Crimson847 wrote:In other words, transgender-friendly privacy laws don't molest people, people molest people.
(Presumably, the only way to stop a bad guy with a transgender-friendly privacy law is a good guy with a transgender-friendly privacy law, and thus transgender-friendly privacy law rights need to be enshrined in the Constitution as well)
Crimson847 wrote:In other words, transgender-friendly privacy laws don't molest people, people molest people.
(Presumably, the only way to stop a bad guy with a transgender-friendly privacy law is a good guy with a transgender-friendly privacy law, and thus transgender-friendly privacy law rights need to be enshrined in the Constitution as well)
Ladki96 wrote:Happy birthday Australia :)
Edgar Cabrera wrote:HOLY SHIT GUYS, IT'S DOGLOVINGJIM!!! HE'S HERE!!!
skoobadive wrote:It's the legendary DoglovingJim! Ohboy, this must be the greatest day of my life!
Cracked.com wrote:Initially, his interest in animals was "primarily a sexual attraction," but as he grew older, he also "developed the emotional attraction." We guess we could call what Jim does ... dog-lovin'
Crimson847 wrote:In other words, transgender-friendly privacy laws don't molest people, people molest people.
(Presumably, the only way to stop a bad guy with a transgender-friendly privacy law is a good guy with a transgender-friendly privacy law, and thus transgender-friendly privacy law rights need to be enshrined in the Constitution as well)
Crimson847 wrote:In other words, transgender-friendly privacy laws don't molest people, people molest people.
(Presumably, the only way to stop a bad guy with a transgender-friendly privacy law is a good guy with a transgender-friendly privacy law, and thus transgender-friendly privacy law rights need to be enshrined in the Constitution as well)
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 23 guests