for extremely-morality and stiff-top-lip questioning are additionally wicked pederasts, thieves and murderers of their spare time, hidden removed from public view. while perverted, wicked leaders like Foley get uncovered, people who're comparable like Ann Coulter specially circumstances tutor their authentic colorations. there is not any longer something 'unexpected' relating to the GOP difficulty with pedophilia. there is greater, basically as undesirable, below the outdoors.

2016-10-18 10:27:20 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I am FAR from being a Democrat, but I am angry about Mark Foley. He is a scumbag and he and anyone that "swept this under the rug" should be canned.

On the other hand, it is funny how ethics only apply to the Republicans...

2006-10-03 08:16:43 · answer #8 · answered by bradhartel 4 · 1 2

don't try to figure out the deranged mind of a liberal....it's like continuously beating your head against the sidewalk

2006-10-03 08:27:43 · answer #9 · answered by bushfan88 5 · 1 0

.... Democrats are definitely not pro-pedophile, if that's what you're trying to say. He took advantage of his position, took advantage of young boys. That's disgusting. It's not a product of being gay, it's a product of being a pedophile which are two completely separate things.

2006-10-03 08:17:08 · answer #10 · answered by Crystal P 4 · 2 2

fedest.com, questions and answers