childs sex = all public access to the growth of all children. formed as false reality on that person, by all active persistence to life.
murders = all public persistence, to allow them their life.
/headscratch
Gibberish. Try again in English using complete sentences.
Is English perhaps not your first language? Is there someone who can help you translate?
Same here.
In other words, you’re still not making sense.
ENGLISH please!!!
My guess is that the problem isn’t that he’s smoking something “medicinal” but that he’s not taking something medicinal. Namely, the stuff he’s been prescribed.
It is what is being said, it is not gibberish.
Authority recognizes a childs sexual inhabitance, to the growth of all children within society.
That society, participates to that information, by falsifying reality on that child.
Insisting such a circumstance does not exist.
This is the committed task, of society, through that authority. By all given function within that society.
Simultaneously, that same society is insisting the rights of life, for people to be incarcerated rather than terminated from life. No matter…the severity… of their crime.
however, At the same time, NOT regarding that child, whose life, is still under persisted falsification, by the basis of that society.
How do you claim the morality and rights to life for the most heinus of criminals. While ensuring that someone whose innocent life, which has catered to the active function within society, does not hold the terms equal to his own fact shared.
BY WAYS OF TORTURE.
This is not some superficial generic pass over. If every adult can recognize their child, to the sex of another child. How then do they persist on the drive of garunteeing life to criminals, while refusing to articulate the fact of participation, ON THAT CHILD!
DO YOU HAVE DONKEY BRAINS?!
No. Do you know how to speak English? Note that I am not arguing about the topic that concerns you, I am pointing out that your English language grammar and punctuation skills are in serious need of improvement. You seem to have a reasonable vocabulary, but you don’t know how to put words together into coherent sentences and paragraphs. You can’t argue about the issues that concern you in an understantable fashion without dealing with that.
You are failing to communicate of the most basic of levels.
You clearly have an exceptionally poor grasp of the English language.
Yes but they also have a rather exceptional vocabulary too, which is strange. I wonder if this is some kind of spam bot.
Yeah, it’s like an application that doesn’t quite pass the Turing Test.
Ve havf vays ovf makink you unterstant…
(Sorry, just a cheap shot. You can yak on me next time I make a typo!)
Seriously, I can’t even read between the lines with this guy: if he has a point, it’s not coming through.
Are you saying that society had a contract with the murderer, to educate and take care of him, and he turned around betrayed that contract and killed? Instead of continuing to keep him alive, society should kill him? Nah, killing is still wrong.
Because some murders are more equal than others?
I bet you that instead of responding to this, he continues to ramble on in what is, at best, pretentious verbal diarrhea.
There’s a story about, IIRC, a large number of monkeys sitting in front of keyboards, randomly punching keys. At some point, owing to chance, at least one of the monkeys will punch out something of the caliber of Shakespeare. After reading the first post in this thread, only one thought comes to mind:
I guess we’ll need another monkey.
Or DONKEY. 
This sounds like the ramblings of a person with a serious mental illness.
Okay, OP, I think it’s pretty clear that you support the death penalty. And that you feel that opposition to the death penalty from people who are apparently unconcerned about something that happens to children, is unconscionable.
We cannot have a useful discussion about this second point unless you make it clear what this thing is that happens to children.
Let’s stipulate that even without the issue of children you would be a supporter of capital punishment, and ignore the existence of the death penalty for a bit. Let’s have you explain about the children so we know what you’re talking about. Because so far you haven’t succeeded in getting that point across. Consider:
Yes it is gibberish, and I’ll tell you why. “Inhabitance” is not a real word. This fact renders your statement not an actual sentence, and therefore unintelligible, and yes, gibberish.
Why don’t you reformulate that little bit, and this time, replace the character string “i-n-h-a-b-i-t-a-n-c-e” with an actual word, preferably a noun, that conveys the meaning you mistakenly believed was being conveyed by “inhabitance?” Once we’ve got that out of the way, communication can BEGIN to occur.
I really dont get what you dont understand. let’s make a chart
-2 parents have one Child A
-2 other parents have one Child B
-Children A and B grow up accross the street from another,
-they have sex in first grade through third grade.
-the regulating authority talks to the parents about their sex,
-the parents and that authority talk to child B about that sex
-Child A is left neglected, while Parents+Authority, regard class mates X-Z in all of Child A’s classrooms.
-for 20 years Child A does not have the notion of the existence.
-However, every class mate or sex partner Child A has had, has been regarded as and since, Child B was initially regarded, by parents + authority.
-What resulted was the collective of society, falsifying reality, on Child A, while actively ensuring it, for every other person.
-Instead of processing that reasoning of life, as initiated on Child B, Child A got subjected to an endless perpetuating harassment scheme, that equals out to a daily regiment of Torture, conducted by all those who were regarded by Parents+Authority, in the first place.
-SO-
-A prisoner deserves to be advocated for, conditions of LIFE IMPRISONMENT versus TERMINATION, when he is already set in stone, his fault and betrayal on society, and what that requires of him.
-While a child, whose private sexual affairs, have been base lined, to all public participation, does not deserve, even the RIGHT of mental stationing, based to the fact shared on his life through 20 years of purposeful withholding?
What is it that Child B gets to be incorporated to the fact of Child A’s sex alongside all other strangers?
Why does the collective of strangers positioned to Child As sex, through equal relevance with Child B, blatantly and abusively deny reality, on Child A?
Why when X amount of adults who have lived their life determined to murder and desecrate life, by such, menacing conviction, do they have the support of society, to give them exemption on their betrayal of life?
Yet a child, whose most intimate of private affairs, been made so public, along side all who shared in that intimacy, is still blatantly denied, the factor of that existence, BY ALL PERSISTENCE OF EVERY CITIZEN, ENGAGED AS STATED.