Roy Moore's Accuser Count is now up to 9

[qui_est_ce]

Boatswain2PA:

niceatheist:

supporting an accused molester of teenage girls can easily be dismissed.

Thank you for accurately inserting the word “accused”.

However I doubt anyone will “easily dismiss” the accusations.

Are you kidding? It’s either “there’s no proof”, to my personal favorite of Moore wanting the purity of youth.

Just make it plain. Some people will vote for an accused molester of teenage girls, and ignore or rationalize away the accusations, for reasons of political expediency. Many of these same people were pounding their proverbial tables about the Clintons last year.

That may be true, but that’s not the argument being put forth here. Another strawman.

 

[qui_est_ce]

Go back a few posts.

My last paragraph wasn’t aimed at you, but my frustration at the matter.

Back 35 years or so, at the end of eight grade my good friend asked if a woman could get pregnant if she had sex during her period.

She told me that the father of the family she would babysit for came home early one afternoon, and as she described had sex with her. I believed her. She was too scared to be lying. She told this to me on day before I moved. I didn’t know at 13 that what she experienced was rape. I didn’t tell anyone because she thought she would get in trouble if she told.

Happened to my sister and the milkman. That story does nothing to prove Roy Moore’s guilt.

 

[qui_est_ce]

qui_est_ce:

niceatheist:

It was an annotation, not a forgery. Nothing in the addition falsifies what Moore wrote in the year book.

The man lusted after a 14 year old girl, and people are trying to wash that away with the flimsiest of excuses.

I sure came to the wrong place for a moral point of view, that much is certain.

What did Roy Moore do that was immoral?

Sexually assaulting a 14 year old is moral conduct ?

He says he didn’t do it. You said you were disappointed by the lack of morality on this site. Nobody here supports child molestation.

 

[niceatheist]

I’m not saying any of them are pedophile lovers. I’m saying his supporters inside and outside Alabama are overlooking or deliberately denying the allegations for nothing more than a vote in the Senate.

 

[qui_est_ce]

I’m not saying any of them are pedophile lovers. I’m saying his supporters inside and outside Alabama are overlooking or deliberately denying the allegations for nothing more than a vote in the Senate.

I’m not ready to judge what’s in people’s hearts. I think a lot of people think the allegations are bogus. I know Marturana, Jig Saw, you, and a lot of others believe them to be true with a passion.

If people think the allegations are true and still vote for him, that’s wrong.

 

[niceatheist]

niceatheist:

I’m not saying any of them are pedophile lovers. I’m saying his supporters inside and outside Alabama are overlooking or deliberately denying the allegations for nothing more than a vote in the Senate.

I’m not ready to judge what’s in people’s hearts. I think a lot of people think the allegations are bogus. I know Marturana, Jig Saw, you, and a lot of others believe them to be true with a passion.

If people think the allegations are true and still vote for him, that’s wrong.

So as long as you can call the nine women liars, you’re okay.

 

[qui_est_ce]

qui_est_ce:

niceatheist:

I’m not saying any of them are pedophile lovers. I’m saying his supporters inside and outside Alabama are overlooking or deliberately denying the allegations for nothing more than a vote in the Senate.

I’m not ready to judge what’s in people’s hearts. I think a lot of people think the allegations are bogus. I know Marturana, Jig Saw, you, and a lot of others believe them to be true with a passion.

If people think the allegations are true and still vote for him, that’s wrong.

So as long as you can call the nine women liars, you’re okay.

I’m not calling anybody anything. I’ve raised two teen-agers. People lie.

I asked earlier if anyone ever heard of Tawana Brawley. I got no answers. If the women are telling the truth, they are not liars. If they are lying, well…

 

[F_Marturana]

I remember the Taiwan Brawley incident.

The difference is that she made s big public lie and had people arrested because of her hoax.

Leigh Corfman didn’t do that. She told people close to her over the course of her lifetime.

The other 8 women also did not try to get him arrested. They shared their story with people close to them.

 

[F_Marturana]

I’m not saying it did. My friend told me. She didn’t go to the police at the time. She didn’t want to tell her parents.

I guess this guy, if he’s still alive is about 69 years old. He got away with rape.

