Between Brock Turner and Brett Kavanaugh, when do girls matter?

  • Thread starter Thread starter TheAmazingGrace
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
But still he was 17. Would anyone have a job anymore if what we all did when we were young came back to haunt us?

It would be a completely different matter entirely if this happened 5 years ago. But it happened when he was 17. People change a whole lot from when they were dumb kids in high school and college
 
Last edited:
And if he were guilty, he’s been able to build a very successful life for himself anyway. But he doesn’t have a right to be appointed to SCOTUS.
 
I’ve interacted with enough juvenile delinquents to know that just because you are a certain way at 17 doesn’t mean you’re going to continue to be that way the rest of your life
 
That right there. It was a serious mistake. It was assault. If it is proven. Equating it with a silly thing every teen boy does is what is making moderates go nuts. People who minimize what may or may not have happened are doing Kavanaugh no favor.
 
It was at a party. There was probably drinking involved. That’s how I’m imagining it
 
I’m not saying it’s just a silly thing. It’s a horrible thing. But I believe that a person can redeem themselves even though they’ve done horrible things

St Paul literally murdered Christians
 
Last edited:
This seems a pretty strong equivocation. Yes, I made mistakes. What I didn’t do, ever, was sexually assault someone.
 
And St. Paul acknowledged his sons and sought redemption. What he didn’t do is stand up in front of his peers and deny that he’d been a Roman lackey.
 
He’s denying it ever happened.

I personally believe this woman and think it did happen. But it happened when he was 17. He’s 53 now. What someone does at 17 isn’t indicative of present character and fitness for the job
 
I agree. But if we proceed from the premise that it did happen, it isn’t typical adolescent male behavior, and his denial means he is the exact opposite of St. Paul.
 
Last edited:
I agree it’s not the strongest argument. The strongest is to deny it completely.

But even if it were true, which none of us know, it happened when he was 17. Also I’m not defending it as normal behavior
 
FloridaCatholic said:
Drunk people are less culpable, especially drunk 17 year olds.

It’s less of a reflection of his character is all I"m saying
Click to expand...
Should we get rid of the drunk driving laws? exposing oneself if drunk? peeing against buildings while drunk? fighting if drunk? After all, these people aren’t really culpable.
 
Saying this is typical male behavior is driving the mothers of teenagers male and female crazy.
 
Last edited:
I didn’t say that. I’m saying it reduces culpability. And the law, under certain circumstances, recognizes that if you do something while drunk the punishment isn’t as severe as if you did it sober. Like murder for instance. Intent matters.
 
Well it’s not normal. But it’s really really prevalent. And if moms don’t understand that then they’re out of touch with all the horrible things boys do to girls
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top