fuck this timeline. this universe better be a goddamn simulation at this point. small government at it again, apparently. your body isn't yours anymore, period. you're just a vessel of the state.
She was not named as the only drafter……Plot twist...the bill was actually drafted by a Democratic state rep.
She was not named as the only drafter……
Plus no bill makes it through the Louisiana Legislature without massive gop support.
You should never perform a medical procedure on someone without appropriate, informed consent. You cannot have informed consent under coercion (in this case, the threat of additional prison time).An offender could refuse to get the surgery, but would then be sentenced to three to five years of an additional prison sentence without the possibility of getting out early.
How about just throw them into prison? It's gross that some want to use the power of society and the government to force their revenge fantasies on criminals.I don't think I have any problem at all with this. Fuck a child under 13, lose your nuts, or do an extra 3 to 5 years.
So totes cool with isis then?The law, as written, targets offenders found guilty of aggravated sex crimes, including rape, incest or molestation against a child under 13. The punishment would be brought in certain cases and at a judge’s discretion and the surgery would be completed by a physician. It will also require a court-appointed medical expert to determine whether the offender is the right candidate for the surgery.
An offender could refuse to get the surgery, but would then be sentenced to three to five years of an additional prison sentence without the possibility of getting out early.
The law doesn’t allow anyone under 17 found guilty of certain aggravated sex crimes to receive the punishment.
I don't think I have any problem at all with this. Fuck a child under 13, lose your nuts, or do an extra 3 to 5 years.
Go join isis you freak. What about if they are innocent? Shortening their sentence if the get mutilated is digusting. You are disgusting. I also laugh at your ignorance that these laws will stop with this. You are sick and awful human being. Checks ignore list to make a nasty evil poster is put on it. May you be rewarded with the evils you perpetuate fucker.The law, as written, targets offenders found guilty of aggravated sex crimes, including rape, incest or molestation against a child under 13. The punishment would be brought in certain cases and at a judge’s discretion and the surgery would be completed by a physician. It will also require a court-appointed medical expert to determine whether the offender is the right candidate for the surgery.
An offender could refuse to get the surgery, but would then be sentenced to three to five years of an additional prison sentence without the possibility of getting out early.
The law doesn’t allow anyone under 17 found guilty of certain aggravated sex crimes to receive the punishment.
I don't think I have any problem at all with this. Fuck a child under 13, lose your nuts, or do an extra 3 to 5 years.
As opposed to forced sexual procedures?Grotesque. Absolutely no place for coerced medical procedures in modern society. Anyone and everyone who wrote, endorses, or supports this needs to talk to someone to uncover why they feel the way they do.
Eye for an eye penalties always start with horrific crimes, because people don't mind punishing someone that does them. But giving the government the ability to cut your nuts off, can lead to bad places. Such as the forced sterilization of undesirables as was previously done in this country. Just leave them in jail for the 3-5 more years.The law, as written, targets offenders found guilty of aggravated sex crimes, including rape, incest or molestation against a child under 13. The punishment would be brought in certain cases and at a judge’s discretion and the surgery would be completed by a physician. It will also require a court-appointed medical expert to determine whether the offender is the right candidate for the surgery.
An offender could refuse to get the surgery, but would then be sentenced to three to five years of an additional prison sentence without the possibility of getting out early.
The law doesn’t allow anyone under 17 found guilty of certain aggravated sex crimes to receive the punishment.
I don't think I have any problem at all with this. Fuck a child under 13, lose your nuts, or do an extra 3 to 5 years.
“The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one’s time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all.”As opposed to forced sexual procedures?
Sorry, I have little empathy for a man that forces himself on a child. Lock him up forever.
Oh so they’ll be castrating the youth pastor?Normal, ignorant rationalization
[Quote]“Some of the critics say, you know, that's cruel and unusual punishment. Well, I disagree. I think the cruel and usual punishment was the rape of that 5 year old," Boyd said.[/quote]
The youth pastor is really sorry and god has forgiven them. So it’s all good now no need to castrate the godly.Oh so they’ll be castrating the youth pastor?
What’s that you say? Only minorities and LBGTQ+ folks?
Nothing is forced, it's a simple choice, and it's a hell of a lot more choice than the kids they abused had.“The trouble with fighting for human freedom is that one spends most of one’s time defending scoundrels. For it is against scoundrels that oppressive laws are first aimed, and oppression must be stopped at the beginning if it is to be stopped at all.”
Sure, lock him up. Remove him from society. Do not force surgical procedures on someone, under duress or otherwise.
It's a choice under duress, that's not a valid choice. It's coerced. It's also barbaric.Nothing is forced, it's a simple choice, and it's a hell of a lot more choice than the kids they abused had.