I’m sorry to hear that about your sister, BTW.

 

[F_Marturana]

Fox News pulled the original title.

She admitted to adding the date and place. She did not admit to forging the signature.

 

[qui_est_ce]

I guess this guy, if he’s still alive is about 69 years old. He got away with rape.

He will have to answer to God. That’s worse.

 

[Jig_Saw]

Please point out where I am spreadig any rumors. I am one of the few here who acknowledge the accusations are terrible, yet there are problems with said accusations.

You, on the other hand, keep spewing out the rumor of unproven accusations and representing them as facts.

It come mostly from the comment “Whoops…there went the evidence, and much of the credibility. Who is a liar now??” Now, you are poking holes in one of the nine accusers allegations and somehow suggesting that it discredits all 9 accusers - like the yearbook signature is the only piece of relevant evidence and it somehow all falls apart if the accuser is fake. And then, there’s the who is a liar now? comment. Well, Roy Moore. He said he didn’t know any of the women. He lied. You are somehow suggesting he’s not and ALL of Moore’s accusers are. That’s misrepresenting the truth.

 

[Ridgerunner]

She admitted to adding the date and place. She did not admit to forging the signature.

Right, but date and place matter.

 

[Theo520]

Given the seriousness of the allegations, when they happened is irrelevant.

That’s a ridic comment, of course when they happened is relevant.
As a rule of thumb, our various statute of limitations confirm the degree of relevance today.

 

[Cathoholic]

JoshuaIsLord (in the context of discussing threads that discuss politicians who abuse women):

.

But most threads turn into a fight about Abortion or something about Clinton or Obama.

.

As they should.

Why?

Because abortion IS abuse of women.

It is abuse of women AND killing their babies at the same time.

 

[Theo520]

did was morally wrong and predatory towards a girl. You point out I use the word “young” incorrectly.

Now we are starting to agree. Yes, if someone did what Moore was accused of doing, it was morally wrong. Chasing ‘jailbait’ is predatory/grooming behavior.

We just disagree whether timing has any relevance. I know my judgement, morals, and degree of wisdom have improved over the decades. I think recency plays on whether the person is still a predator.

 

[Cathoholic]

Speaking of Bill Clinton, someone suggested there was no evidence of Clinton being an abuser (presumably) before the Clinton abuse of White House Intern Monica Lewinsky was brought to light.

From 1992 . . . .

Watch this and draw your own conclusions.

It was pretty well-known Bill Clinton was a serial philanderer BEFORE he was elected in 1992.

Now someone will protest and say “philandering isn’t the same as abuse!”

But that’s for the voter to decide.

The media worked overtime concealing Bill Clinton’s abusive ways toward women until it became virtually impossible to do so.

This made it much more difficult for the voters to make a decision.

For better or worse, much of the mainstream media gets by-passed when they attempt to pull that stunt today.

 

[niceatheist]

F_Marturana:

did was morally wrong and predatory towards a girl. You point out I use the word “young” incorrectly.

Now we are starting to agree. Yes, if someone did what Moore was accused of doing, it was morally wrong. Chasing ‘jailbait’ is predatory/grooming behavior.

We just disagree whether timing has any relevance. I know my judgement, morals, and degree of wisdom have improved over the decades. I think recency plays on whether the person is still a predator.

The point being here he denies the allegations and paints the accusers as liars.

 

[Jig_Saw]

That’s a ridic comment, of course when they happened is relevant.

As a rule of thumb, our various statute of limitations confirm the degree of relevance today.

You know, in Japan, there is a statute of limitations on murder. I know because the person that translated the Satanic Verses into Japanese was murdered and the 15 year anniversary of that murder and that was the statute of limitations for the crime ran out in Japan. By your logic, I guess you would be ok with that murderer being in the Senate.

 

[Theo520]

You know, in Japan, there is a statute of limitations on murder. I know because the person that translated the Satanic Verses into Japanese was murdered and the 15 year anniversary of that murder and that was the statute of limitations for the crime ran out in Japan. By your logic, I guess you would be ok with that murderer being in the Senate.

Your post shows great confusion.
Japan is a separate country with their own rule of law.
Introducing it into a US centric discussion is just a red herring.