Keefe
Well-Known Member
He's a HS SS teacher, I believe. His degree was in Thrilling.
Roy Moore justifications
- Thread starter The Thriller
- Start date
He's a HS SS teacher, I believe. His degree was in Thrilling.
D
Deleted member 848
Guest
Oh yeah, there are people in both categories? Can you give me a ratio?
Red
Well-Known Member
If then-ism. What about-ism. So what-ism....
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...e285c7f4512_story.html?utm_term=.1392cd3ad58a
Trump’s conveniently flexible standard on accusations — and he is not alone — boils down to: If the accuser points a finger at a Democrat — Bill Clinton, Harvey Weinstein — her word is to be trusted, automatically. If she complains about a Republican, Trump’s otherwise dormant devotion to due process kicks in. How can claims from “many years ago” be allowed to “destroy a person’s life”?
Some answers: Because they are entirely credible. Because the girl, now a woman, has no conceivable ax to grind — she is a longtime Republican, a Trump voter even — and nothing to gain from coming forward. Because three other women related similar, although less disturbing stories, underscoring Moore’s interest in younger girls......
.......you are a politician dealing with a story you wish would go away. Then you turn instinctively to if-then-ism. “If these allegations are true . . .” said Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), leading — or not — his prove-it caucus. Disappointingly, among them were women senators who ought to know better. “If it’s true . . .” said Alaska’s Lisa Murkowski. “If the allegations . . .” said West Virginia’s Shelley Moore Capito. “If there is any truth at all to these horrific allegations . . .” said Maine’s Susan Collins. Seriously, have you read this article? How can you think about serving alongside this man?
....If-then-ism is the rhetorical cousin of what-about-ism, a bid to deflect attention by questioning whether those complaining about “x” were equally inflamed by “y,” when “y” involved someone on their side. If-then-ism represents a similar effort to avoid casting a politically inconvenient judgment.
It is better, sure, than the jaw-dropping alternative: so-what-ism, remarkably flagrant among Alabamians in response to the Moore report. “Much ado about nothing,” State Auditor Jim Zeigler told the Washington Examiner. Joseph did it with Mary, he observed. Except, um, minor theological point here — did he?
Still, there is something clarifying in the brutal honesty of so-what-ism. A 32-year-old Moore could put a 14-year-old girl’s hand on his erect penis and touch her over her bra and underpants. Trump could shoot someone in the middle of Fifth Avenue. It would not deter their supporters. Okay, at least we know where you’re coming from. Your moral parameters are clear in their absence....
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...e285c7f4512_story.html?utm_term=.1392cd3ad58a
Trump’s conveniently flexible standard on accusations — and he is not alone — boils down to: If the accuser points a finger at a Democrat — Bill Clinton, Harvey Weinstein — her word is to be trusted, automatically. If she complains about a Republican, Trump’s otherwise dormant devotion to due process kicks in. How can claims from “many years ago” be allowed to “destroy a person’s life”?
Some answers: Because they are entirely credible. Because the girl, now a woman, has no conceivable ax to grind — she is a longtime Republican, a Trump voter even — and nothing to gain from coming forward. Because three other women related similar, although less disturbing stories, underscoring Moore’s interest in younger girls......
.......you are a politician dealing with a story you wish would go away. Then you turn instinctively to if-then-ism. “If these allegations are true . . .” said Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), leading — or not — his prove-it caucus. Disappointingly, among them were women senators who ought to know better. “If it’s true . . .” said Alaska’s Lisa Murkowski. “If the allegations . . .” said West Virginia’s Shelley Moore Capito. “If there is any truth at all to these horrific allegations . . .” said Maine’s Susan Collins. Seriously, have you read this article? How can you think about serving alongside this man?
....If-then-ism is the rhetorical cousin of what-about-ism, a bid to deflect attention by questioning whether those complaining about “x” were equally inflamed by “y,” when “y” involved someone on their side. If-then-ism represents a similar effort to avoid casting a politically inconvenient judgment.
It is better, sure, than the jaw-dropping alternative: so-what-ism, remarkably flagrant among Alabamians in response to the Moore report. “Much ado about nothing,” State Auditor Jim Zeigler told the Washington Examiner. Joseph did it with Mary, he observed. Except, um, minor theological point here — did he?
Still, there is something clarifying in the brutal honesty of so-what-ism. A 32-year-old Moore could put a 14-year-old girl’s hand on his erect penis and touch her over her bra and underpants. Trump could shoot someone in the middle of Fifth Avenue. It would not deter their supporters. Okay, at least we know where you’re coming from. Your moral parameters are clear in their absence....
