Lease this WebApp and get rid of the ads.
Poppet
Oh, please. The implication of equivalence was clear.
Tue Nov 14, 2017 10:11am
24.21.52.54

I do agree that neither of us knows if the allegations are true or not (nor, for that matter, will we if/when there's some sort ofr trial...OJ, anyone?). That's why I used the language I did. But I'm under no obligation to presume innocence (I'm not a court of law). With the implicit understanding that I don't know the guy's a serial statutory rapist, my default position in such cases is to believe the woman. That's not gender politics on my part, it's a realization that even in the current circumstances, it's a VERY difficult thing for a woman to go public about such things. This is particularly the case when the accused is famous and powerful, as she knows she'll be on the receiving end of vicious attacks on her character and motivation.

I could care less about him dating any 18+ women while he was in his 30's. It's more than a bit skeevy and pathetic, but none of my business. It's the younger accusers I have a problem with.

We share the hope that the Alabama GOP repudiates Moore (as so much of the national-level GOP leadership has done). Will they risk losing the seat to do that? I suspect the risk isn't that great, given the dominance of the GOP in that state.

Clarifications much appreciated, of course!

  • Please show me where I said 19 = 14 and I will correct it.Mondo Fuego™ , Tue Nov 14 9:19am
    I have nowhere defended Roy Moore. In fact, I don't like Roy Moore ... I much prefer Luther Strange. Let me be clear: 1. Neither you nor I know for a fact that the allegations are true. They have not ... more
    • Oh, please. The implication of equivalence was clear. — Poppet, Tue Nov 14 10:11am
      • I strongly disagree that "the implication of = was clear".Mondo Fuego™ , Tue Nov 14 10:39am
        If it appeared that way to you, then my assurance to you that such was not the actual or intended case should enable you to move beyond that. What is abundantly clear is that non-consensual advances, ... more
        • Thanks for the clarification.Poppet, Tue Nov 14 1:14pm
          I certainly won't apologize for my interpretation, as I think it was perfectly reasonable, but I very much appreciate the clarification. And yes, the Charles/Diana thing was a bit skeevy...but I also ... more
Click here to receive daily updates


Religion and Ethics BBS