San Angelo Man Indicted For Assaulting Minor

 

SAN ANGELO, TX – On June 18, 21-year-old Dylan Jupiter Carter was indicted by a Tom Green County Grand Jury on the sole charge of Sexual Assault of Child.

As previously reported, the defendant and the 14 year old victim previously shared a relationship, but had been warned several times by family members due to the difference in ages between the two.

Initial reports state that the victim was staying at a witnesses house the evening prior to the assault taking place.

The following afternoon the victim left the residence on Sherwood Way around 1:30 p.m to meet up with the defendant.

It was later discovered that the two had driven to a different part of the property where the two engaged in non-consensual sexual acts before returning the victim to the residence.

As the victim arrived back at the residence a witness noticed a hickey on the neck of the victim, and immediately contacted authorities. 

On April 23, Deputies with the Tom Green County Sheriff's Office apprehended Carter shortly after 5:00 a.m. after an arrest warrant was issued for his arrest.

Later that day Carter was released from the Tom Green County Jail after posting $30,000.00 in bond. 

Nearly two months later on June 18, Dylan Jupiter Carter was indicted by a Tom Green County Grand Jury on one count of Sexual Assault of a Child which is a Second Degree Felony in the state of Texas. 

Charges associated with Carters indictment include possible incarceration penalties of up to two to twenty years in prison, fines not to exceed $10,000.00, and the defendant must register as a sex offender for a lifetime.

A person who is convicted of aggravated sexual assault, sexual assault of a child, sexual assault of a dependent or employee may face elevated charges.

In some cases, these charges can be elevated to first degree felony statuses.

If this occurs, punishments will typically include sentences of five to 99 years, and or life in prison.

 

Subscribe to the LIVE! Daily

The LIVE! Daily is the "newspaper to your email" for San Angelo. Each content-packed edition has weather, the popular Top of the Email opinion and rumor mill column, news around the state of Texas, news around west Texas, the latest news stories from San Angelo LIVE!, events, and the most recent obituaries. The bottom of the email contains the most recent rants and comments. The LIVE! daily is emailed 5 days per week. On Sundays, subscribers receive the West Texas Real Estate LIVE! email.

Required

Most Recent Videos

Comments

Its strange how 100 years ago we married off our daughters as quickly as possible. 14 wasn't unheard of to be married, especially if the man was in his early 20s. Non consensual? Not a chance. No one gets a hickey nonconsensually. You can get bit, but it doesn't say its a bite. This is ridiculous.

A lot can change in 100 years.

We widely accept and agree as the state of Texas that is is unacceptable no matter how much you disagree, for a minor to permit a grown adult to have sex with them even if the kid wants to have sex ... it's the law and it's the law for a reason.

Better not let me catch some dude trying to justify having sex with a minor regardless of that minors willingness.

The law came about because of the age we declared one a legally bound adult. It came down to who is responsible for the baby should one be conceived and had nothing to do with biology or some set of moral standards. I agree that 14 isn't old enough to legally consent to sex, with anyone, at any time for the fact that should she get pregnant she isn't legally responsible for the wellbeing of the baby. I dont think that is something that needs a debate in particular. Perhaps one of the parents should be charged with criminal negligence, as their 14 year old wasn't supervised to the extent that she found time to run off with a 21 year old. She didn't meet him randomly, I'm sure. They likely talked online for quite some time with a phone or computer provided by the parents. It's sad that this is turned into some sort of pedophilia case. Our views of what pedophilia is haven't changed over the past 100 years. Our view of legal responsibility has. So after lying to this guy about her age (I'd bet my right hand she did) and getting caught with him she negates all responsibility and he gets labeled a child molester. By the way, biologically speaking, pedophilia is an attraction to a person who isn't of reproductive age. Its a mental disorder. Being attracted to a young woman who is clearly of reproductive age visually, and who very likely lied about how old she was is NOT pedophilia. I hate that there are men and women out there actually molesting CHILDREN and a story like this pops up that not only wastes time and resources but also skews peoples views subjectively. You keep.telling teenagers they aren't responsible for their own actions and you're going to get a whole bunch of 20 somethings who also don't think they're responsible for their own actions. Ridiculous.

There are already a bunch of over sexualized teens running around... just because some perv capitalizes on that without doing any checking on the validity of a youngsters age and blames the child to absolve himself of all responsibility, sorry Bucko but that crap don't fly in this house.