The Thriller
Well-Known Member
It’s pretty crazy that sok non the right are accusing the post of libel. The story has over 30 sources on the record.
If Moore really wants to clear his name, why not sue the post? I think we all know the answer to that.
If Moore really wants to clear his name, why not sue the post? I think we all know the answer to that.
The Thriller
Well-Known Member
Are you talking about me? That’s where I started but that’s not where I am now. Why?
Edit: Awww. I understand now. Sorry, I’ve had Archie on block for about one week now.
The Thriller
Well-Known Member
Joe Bagadonuts
Well-Known Member
Yeah, because even in those cases where no accusation has ever been made I have this intrinsic knowledge that something inappropriate happened and the degree to which it occurred. Unfortunately this power is so magnificent that it would cause society to collapse if I were ever to use it in a public way, so I have to keep the information mostly to myself. I can, however, reveal is that I know of women who have been devastated by having been sexually abused, and I know of men who have been devastated by being accused of sexual abuse that they did not commit. I'm not sure this information should be that surprising, though. Did you know that there are also people who have been incarcerated and even killed for murders that they did not commit? Not exactly a pleasant experience for an innocent person.
D
Deleted member 848
Guest
Ratio pls
Do you have a ratio? Is there any way to know the actual ratio?
Are you suggesting something along the lines of 1000:1, 100:1, 10:1?
And in the end, do we do away with the notion allegations require evidence and the presumption of innocence until proven guilty?
I assume the vast majority of sexual assault allegations are honest and truthful. I also assume that not 100% of them are.
Joe Bagadonuts
Well-Known Member
In some instances the ratio is that the accuser is 100% truthful. In some instances the ratio is that the accused is 100% innocent. Of course, their are all sorts of ratios in between. The crazy thing is that the truth is always specific to the facts of the actual case. You're welcome.
Joe Bagadonuts
Well-Known Member
A family I grew up near had four daughters and a son. They always seemed happy and well adjusted. Our families have remained close friends for life. The oldest daughter married an unusual man and moved to Alaska. She became estranged from her family. When she reappeared about ten years later, after having divorced, she claimed she had married largly because her father had sexually abused her. She said it was such a horrific experience that the memory of it had gone away, but now it had come back. Everyone who knew the man, including his other children were stunned by the accusation which seemed completely out of character. The estranged daughter then decided to sue her father. In the course of this a second daughter said that similar memories of her father had re-emerged for her. So now two of this man's five children were accusing him of sexual abuse. You can imagine how devastating all of this was for every member of the family. The lawsuit was eventually dropped, and the second girl who had testified against her father has now begun to claim that she no longer believes the memories of sexual abuse were real. She says that they seemed real because of conversations with her sister who started the whole thing and a therapist.
My closest relationship in the family is with a daughter who not only did not accuse her father of sexual abuse. She says he is a wonderful man who could not possibly have done any of the things he was accused of. Her relationships with both of the girls who accused their father is very strained.
So based on a story like this, does anyone believe that a sexual abuse accusation should be the only requirement for bringing a person down? Does the testimony of other witnesses matter? Does the passage of time and other life experiences matter? I honestly don't know the answers to these questions, but I do know that I went through something terrible personally, and it had devastatingly negative impacts on my life until I decided to let go of the anger and hurt and move on. It's amazing how quickly I healed once I gave myself permission to, and it's incredible how many blessings came into my life.
I am personally sickened by the idea of sexual abuse. I am in favor of severe punishments for any person who perpetrates it (castration seems reasonable). That said, my hope for all of the victims of abuse is that they can give themselves permission to let it go. Holding on to the hurt is way too painful. Moving on is so incredibly freeing.
I will probably get hammered for this post by many of the usual suspects, including one guy here who thinks he knows everything about me and actually knows almost nothing. I don't care about that. What I do care about is that the book "The Four Agreements" changed my life. I cannot imagine a person who would not benefit by reading and studying that wonderful piece of work. (BTW, the first time I tried to read it I couldn't even get through the prologue because I just wasn't ready for such thinking. Once I was in a time and place where I could really understand it I was completely blown away by the wisdom.)
My closest relationship in the family is with a daughter who not only did not accuse her father of sexual abuse. She says he is a wonderful man who could not possibly have done any of the things he was accused of. Her relationships with both of the girls who accused their father is very strained.
So based on a story like this, does anyone believe that a sexual abuse accusation should be the only requirement for bringing a person down? Does the testimony of other witnesses matter? Does the passage of time and other life experiences matter? I honestly don't know the answers to these questions, but I do know that I went through something terrible personally, and it had devastatingly negative impacts on my life until I decided to let go of the anger and hurt and move on. It's amazing how quickly I healed once I gave myself permission to, and it's incredible how many blessings came into my life.
