Texas OK's dirty talk to minors

It's now OK for an adult to talk dirty to a minor in the state of Texas.

The law, citing the First Amendment, was recently struck down by the
Texas Court of Criminal Appeals.

"They should have kept it the way it was," said Sarah Quinonez of
Central El Paso. "So it's not as bad as a video. That's not right," said
Michael Romero, of Socorro. "If we're here as a parent, as a
grandparent, to protect our kids, that's what I'm going to do. I'm going
to protect my kids," Romero said. The law previously banned sexually
explicit online communication between an adult and a minor.

Now, dirty talk between someone of age and someone under age is OK in
Texas. "I don't think it's right because the child that's online doesn't
know who that other person is, has no knowledge of that person, whether
that person is a pedophile, they don't know. Kids don't know that,"
Romero said. The lawyer for a man accused of sending dirty texts to a
teen says it's a parent's job, not the state's, to deal with situations
like these. "I don't think that's right. They're still minors. They
shouldn't be seeing those words said to them especially," Quinonez said.
"You're just leaving your kid out there to do what they want. Right now
this place is full of pedophiles. You have to watch for your kid,"
Romero said.

Each parent we spoke with today, on and off camera, disagreed on the
ruling. "Why would that person wanna chat with a kid anyway? Because
they're trying to lure that kid to go somewhere, to do something. You
can't tell me it's just to chat. I could care less about anything else.
The more important thing to me is my kids. The safety of my kids,"
Romero said.

Read More at:
http://www.kfoxtv.com/news/features/...act-2258.shtml
--

Now we know where PsychoScotty can safely move and discuss oral sex in
front of his kids.


Religion: together we can find the cure.

On 11/4/2013 11:57 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
Texas OK's dirty talk to minors

It's now OK for an adult to talk dirty to a minor in the state of Texas.

The law, citing the First Amendment, was recently struck down by the
Texas Court of Criminal Appeals.

"They should have kept it the way it was," said Sarah Quinonez of
Central El Paso. "So it's not as bad as a video. That's not right," said
Michael Romero, of Socorro. "If we're here as a parent, as a
grandparent, to protect our kids, that's what I'm going to do. I'm going
to protect my kids," Romero said. The law previously banned sexually
explicit online communication between an adult and a minor.

Now, dirty talk between someone of age and someone under age is OK in
Texas. "I don't think it's right because the child that's online doesn't
know who that other person is, has no knowledge of that person, whether
that person is a pedophile, they don't know. Kids don't know that,"
Romero said. The lawyer for a man accused of sending dirty texts to a
teen says it's a parent's job, not the state's, to deal with situations
like these. "I don't think that's right. They're still minors. They
shouldn't be seeing those words said to them especially," Quinonez said.
"You're just leaving your kid out there to do what they want. Right now
this place is full of pedophiles. You have to watch for your kid,"
Romero said.

Each parent we spoke with today, on and off camera, disagreed on the
ruling. "Why would that person wanna chat with a kid anyway? Because
they're trying to lure that kid to go somewhere, to do something. You
can't tell me it's just to chat. I could care less about anything else.
The more important thing to me is my kids. The safety of my kids,"
Romero said.


One of the problems is that lawyers, courts and judges have become too
academic in interpreting laws ... and the Constitution. The trend has
become to literally interpret based on language and the dictionary
definitions of words rather than applying some reason and common sense.

I recently saw a retired judge talking about this. He wrote a book
about it.

On 11/4/13, 12:59 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/4/2013 11:57 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
Texas OK's dirty talk to minors

It's now OK for an adult to talk dirty to a minor in the state of Texas.

The law, citing the First Amendment, was recently struck down by the
Texas Court of Criminal Appeals.

"They should have kept it the way it was," said Sarah Quinonez of
Central El Paso. "So it's not as bad as a video. That's not right," said
Michael Romero, of Socorro. "If we're here as a parent, as a
grandparent, to protect our kids, that's what I'm going to do. I'm going
to protect my kids," Romero said. The law previously banned sexually
explicit online communication between an adult and a minor.

Now, dirty talk between someone of age and someone under age is OK in
Texas. "I don't think it's right because the child that's online doesn't
know who that other person is, has no knowledge of that person, whether
that person is a pedophile, they don't know. Kids don't know that,"
Romero said. The lawyer for a man accused of sending dirty texts to a
teen says it's a parent's job, not the state's, to deal with situations
like these. "I don't think that's right. They're still minors. They
shouldn't be seeing those words said to them especially," Quinonez said.
"You're just leaving your kid out there to do what they want. Right now
this place is full of pedophiles. You have to watch for your kid,"
Romero said.