The law recognizes that children are developmentally not able to make decisions about some things, including when to engage in sexual behaviors. Willingness or permission from a child does not imply consent. A child's sexual desire does not permit sexual activity with an adult. If you're under 17, you're a child in Texas.

If you are participating in a sexual relationship with someone under 17 in Texas, you are in violation of the law... Just being real.

Mistake of age is not a defense in Texas, whattyagotta say now people?

Many of us had grandparents/great-grandparents who hooked up and had burgeoning families by 15 or so. Save any instances of disapproving fathers, no mobs of self-appointed vigilantes wanted to lynch the male halves of these unions, nor were there any empty suits with badges, carting away the female halves for a mandatory genophobic brainwashing, and passive aggressive issuances of victimhood badges: "I'm so sorry, dear, and it's not your fault, but you were one half of an illegal,shameful act!"

Within our modern age of championed infantilization, I believe the age of consent in the United States is now 30. After all paperwork and superfluous formalities have been filled out and executed, two people may then engage in intercourse -- in keeping within the guidelines of said contract, and preferably only performed in the prescribed, moral "missionary" position (or other ambiguously interpreted methods, specifically formulated for same-sex prospects.)

I'm not familiar with any guidelines regarding ''approved banter'', overt vocalized expressions of pleasure, or technical bumps in the road in the instance the act in question involves more than two persons, but I'm certain much of this is covered in the fine print, and subject to review and revision, as needed.

For those interested in learning more about this ingenious link in the ever tightening choke-chain around our liberties, or simply wanting to lessen the chance of being pounced on 20 years from now, by a gaggle of emotionally imbalanced, middle aged #metoo'ers, I've provided a link to the contract for your convenience:

https://www.jotform.com/form-templates/sexual-consent-form

This girl was really messed with and all y'all wanna post is how great things were in the "good ole days", and just sounds like several of y'all disagree with the current law?

Personally, I don't care what you believe, I care about children who can't protect themselves and keeping guys who think it's okay to have sex with them away.

If the law that allowed these kinds of unions was so great, why did it get changed?

Please voice your opposing opinion, including your full name so that people know who to keep their children away from.

If you have such strong opinions concerning the matter, then don't be a coward behind a screen name, let everyone know who you are.

Methinks the commenter doth protest too much. These were two young people, though 14 is still way too young, even by the standards of more ephebophilic states and countries where the age of consent is around 15 or 16.

"Personally, I don't care what you believe, I care about children who can't protect themselves and keeping guys who think it's okay to have sex with them away." - Nate Schmidt

Now on this, we're in agreement.

For the love of God if I give you my name will you keep my children away from me?! I need a vacation. Yes at the ripe old age of 28, and always having gone after older men, please keep your teenagers away from me. They're awful creatures, truly, and I could live my whole life not being abused by their meer presence again. >.> By the way, the law wasn't changed, it was written. There didn't need to be a law against pedophilia because people dealt with it on a personal level. This system worked. Ill explain it to you again, the law of consent was written because there was ambiguity about who was responsible for the child should someone get pregnant without being married. The age of consent must be the same age as that of lawful adulthood for obvious reasons. If there is a pregnancy, someone must be held responsible.

Hell yes, times have changed, you can't mess with someone under 17 legally in Texas in 2020 and that's better than Grandad's era.

-- 14 year old who presumably knows right from wrong and has a basic understanding and awareness of the common dangers young women may be subjected to in relationships such as these

-- "non consensual" acts are mentioned, yet she's coming home with a hickey, something which is nearly impossible to acquire in the instance a struggle occurs

If this girl is mentally retarded, her guardians dropped the ball and should be held as accountable as the accused. However, this looks like the quintessential case of the impetuous teenage girl who's going to do what she's going to do, right under the noses of the predictably oblivious parental figures.

JJE made two excellent points:

1) cases like these are clearly enabled: readily available, unsupervised access to phones and the internet, free reign to do whatever, whenever, with WHOMEVER

2) these incidents tend to be lumped in with violent abductions, and are seen as being on par with 2 or 3 year olds who are kidnappeed and assaulted

It'd be nice to receive fewer ''Amber Alerts" for runaway 16 year olds, or narratives about ''sexual assaults" which upon a closer look, reveal absentee parents of alleged ''victims'' with revolving doors of intimate companions of questionable character.

Runaways aren't "missing children", rather delinquents, and "rape" and "sexual assault", involves somebody violently forcing themselves upon someone else, sexually -- not so much a torrid, ongoing affair that's suddenly taken a wrong turn somewhere along the line.

