Where have I seen the kind of logic that the AFA and Limbaugh are employing before? Hmmm....
"Officer, if she wasn't looking for sex she shouldn't have worn such a tight shirt and short skirt. Besides, she winked at me. That's as good as consent."
Seriously? Last I checked, schoolboys flirt with girls who don't want to be flirted with every damn day. Should little Suzy bring a Glock to school and gun one down to make sure that the next little Johnny gets the picture when she says no? And then, should the defense argue that the boy little Suzy gunned down had it coming because the school didn't stop him from flirting with her?
Why does the situation change when Suzy becomes Brandon McInerney and the person gunned down becomes Lawrence King, homosexual male/possible transgirl?
Also, did you see the part of Limbaugh's article where he stated this:
"Can you imagine if the kid were a conservative and wanted his civil right to indulge and inform himself about conservatism, whether the school would have said, "Hey, there's nothing we can do. The kid wants to learn about conservatism and there's nothing we can do to stop it." I hardly think so."
Last I checked children in America weren't being gunned down for being Republicans, ->-bleeped-<-.