Each parent we spoke with today, on and off camera, disagreed on the
ruling. "Why would that person wanna chat with a kid anyway? Because
they're trying to lure that kid to go somewhere, to do something. You
can't tell me it's just to chat. I could care less about anything else.
The more important thing to me is my kids. The safety of my kids,"
Romero said.


One of the problems is that lawyers, courts and judges have become too
academic in interpreting laws ... and the Constitution. The trend has
become to literally interpret based on language and the dictionary
definitions of words rather than applying some reason and common sense.

I recently saw a retired judge talking about this. He wrote a book
about it.





I think the law should accommodate the need to protect children from all
sorts of abuse, including smutty text language from an adult.

--
Religion: together we can find the cure.

On 11/6/13, 9:42 AM, Gogarty wrote:
In article , says...


On 11/4/13, 12:59 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/4/2013 11:57 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
(Snip)

I think the law should accommodate the need to protect children from all
sorts of abuse, including smutty text language from an adult.

--
But... But... But... Aren't you a librul?


I am indeed, and happy to be a "liberal," "progressive,"
"left-winger," and believe that children need to be protected from
abusive, predatory adults.

--
Religion: together we can find the cure.

On 11/6/2013 9:42 AM, Gogarty wrote:
In article , says...


On 11/4/13, 12:59 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/4/2013 11:57 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
(Snip)

I think the law should accommodate the need to protect children from all
sorts of abuse, including smutty text language from an adult.

--
But... But... But... Aren't you a librul?


Democrats don't believe in "Freedom of Speech", in any forum...

On 11/6/2013 10:01 AM, Charlemagne wrote:
On 11/6/2013 9:42 AM, Gogarty wrote:
In article , says...


On 11/4/13, 12:59 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/4/2013 11:57 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
(Snip)

I think the law should accommodate the need to protect children from all
sorts of abuse, including smutty text language from an adult.

--
But... But... But... Aren't you a librul?


Democrats don't believe in "Freedom of Speech", in any forum...

Well, they kind of do... As long as you say what they tell you to say

In article , says...

On 11/6/2013 9:42 AM, Gogarty wrote:
In article , says...


On 11/4/13, 12:59 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/4/2013 11:57 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
(Snip)

I think the law should accommodate the need to protect children from all
sorts of abuse, including smutty text language from an adult.

--
But... But... But... Aren't you a librul?


Democrats don't believe in "Freedom of Speech", in any forum...

You think that it's okay to talk sexual crap to children? Figures,
seeing how you had your daughter read your crap here about oral sex.
What a Christian!

On 11/6/13, 10:01 AM, Charlemagne wrote:
On 11/6/2013 9:42 AM, Gogarty wrote:
In article , says...


On 11/4/13, 12:59 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/4/2013 11:57 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
(Snip)

I think the law should accommodate the need to protect children from all
sorts of abuse, including smutty text language from an adult.

--
But... But... But... Aren't you a librul?


Democrats don't believe in "Freedom of Speech", in any forum...

Yeah, we Dems don't think it a good idea for adults to talk about oral
sex in front of children, you know, as you did here while your kid watched.

--
Religion: together we can find the cure.

On 11/6/2013 9:45 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 11/6/13, 9:42 AM, Gogarty wrote:
In article , says...


On 11/4/13, 12:59 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/4/2013 11:57 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
(Snip)

I think the law should accommodate the need to protect children from all
sorts of abuse, including smutty text language from an adult.

--
But... But... But... Aren't you a librul?


I am indeed, and happy to be a "liberal," "progressive,"
"left-winger," and believe that children need to be protected from
abusive, predatory adults.


You feelin guilty of something?

On 11/6/2013 3:05 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 11/6/13, 2:52 PM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article m,
says...

On 11/6/2013 9:45 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 11/6/13, 9:42 AM, Gogarty wrote:
In article , says...


On 11/4/13, 12:59 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/4/2013 11:57 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
(Snip)

I think the law should accommodate the need to protect children
from all
sorts of abuse, including smutty text language from an adult.

--
But... But... But... Aren't you a librul?


I am indeed, and happy to be a "liberal," "progressive,"
"left-winger," and believe that children need to be protected from
abusive, predatory adults.


You feelin guilty of something?

Do you not feel the same way?


Hank? Hank/FlaJim is a seventh grader.

You just lied again. Have you no shame or self respect?