Albeit this man's actions were illegal, more often than not, the narratives of these incidents seem to try and convince the reader that these teenaged female halves had absolutely nothing to do with the activities in question. She's a young woman, not a 3 year old. Had the "victim" robbed a bank or burglarized a building with the suspect, she more than likely would be sitting in Juvi' hall, instead of an interview, being handed tissues to wipe away her crocodile tears.

Fourteen year olds know that affairs with men over 18 are illegal, as much as 18 year old men are aware of the ramifications of screwing 14 year olds. An illegal act was committed by two people. Both should face consequences.

Lot's of little Lolitias out there. Hard to imprison a 19 year old for succumbing to the seductions of a 16 year old.

The law has that covered too, 3 year window, parents or caregivers have to approve.

These guys know what level we're talking about here.

So, before this post, I don't believe that Lares had explicitly stated that he believed that a minor should be held legally accountable for consenting to a sex act, which they are not legally capable of doing. For that matter, I wasn't quite aware that I had stepped into someone's legal "Star Chamber" discussion of favorite topics to debate.

The narrative is not to say that the child has no "INVOLVEMENT", it is to say regardless of your opinion, the truth remains that a child under 17 in Texas CANNOT GIVE CONSENT to sex with an adult, regardless of their involvement! The law is pretty clear, and I'd say it's a good one that doesn't need any revision.

I'm aware that by law, minors cannot ''give consent" to mutually agreed upon intercourse with an adult.

I'm also aware that a 20 year old can't burn down a building with a 14 year old accomplice, and go to jail while the 14 year old is labeled a victim and told the incident they took part in isn't their fault.

Children do get into trouble for sexual crimes... and they serve prison sentences for it too.

The thing is, you seem upset that they're not doing that in these circumstances where some pedophile manipulates a young girl he knows is interested in sex.

The guy took advantage of her plain and simple... how can you blame the girl?

I don't think she should be doing these kinds of things, I'm sure the parents don't want her doing them... seems like it's only the perverts who get caught doing this and you who stick up for it Lares, don't forget Rita and JJE's opinions on it either.

Not sure how something so simple is so hard for you guys to let go, it shows a lot about where your heart is... If a kid molested another kid and had to serve a prison sentence,then why is a child not responsible for sex with an adult? BECAUSE THERE WAS A FRICKIN ADULT THERE!!!

No more excuses.

Most pervs are aware of the law that is always ready to serve consequences for those type of actions... and they show up for sex with the children anyway.

Comparing willingness in the two different acts mentioned is exactly what you like to say, "apples and oranges."

Be a responsible adult in our community Lares.

https://ifstudies.org/blog/how-denial-and-victim-blaming-keep-sexual-assault-hidden

"The Biloxi bridge assault illustrates another problem, which is that some victims are blamed because they aren’t innocent enough to deserve victim status. If a person fights back, is not dressing in the right way, is intoxicated, or if the accused is someone they know, their story is more likely to be questioned or doubted. One scholar found that people only give a full pass to those fitting an “ideal victim” profile, which consists of five traits. The one hurt must be: (1) weak/vulnerable, (2) involved in a respectable activity at the time of victimization, (3) blameless in all aspects of the interaction, (4) victimized by an obvious offender, and (5) someone who does not know the offender. This may be why professionals or clergy are more likely to blame victims who are not living according to the standards or recommendations they give, and it also may be why male victims are less likely to be taken seriously. Those who meet the victim profile fully are most likely to be supported in their trauma."

Sexual predators love the wrong kind of victim... people are less likely to care about them leaving the predator feeling secure in doing their misdeeds.

When a child predator is unmasked, they play the victim card and blame the kid... i.e. "Fourteen year olds know that affairs with men over 18 are illegal, as much as 18 year old men are aware of the ramifications of screwing 14 year olds."
It's called victim blaming, they do it because of the undesirable consequences of their actions.

Stop blaming the victims!

I've found myself taken aback by the attitudes of some Catholics regarding the pedophile scandals involving the clergy and the sentiment that the victims and parents were, in fact, to blame, and not their priests.

