Friday, September 26, 2008

Liberal bloggers can't read

James Curran is on a rampage today, attacking Conservatives for their religious beliefs while conveniently ignoring Liberals with the same beliefs.

It doesn't end there, James Curran is now attempting "mislead" his readers by making false statements about existing laws.

PM Harper and Justice guy Rob Nicholson put forth a Bill raising the age of consent from 14 to 16. In other words, 14 year olds and 15 year olds are not mature enough to determine whether or not they should be able to have sex. So an 18 year old having sex with a 15 year old could be charged with rape.

Mr. Curran, did you even read the article you linked to about the law before writing your claptrap? Or are you betting on that most readers won't click the link and will just take your word for it?

From YOUR link:
The Criminal Code contains a "close-in-age" exemption of less than five years, added so that teens who engage in sex are not breaking the law. For instance, a 19-year-old could have relations with a 15-year-old without being criminally charged, provided the older partner is not is a position of trust or authority over the younger teen and the relationship is not exploitive.

This law brings us into line with many other western countries. This is not to criminalize teenage sex, it is to provide protection from those who prey on the young.

Indeed, what do you know?

I see. So, 14 year olds don't have the mental capacity to have sex, but they have the mental capacity to determine the scale of crimes they commit? And these same 14 year old criminals will be named for these crimes to act as a further deterrent to future crimes they may or may not commit (depending on whether or not they been sodomized to death in a general population of adults in one of the new penitentiaries Mr. Harper will have to build to accommodate all these new criminals).

Are you equating sex with adults to murdering someone? Teens can still have sex as long as it is not with an adult.

The is a distinct difference, when you murder someone you KNOW there will be a consequence. With sex, there MAY be a consequence, like pregnancy, or a STD. When you commit a violent crime the youth knows there IS a consequence. With sex, they HOPE there isn't.

Oh, and nice disgusting reference to sodomy, and it is just wrong to boot.


JDot said...

Wow, that Liblogger has gone off the deep end..

Rick said...

And you won't be able to argue with James either. He will not acknowledge that there is any other point besides his. I have tried many times :-)

wilson said...

The age 16 law was to bring Canada inline with other countries,
because Canada was becoming the go to country for internet preditors.
40 year old preditors from Canada and other countries were luring adolescents into sex, using the internet.

If you remember, Liberals main defence of keeping the age at 14 was because 14 & 15 year old prostitutes would go under ground to practice their trade.

James (a David Orchard supporter) is one of those libloggers that trolls for 'trolls'.
He often misrepresents issues to the point of down right being a liar. His following still use clearasil.

His mission this week it to fearmonger the 'evangelist Harper', the scary religious right.

I would warn Liberals that opening up a controversy on religion will not bode well for them.
But they are losing sooooooo badly, they are just trying to save the furniture, as their base starts to disintegrate.

Anonymous said...

Mr Curran is part of the Martin/Dion know...the ones who have taken an unbeatable political dynasty and are now fighting the election of their lives for a chance to beat the NDP for 2nd! I wonder if he even understands that Liberals like him are why Canadains are turning to the Conservatives? Let him speak!

Matt said...

James Curran is lower in the food chain than Jeff Davidson of "where'd that bug go".

Here's an encounter I had with him in the summer, the relevant information is linked in this post.

This guy was actually a nominated candidate until fraud charges were brought about him. I hope he decides to run again, because we will have a heyday with that silly man.

James Curran said...

SPeaking of liars... I wasn't nominated yet Matt liar. And, the crown dropped all charges as bogus.

Then again, I know the truth is hard for some people, right wilson?

As for the evangelical thing? Well, blame the guy that actually wrote the article. Not the guy who posted it.

Then again, that would involve some truth.

Another lie would be to say that I was a Martin supporter. In fact i blogged against his crew's tactics often.

So, what did you want to argue about Rick?

Feel free to talk amongst youselves now.

Anonymous said...

Curran can never again run for public office and not being able to partake from the Liberal trough has made him a very unhappy camper.

James Curran said...

Never, is a very long time

Matt said...

never isn't long enough. Those wackjobs out there who write dumb things online, like that liberal 9/11 truther, can relish in the fact that james curran is among them. let him run. his blog is a treasure trove of controversy. I've gone through it all and archived the best of it.

Anonymous said...

James Curran meet Drew Adamick.