POLL: If Kavanaugh were proven guilty

  • Thread starter Thread starter gracepoole
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
G

gracepoole

Guest
If the claims made against Kavanaugh were proven beyond doubt, how would you answer the following question:

Should he still be appointed to SCOTUS?
  • Yes. If true, the assaults took place a long time ago and aren’t relevant to Kavanaugh’s current character.
  • Yes. If true, the sexual encounters were equally the responsibility of the women involved.
  • No. No one proven guilty of sexual assault should be appointed to SCOTUS.
  • Don’t know.
0 voters
 
Last edited:
Question 3 seems a poorly worded question. A credible accusation isn’t the same as claims being proven beyond a reasonable doubt. One can find Ford somewhat credible and still recognize that her charges are unprovable. The circle you then have to square is whether or not it’s fair to destroy someone’s career and reputation, and put their family under intense trauma based on unproven and unprovable allegations from decades ago.
 
Last edited:
Tell yourself whatever you have to, @ucfengr. Or, you know, just answer the question instead of forcing your final statement into the poll somehow.

ETA: changed it just for you.
 
Last edited:
gracepoole said:
Tell yourself whatever you have to, @ucfengr. Or, you know, just answer the question instead of forcing your final statement into the poll somehow.
Click to expand...
The allegations against Kavanaugh can’t be proven beyond a doubt, or even beyond a reasonable doubt, so I fail to see how entering a hypothetical world in which they can be adds value to the discussion. We make, or should make, judgements based on how the world is rather than how we’d like it to be.
gracepoole said:
ETA: changed it just for you.
Click to expand...
Thanks, I guess…
 
Last edited:
The question is whether people would see sexual assault committed as a teenager as a reasonable preclusion to a lifetime appointment on SCOTUS. Apparently you don’t?
 
gracepoole said:
The question is whether people would see sexual assault committed as a teenager as a reasonable preclusion to a lifetime appointment on SCOTUS. Apparently you don’t?
Click to expand...
I think the question should be whether unprovable allegations from from a politically motivated source should be a reasonable justification for publicly destroying a person’s reputation and career, and traumatizing his wife and children. Apparently you do…
 
ucfengr said:
40.png
gracepoole:
The question is whether people would see sexual assault committed as a teenager as a reasonable preclusion to a lifetime appointment on SCOTUS. Apparently you don’t?
Click to expand...
I think the question should be whether unprovable allegations from from a politically motivated source should be a reasonable justification for publicly destroying a person’s reputation and career, and traumatizing his wife and children. Apparently you do…
Click to expand...
Do I? Have I said that? That’s not the hypothetical involved in this poll so perhaps you want to create your own poll?
 
It depends on what is “proven” and how it is “proven”.

I can’t take a poll when those questions are open.

I also think this poll is just more trying to suss out whether people on here, in the opinion of the OP, think sexual assault is “okay”. It’s a bait question and I don’t wish to play such a game.
 
You know and I know if there was clear evidence he had done such a thing, the FBI would have uncovered it in one of their past 6 investigations and he would not have been nominated, so the whole question IMHO is pointless unless you just want to argue with people, mostly male, about their thoughts on sexual assault. Agenda.
 
The accusations cannot be proved because the accuser has not filed charges. With no charges, there will be no legal investigation nor trial. In the end, this smear will follow this man for the rest of his life. I feel sorry for him and his family.
 
This isn’t a trial, it’s a confirmation hearing, and Republicans can most certainly push through Kavanaugh’s appointment if they so desire.
 
The title of this thread is “POLL: If Kavanaugh were proven guilty,” I am stating that he cannot be proven guilty, or not guilty, since there are no charges nor will there be a trial.
 
niceatheist said:
This isn’t a trial, it’s a confirmation hearing,
Click to expand...
So, because it’s only a “confirmation hearing” destroying a man’s reputation and career, and traumatizing his family over unprovable, decades old allegations from people with a political motivation is okay?
 
There’s no “game” here. Either people think a past sexual assault, once proven, should keep someone off the court or they don’t. It’s actually pretty direct and simple.
 
Roy Moore’s reputation was savaged, but it still wasn’t a trial. Confirmations and votes are about character. Those are far less proscribed than trials.
 
Bear, you’re welcome to your opinion. It’s absolutely false in this case but you’re welcome to it.
 
What are you talking about? It’s a hypothetical question. It doesn’t matter if it can or can’t become a reality.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top