Listen you ignorant poptart. No one is victim blaming. No one is defending a guy who sodomized a 4 year old. NO ONE. Were saying that she wasn't claiming to be a victim until the sexual affair came to light, and then she claimed it was non-consensual. She physically consented in every way. Verbally consented. She gave everything besides legal consent which ill say again is only binding because in the event of a pregnancy SOMEBODY LAWFULLY MUST BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CHILD. She's not a victim of prolonged molestation. She's not a victim of violent rape. She's not a victim of anything besides what SHOULD BE her parents wrath. Again, telling her she isn't responsible for her own body is NOT a message id like a generation of young women to receive. Do you not understand the difference between a man who is attracted to children and a man who is attracted to someone of breeding age by all visible signs? This man is NOT a pedophile and hes being lumped in with those who are and its wrong.

There's a huge audience with an insatiable hunger for devouring your sort of spin on this topic...feminazis, #metoo'ers, jaded old spinsters, fans of "The View" etc...

My intention was not to place blame, rather accountability on the part of all involved in a criminal act.

Little Miss Thang knows not to shoplift, she understands elementary concepts like keeping schedules, family obligations, personal hygiene....but is suddenly devoid of all better judgement and discretion when it comes to having sex?

That's a hard sell, Nate, but like I said, you'd have plenty of eager buyers.

But Lares, I have desperately tried to display for you how accountability is dispersed in these scenarios... I know you don't show any understanding of this concept, just keep telling people these uncontrollably horny tweens and young teens are to blame because they blatantly like sex.

Since I'm not understanding how it's a 14 year olds fault because she is being exploited by someone who knows she is experiencing her sexuality, the families warned them both... his adulthood was the factor after they were both warned, he knew he was culpable to the law at that point, there is no law or reasonable expectation that a child should be responsible in this scenario, but by all means, please do try to explain your radical view to me again.

I'm not going to waste time on the concept of ''morality'', as its a subjective concept. "Tradition", also is a subjective concept. I tend to lean towards science, instead of hang-ups, arbitrary man-made laws and tenets derived from various brands of superstitious nonsense, when it comes to making sense of this subject.

My view on this isn't that radical, nor hard to comprehend (for most), and ''blame'' isn't my game either, as I don't think people's innate sexual tendencies are necessarily their fault, be they the urges of a 14 year old or a 30 year old.

Can we control or curb our urges? Yes. Should we? Yes, as there are consequences for those who do not.

The laws regarding "age of consent" are very inconsistent with laws pertaining to other crimes, and that's basically what I'm pointing out here. Still with me..?

If an act is deemed illegal, then it makes sense to hold all participating parties responsible. I guarantee you, if you asked any 14 year old if they knew it was illegal for a person over 18 to have sex with them, they'd know it was. If we're dealing with mentally impaired people or toddlers, that's a whole other story.

Society expects quite a bit of personal accountability from 14 year olds, in many other areas of daily life. They're reprimanded if they skip school, and they're held in juvenile detention facilities for countless other crimes. Every so often the judicial system may be lenient, but the bottom line usually entails some sort of understanding that they're certainly expected to know better, and will face harsher consequences if they don't fall in line.

"Underage sex" is the only crime in which a teenager can participate in, and not only forgo accountability, but garner sympathy and consolation from others. Victims of rape deserve the aforementioned, as do helpless children who are forcibly assaulted -- not so much runaway teens who spend anywhere from a weekend to a few years screwing some moron, and then pull the victim card when the convenience presents itself.

These cases kind of remind me of seniors who condescendingly scold younger generations for their behavior, and do so using their age as their badge of authority, then when these same old codgers are duped out of money over the phone by some peasant in India, pull the age card again, only this time using their advanced age as the reason why they're just so vulnerable.

I hope you can understand where I'm coming from, this time, Nate. I'm not contesting the law, rather citing it's inconsistencies.

If you think that a child victim of sexual assault deserves part of the punishment then I'm glad the law is EXTREMELY inconsistent in this area in your honest opinion.. in fact I relish in the fact that this law upsets you so much... I've never seen you so inconsistent and off your game Leery Deces... keep up the good work, we're rooting for you to figure it out!

Inconcistancies with the law? Seems to be more so the punishments are designed to fit the crimes. I'm sure there's some science behind it!

So let me get this this straight, the child, who is deemed unable to legally give consent is somehow at fault?

Not sure I'm understanding how this is counted acceptable to you? Common sense would say a grown adult should always say no to engaging in sexaul acts with a child under the age of seventeen.

In this case, a man felt it was ok to engage in sexual intercourse with a child even though HE is an adult and able to make those distinctions. Knowing the weight of his consequences surely, including the possibility of the pedophilia being outted, landing himself on a S.O. roster, he still messed with this kid.

A kid can be willing and want it so much it drives them crazy but ultimately, it is the adults decision to engage in the illegal act.

