Warning : Above post may contain snark and/or sarcasm. Try reparsing with the /s argument before replying.
What the world has learned is that America is never more than one election away from losing its goddamned mindMe on Elite : Dangerous | My WoW charactersOriginally Posted by Howard Tayler
That's not true if someone just said any of those things no one would believe them, what people choose to ignore is that there are reasons for people saying that. Instead some people choose to argue with the label rather than the reasons. It's why calling people a nazi is rarely effective, even when the person in question is an actual nazi because people don't look at the reasons they look at the labels. In Roy Moore's case there is evidence so when people call him a pedophile it's because of this evidence.
I'm fine with you arguing against the evidence, but don't argue against the conclusion before arguing against the evidence. For handy access https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roy_Mo...ct_allegations
This thread got wierder faster than the sargon one. Yeesh
So he said, she said. Good facts. Good to know. Now post the fucking evidence. Pedophilia isnt a mild accusation, surely you wouldnt randomly call people pedophile on the internet because they belong to a party you dislike, that'd be intellectual terrorism.
I also note that this is very conveniently purely in the trial of public opinion, correct me If I'm wrong but there doesnt seems to be any actual investigation or legal procedure going on, the accusation are just spouted and float in the air, it's a lot easier to get the result you want when CNN and Slate are the prosecution.
No really, you don't remember the SRA craze, when the fundies and Republican got in hysterical tantrums and ruined the lives of dozens of people in the 80s ?
Again, is there a way sexual accusations would stick with the usual suspects beyond ''and the girl was coming out of Sunday school when she was attacked by swarthy savages who chained her to wall while she was begging them to save her virginity to Jesus and while they performed Satanic Gay Commie Muslim rituals while talking about how they were Democrats and how they were against guns'' ?
Congratulation for discovering astonishing stuff as ''most sex case do involve ''he say/she say'' (we are learning now that ''SHE SAY'' means automatically LYING WUMIN WHO DO THIS FOR ATTENTION, which somehow manage to be more backward than the Bible and the Koran)
Last edited by sarahtasher; 2018-01-06 at 06:55 AM.
I think you should read your actual link, the only thing "witness testimony" can attest here is that he "met" with some of the girls, which can mean things as wide as being in the same room and saying hello. Yeah I know, law is complex outside of totalitarian hellscapes.
And let me remind you that your accusation isnt about meeting people, it's about fucking childrens.
Quit calling other users pedos. It's going Beyond proving a point.
We now see a particullary repulsive side of human nature, the proud alpha studs who insist that having sex with underage girls is ''not pedophilia cause they are not kids''. I sure hope some of you are not going to explain the fine point of this ''bro theory' to your cellmate.
You've been pulling in black men, rape, lynching and pedophilia accusations against someone who disagrees with you and his eff off is "uncalled for?"
No it wasn't.
The whole argument about "lynch mobs," "innocent until proven guilty," and "court of public opinion" has just been empty rhetoric stacked against numerous statements from both opposition and Moore's own party. It's just an empty defense against dozens and dozens of witness statements, from friends, law enforcement, young girls, and anyone that knew that guy.
There isn't a comparison and you didn't "do the same thing" to him. It's not even close. After all of this, you still have yet to address any of the evidence as you make your empty arguments.
As such, I'm going to leave off too. I have zero respect for anyone defending Moore in any capacity.
Yeah try this : Prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. First prove that the sexual act happened, then collect elements indicating that it was non-consensual, we live in the digital word, getting it in writing in a conversation could be a start.
The wrong way to do it is to find an old signature of the guy you're accusing and writing a fake date and place to frame him as a pedophile. I dont advise you to do that.
"But it's hard to prove!" Yeah no shit sherlock, but the alternative is just throwing due process alltogether and wasting countless live on the sole basis of a baseless accusation. So forgive me If I defend an imperfect system to a barbaric system.