Everyone has known for YEAR that little ones have slept in the same bed as Michael. He didn't say he molsted them, just that he slept with them, merging the two different states of being is wrong.
Printable View
Everyone has known for YEAR that little ones have slept in the same bed as Michael. He didn't say he molsted them, just that he slept with them, merging the two different states of being is wrong.
there is nothing amoral about sleeping with your
child, regardless of gender... or fame...
i don't understand why its anyone's f.r.i.g.g.i.n. business
or 'right' to get all up into everyone else's business.
i have heard of mothers and fathers expressing
deep wishes to swim in the nude with their newborns.
there is nothing wrong with this either. in fact,
IMO, i find it deeply moving and compassionate.
it irritates the bejeeezus outta me when people
go ballistic over b.u.l.l.s.h.i.t. such as this.
and one more thing....
before you go butchering my post and claiming that
i am forcing some sort of negativity or sarcasm
upon your initial post, know this...
i was agreeing.
Actually, I did not think such a thing, from your first response, now, as for your follow up... [img]confused.gif[/img]
Keep in mind that these were not familial sleep-ins, but Michael Jackson and non familial "friends". However, sleeping with said friends does not mean Michael Jackson "slept" with said friends.
Although there was that "settlement" he engineered with the family of one such friend. If Michael Jackson has never had sex in these type of sleepovers, then he is really a cool guy. If he has, then he's the typical adult opportunist having his way with someone who isn't an adult yet.
he sickens me.
not in that moral disgust sort of way,
just he looks like if he were to be living in sydney right now, his face would melt right off. i think he's icky.