No matter the physical attributes a child has or the lusts they have or the fact they're physically able to have sex, adults should never diddle a kid under the age of seventeen here in Texas because it is the LAW and obviously it wouldn't be the morally right thing for a grown man / women to do as well.

I do not believe it is the child's fault that she was exploited by a grown man looking to please his pedophilia. Everyone has the desire to be wanted and if a perv knows that, they will willingly give a child what they want.

We dont need to be telling the children, LITTLE GIRL DONT PUT YOURSELF OUT THERE LIKE BAIT BECAUSE GROWN UPS CANT HELP THEMSELVES AND WILL HAVE TO BREAK THE LAW TO DO WHAT YOU WANT...

We should be respecting our children who aren't respecting themselves as they grow into adulthood... in fact we need to teach them the dangers of when a grown man is lusting for them, we need to teach them that pedophile behavior is not ok they have something wrong with with them and they should stay away from people like that. And of course we know children will be children and do things they shouldn't ie. lie or try to manipulate to get what their wanting because after all they're not grown yet and it's a part of learning.

Surely we should be saying things like, HEY ADULT, YOU ARE THE ONE WHO WILL BE HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS BECAUSE A CHILD HAS NO WAY TO CONSENT.

This child was a victim of exploitation regardless of her willingness a grown man took advantage. There really is no grey area in this, either your alright with kiddy diddling or not. Breeding features and tradition hold no weight to the law or the morality of this issue.

Also, their are studies that have proven some children develop physically at a much earlier age than others because they began to be molested at an early age... not saying that is the case for every child either... just saying you can't rule that out while you excuse these pervs actions by saying that a bunch of 14 some odds wanted it.

Here's where your hangup is in the matter. Its an important distinction to make as it pertains to biology and how it directly effects sexual urges. Are you ready? Being attracted to a human who can biologically have childen safely isn't pedophilia. It is nature. Lawmakers put a number on the age to hold parties responsible for bastardized children. If the age of lawful adulthood was 25, then they would make the age of consent 25. If it were 13, then the age of consent would again be 13. NOW, let me explain you what a pedophile is. A pedophile is someone attracted to a human who isn't capable of breeding due to sexual immaturity. For example, even if a 9 year old is capable of getting pregnant due to having a menstrual cycle, she is incapable of safely carrying and delivering a child as the hips haven't widened and the cervix has not yet developed. The person attracted to her is a PEDOPHILE. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE?

I hear your arguement, JJE, mine is not from biology, more from the current constructs of the law, morality, and the psychological development of our children and young adult's if you will... Anyone under 17 in Texas.

Your telling me this biological stuff really changes nothing about how I feel on this matter... we have different levels of punishment available for different kinds of crimes, let them argue biology... this isn't a courtroom.

If you're an adult and you're having sex with a child under 17, you deserve punishment even if you claim ignorance and I HOPE THAT PISSES OFF A LOT OF PEOPLE!!!

We aren't discussing "attraction" here, we're discussing a felony act that is immoral and is not "natural". Next thing you're gonna hit me with how you know a group of "non-offending" pedophiles and you believe they hold a revolutionary secret to protect our kids.

This biological origin you quoth, does not change my view on this subject as far as you have explained it to me.

Nate, there are a lot of other issues I would be more wary about you feeling should be treated as starkly as you treat this issue.

Personally, I could see how dropping the age of consent down to 16 might save everyone a lot of hassle considering how highly sexualized American culture has become. On the other hand, I understand that there's a slippery slope involved once laws like these start changing.

Now, if you were trying to convince most of Latin America (or Kentucky, for that matter,) that it is *morally* wrong for young adults to have relations at 16, man, good luck with that.

https://youtu.be/P7e3M6FeOsw

Like vaya con Dios, and good luck.

You hit the heart of the issue LOL, when you said we should be respecting our children who aren't respecting themselves as they grow into adulthood!

I didn't originate a view here buddy, I just align with what I believe God's heart on the matter is and what Texas law has on the books, any other opinion is an anomaly to me.

You wrote that your argument comes from "the current constructs of the law, morality, and the psychological development." You also seemed to be completely serious when you dismissed biology while admitting you rely on psychology, which also relies on biology to a great extent.

When will you learn that Jehovah's true will is for you to send your entire paycheck to internet evangelists?

Any studies you care to cite for that, or am I speaking to the god emperor of the Incas or the Chinese? I don't expect your mind to change. So long as you come to an approximation of the right answer, who cares how wrong you are in getting there.