I am personally sickened by the idea of sexual abuse. I am in favor of severe punishments for any person who perpetrates it (castration seems reasonable). That said, my hope for all of the victims of abuse is that they can give themselves permission to let it go. Holding on to the hurt is way too painful. Moving on is so incredibly freeing.
I will probably get hammered for this post by many of the usual suspects, including one guy here who thinks he knows everything about me and actually knows almost nothing. I don't care about that. What I do care about is that the book "The Four Agreements" changed my life. I cannot imagine a person who would not benefit by reading and studying that wonderful piece of work. (BTW, the first time I tried to read it I couldn't even get through the prologue because I just wasn't ready for such thinking. Once I was in a time and place where I could really understand it I was completely blown away by the wisdom.)
The Thriller
Well-Known Member
I wonder how many of those “false accusers” fabricating child molestation and rape cases have Washington Post stories confirmed by 30 different sources, where 3 women have gone on the record to retelling similar stories showing Moore’s methods, and one former colleague who admitted that “it was common knowledge he dated high School girls?”
I get that sometimes people say things for attention. Sometimes politics can get dirty. And sometimes people flat out lie about rape. This does not appear to be one of them. In fact, I’d say the likelihood of Moore’s crimes of child molestation being true are far greater than most of the accusation coming out of Hollywood (that everyone seems to believe in).
So why are some of you so skeptical about Moore? I hope we aren’t letting politics cloud our judgement. Many of the common characteristics of molesters is the need for power. Moore’s long career against women, minorities, and religions he deems unworthy of recognition (despite Islam being one of the 5 major world religions) is indicative of a narcissist who craves power. Craves control. He even defied the Supreme Court... twice!
This guy doesn’t like being told what to do. He likes complete control. That likely contributed to his molesting of children.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/teresa-jones-says-roy-moore-common-knowledge-dated-teens/
I get that sometimes people say things for attention. Sometimes politics can get dirty. And sometimes people flat out lie about rape. This does not appear to be one of them. In fact, I’d say the likelihood of Moore’s crimes of child molestation being true are far greater than most of the accusation coming out of Hollywood (that everyone seems to believe in).
So why are some of you so skeptical about Moore? I hope we aren’t letting politics cloud our judgement. Many of the common characteristics of molesters is the need for power. Moore’s long career against women, minorities, and religions he deems unworthy of recognition (despite Islam being one of the 5 major world religions) is indicative of a narcissist who craves power. Craves control. He even defied the Supreme Court... twice!
This guy doesn’t like being told what to do. He likes complete control. That likely contributed to his molesting of children.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/teresa-jones-says-roy-moore-common-knowledge-dated-teens/
DutchJazzer
Banned
you convinced me! throw him in jail. if he did it we throw him in jail right!
unless they are left wing, then we ignore it!
lets throw all capitalist in jails,
The Thriller
Well-Known Member
Harvey Weinstein has lost his company and is a social pariah.
Kevin Spacey lost his show on Netflix and is literally being erased from his last movie.
CK Louis lost his show on HBO.
Enough with this “the left doesn’t hold their own accountable” nonsense. That narrative is as accurate as Hannity’s reporting of Seth Rich or uranium. Utter rubbish.
Kevin Spacey lost his show on Netflix and is literally being erased from his last movie.
CK Louis lost his show on HBO.
Enough with this “the left doesn’t hold their own accountable” nonsense. That narrative is as accurate as Hannity’s reporting of Seth Rich or uranium. Utter rubbish.
Keefe
Well-Known Member
That industry depends on fans as their livelihood. The hell if they're going to risk that as an industry.
Politicians have gotten away with murder, literally I'm sure, for centuries. And they still get re-elected. They do what they want because there's little risk in losing their livelihood.
The Thriller
Well-Known Member
Huh?
Politicians don’t depend on the public and the public’s perception of them for their livelihood? Hmmm...
candrew
Well-Known Member
What's with guys getting chicks in a room and making them watch them jack off?
I didn't even know that was a thing.
I read somewhere that it's a bizarre rationalization by sexual deviants in that they're not sexually assaulting a woman but still satisfying their need to exert power over them.
I dunno..
I didn't even know that was a thing.
I read somewhere that it's a bizarre rationalization by sexual deviants in that they're not sexually assaulting a woman but still satisfying their need to exert power over them.
I dunno..
Keefe
Well-Known Member
Nope. Did you see who got elected President? People would rather elect someone who raped a woman than someone who stole $50,000 in funds.
DutchJazzer
Banned
actually alex jones has been warning about this for a while now!
ooh and stuff turns frogs gay!