Just another tidbit...

For those who don't know, these stories will always detail that "non-consensual", sex occurred in the event a minor is involved... Because a minor doesn't have a legal capability or a moral responsibility to give consent to an adult.

Hey, you're the final perv arguing what has already been written into the law okay, counsel me if it makes you feel better, argue with me when these laws are changed, till then, you're gonna look increasingly peddy/petty.

Nate, nothing about this changes how stupid you sound. I'm not actually arguing the law at this point. I'm attacking the way you've made your arguments. I can already tell you're a narcissistic control freak who hates to be contradicted, so that alone is enough to keep this ball rolling, come hell, high water, or anything short of a well aimed bullet. (Poor aim won't cut it, man.)

Besides, you act as if the Bible gives an age of consent. If so, where?

We're not living in a theocracy, but maybe Nate is unaware of this. Although most Christians cling to their Ten Commandments, they conveniently ignore the more severe and bloody aspects of Mosaic Law -- like killing your rebellious kids.

Consistency is not a strong suit among the devout, in particular those who refer to the Bible as their handbook for daily life.

If Biblical justice is what's in order, then let's present all these horny little brats to the ''elders of the city", have them tried for their insubordination and stoned to death.

God would want it that way.

Typical of both you two, full of misquoted Bible verses and yourselves... Rita and Leery ought to be ashamed. All this time and neither one of you has a stronger argument than this?

This is what happens when someone seriously disagrees with a grown man having sex with a child. People come out of the woodwork to voice their support for the perpetrator, they come swiftly to argue the meaningless points of debate wishing only to detract from the topic.

Well boys, the Bible doesn't support West Texan's stoning their children today, I'm sure you knew that when you typed your response though.

The sickness in you two is that, while some girl is out there right now trying to make sense of the world, after being exploited for sex, which is obviously not easy for adults, let alone a child, in these unprecedented times... And yet, here you two are, joking between each other about stoning horny teens.

You guys do that, I'm going to be busy talking about what's really going on.

I just came up here to learn from Nate. He's the real guru around here. I'm just the humble deacon.

Oh my guess these guys cant read well....? The bible supports our CURRENT laws .Although you can lead them horses to water we all know if they dont want to drink we cant make them and if that be the case surely that horse will get whatever the consequences of that may be.
Since rita and you keep on bring up tradition legal latino diddling ancient cultures of aztec china India whatever and arranged marriages I get the feeling the insistence in which you guys want to argue over has you emotional . How sad these are your expressions over the fact we have not adapted the relaxed system that they have in other cultures for younger diddling ages . Isnt it lovely that we live in the good old USA I love it ! It is so good knowing they have constructed laws supported from Gods word itself to protect the people. God says follow mans laws... here in United States those laws say dont diddle kids and although I'm no expert I would imagine he ment all laws should be followed not excluding those of marriages so if it's illegal to have an arranged marriage in Texas so be it if is legal so be it the law is the law. Maybe I'm over simplifying this. I cant make you guys want or do what's right. Science doesn't support diddleing children sorry Leery's..... how unfortunate for your views oh by the way your right people like you who have sickening foolish ideologies show way more "CONSISTANCY " . than us.

If Jehovah supports the current laws, then why is does the US still have the immigration floodgates wide open to "Aztec Chinaindia" for all of their kung fu maharishis to come down off their pyramids, come here and change our mores?

What's more, as I've stated elsewhere, the Left is already advocating to have these laws changed. You, yourself, Brit, have cited the fact that extremists are already trying to get the "P" for "pedophile" added to their acronym in support of pedophilic interest.

Perhaps some higher power is telling us that we should all be getting married to each other at 15, like so many of my friends' parents did. (Possibly in arranged marriages.)

They come here to this great place and live under our great laws. Or suffer the consequences just like anyone else. And just because pedo's want it legal doesn't mean they can get what they want! Thank God

Well, that may be the case, and for the most part recent arrivals and their descendents do respect the law of the land. However, other groups are not so amenable to integrating into American culture and instead seek to enforce their own.

A significant force in the push to normalize pedophilia is the Muslim community, whose extreme and conservative adherents have many legally adept activists working for their interests.

https://www.sapiens.org/culture/sharia-united-states/

https://www.truthandaction.org/dearborn-michigan-first-city-us-enforce-sharia-law/2/

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/01/no_sharia_in_america.html

For the most part, the "Aztec Indiachinese" aren't so much the problem.

Post a comment to this article here: