ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 5th December 2017, 09:17 AM   #41
phunk
Illuminator
 
phunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,609
Originally Posted by kookbreaker View Post
That's nice. I've encountered too many folks who sexually abuse teens or justify soliciting nude images from kids as young as 13 try to justify their actions with the cry of 'but its not pedophilia, its ehebophilia'. As if that makes it allllll better.

Have fun.
It doesn't make it better at all and it's not a defense. It's just a fact that there is a serious difference between molesting a 14 year old and a 4 year old, and there are different terms for them. Both are disgusting crimes but they are not the same thing or even on the same level of disgusting.
phunk is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th December 2017, 09:21 AM   #42
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 68,642
Originally Posted by kookbreaker View Post
That's nice. I've encountered too many folks who sexually abuse teens or justify soliciting nude images from kids as young as 13 try to justify their actions with the cry of 'but its not pedophilia, its ehebophilia'. As if that makes it allllll better.
It has NOTHING to do with whether it's an evil thing to do or not. It's a correction on the use of the TERM.

What's your alternative? To continue to use the incorrect, emotionally-charged term? Doing that maintains the idea that molesting a minor and having a preference for pre-pubescent children are exactly overlapping concepts, which is a dangerous idea. Isn't it exactly the sort of thing this forum is meant to address? Or has it become only a dual echo chamber where both sides merely post to broadcast how moral they are?
__________________
渦巻く暗雲天を殺し 現る凶事のうなりか

Argumemnon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th December 2017, 09:27 AM   #43
WilliamSeger
Master Poster
 
WilliamSeger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,421
Originally Posted by phunk View Post
It doesn't make it better at all and it's not a defense. It's just a fact that there is a serious difference between molesting a 14 year old and a 4 year old, and there are different terms for them. Both are disgusting crimes but they are not the same thing or even on the same level of disgusting.
True, and I'm normally a stickler for precise definitions myself, but presumably everyone knows that Moore is accused of molesting and attempting to seduce a 14-year-old, not a 4-year-old, and they will make of that what they will without recourse to technical definitions. And correcting the technical definition should not change how they feel about that behavior, which is the typical reason for deliberately using imprecise definitions.
WilliamSeger is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th December 2017, 09:28 AM   #44
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 40,299
Originally Posted by phunk View Post
It doesn't make it better at all and it's not a defense. It's just a fact that there is a serious difference between molesting a 14 year old and a 4 year old, and there are different terms for them. Both are disgusting crimes but they are not the same thing or even on the same level of disgusting.
Sure it is a defense, you have changed the topic of argument from the actions of the sexual predator to pedantic definitions. That is totally a defensive technique. It is very effective. Next you will say whataboutism is a defence either.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th December 2017, 09:32 AM   #45
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 68,642
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
Sure it is a defense, you have changed the topic of argument from the actions of the sexual predator to pedantic definitions.
Only if the person doesn't take the correction and starts arguing about it. Otherwise they say "you're right, my bad. Anyway, child molester." and move on with the discussion. If you think it's a deflection to even make the correction, then it means you don't care about accuracy when making statements.
__________________
渦巻く暗雲天を殺し 現る凶事のうなりか

Argumemnon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th December 2017, 09:36 AM   #46
Lithrael
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,235
I guess it’s kind of a frog-and-toad distinction where some people care that the correct word is being used and other people just want to express how gross it is when an amphibian unexpectedly exists in your shoe, and tend to view any correction as deflection.
Lithrael is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th December 2017, 10:00 AM   #47
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 15,392
Originally Posted by This is The End View Post
I never really completely understood the "but but but it's not technically pedophilia because X age is the cutoff". I mean, why would you even remotely want to be defending something like this even if it is technically correct.

OK so one is just pretty ****** evil, and the other is worse, it's extremely ******* sick and evil.

Yeah, we're so sorry that we accused your guy that is just pretty evil with being extremely evil! So sorry.
The difference between pedophelia on one hand and normal sexual persuasion is not a cutoff age. It's conceptually whether one is sexually attrected to people with post-pubescent physical features or not. And Moore is that - the too-young girls he creepily targeted to date had breasts and all that. More importantly, post puberty a person is equipped with strong doses of sex hormones, like adults, and experience sexual attraction and arousal - at least they understand what a sexual advance is. Big difference to a child: a post-pubescent teenager can WANT to date, kiss, have sex because they are sexual beings. Remember that all these girls voluntarily agreed to meet Moore for dates, most expressed feeling flattered, and similar positive feeling, before those dates.

What Moore did was at least creepy, certainly inappropriate, abusive, and in at least one case very probably criminal, and he is in denial, all of which goes against what should be normal ethical minima in US politics.

But he is not a pedophiliac, not a violent rapist, and no case can be made to accuse and jail him on criminal charges. None of this excuses what he actually did, but let's not make accusations and claims that simply are, objectively, FALSE. That's not the standard a skeptic forum ought to hold itself to.

(I started this post several hours ago, sorry if it's out of context now)
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)
Oystein is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th December 2017, 10:13 AM   #48
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 40,299
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
Remember that all these girls voluntarily agreed to meet Moore for dates, most expressed feeling flattered, and similar positive feeling, before those dates.
Except all those he assaulted/harassed that he wasn't dating. Going to the mall is not a voluntary agreement to be harassed by and adult man. Being your waitress does not give you permission to sexually assault them and should not be taken as agreeing to a date.

Simply existing does not equal consent for a date.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th December 2017, 10:14 AM   #49
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 15,392
Originally Posted by Lithrael View Post
I guess it’s kind of a frog-and-toad distinction
...
No, it isn't, there is a clear difference in level of vileness. Much like theft isn't robbery, battery isn't manslaughter, abortion isn't murder. By accusing someone of a crime objectivly worse than what he actually did, one is aiding the actual defense and enabling an acquittal. It is the SMART thing to accuse the guilty of their ACTUAL crime, not some hyperbolic exaggeration.
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)
Oystein is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th December 2017, 10:14 AM   #50
Crossbow
Seeking Honesty and Sanity
 
Crossbow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Charleston, WV
Posts: 11,214
And if Moore wins the election, then I expect that there will be some stupid, idiotic, lying Republicans claiming that since Moore won the election and since Moore denied the charges, then Moore must be innocent of those charges.

Much like what happened with Trump and all of his numerous charges of seedy sex related actions.
__________________
On 16 MAY 2017 Paul Bethke discussed some of the sexual prohibitions of his god regarding man-to-man sex acts and woman-to-woman sex acts: "So not only lesbian acts but also anal sex.."
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...0#post11840580

A man's best friend is his dogma.
Crossbow is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th December 2017, 10:16 AM   #51
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 15,392
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
Except all those he assaulted/harassed that he wasn't dating. Going to the mall is not a voluntary agreement to be harassed by and adult man. Being your waitress does not give you permission to sexually assault them and should not be taken as agreeing to a date.

Simply existing does not equal consent for a date.
I haven't followed all the news and am not aware of any actual accusations of actual assault and/or harrassment. Could you paraphrase how a typical case of that went? Anything beyond ogling and chatting up girls?
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)
Oystein is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th December 2017, 10:19 AM   #52
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 40,299
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
I haven't followed all the news and am not aware of any actual accusations of actual assault and/or harrassment. Could you paraphrase how a typical case of that went? Anything beyond ogling and chatting up girls?
Here is a non date sexual assault

http://www.latimes.com/politics/wash...htmlstory.html

Here is about Moore getting banned from a mall, not something from being on dates.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/roy-m...ry?id=51195632

Now he clearly should have gone a more presidential route and burst into the changing rooms, everyone would be cool with that, see trump.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th December 2017, 10:24 AM   #53
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 23,475
Originally Posted by thaiboxerken View Post
Wow. That says a lot. : eek :
Not really; it's a pretty simple concept, with a pretty straightforward medical definition. What says a lot to me is people not wanting to call it what it is and judge it honestly, in favor of exaggerating it for rhetorical effect.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th December 2017, 10:27 AM   #54
crescent
Graduate Poster
 
crescent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,821
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
I haven't followed all the news and am not aware of any actual accusations of actual assault and/or harrassment. Could you paraphrase how a typical case of that went? Anything beyond ogling and chatting up girls?

He molested a 14 year-old girl:
Senate candidate Roy Moore's accuser: I was a 14-year-old child
Quote:
"At 14 I was not able to make those kinds of choices. I met him around the corner from my house, my mother did not know.

"And he took me to his home. After arriving at his home on the second occasion he basically laid out some blankets on the floor of his living room and proceeded to seduce me, I guess you would say."

She alleged that he removed her clothing and stripped to his white underwear before molesting her and trying to get her to touch him.

Report: Roy Moore had sexual encounter with a 14-year-old girl when he was 32
Quote:
She says that Moore drove her back to the same house after dark, and that before long she was lying on a blanket on the floor. She remembers Moore disappearing into another room and coming out with nothing on but “tight white” underwear.

She remembers that Moore kissed her, that he took off her pants and shirt, and that he touched her through her bra and underpants. She says that he guided her hand to his underwear and that she yanked her hand back.

He assaulted a 16 year old girl:
Former waitress says Roy Moore sexually assaulted her when she was 16

Quote:
Moore offered her a ride home. Unable to reach her boyfriend, who was supposed to pick her up, she accepted.

“I trusted Mr. Moore because he was the district attorney,” she said. “I thought that he was simply doing something nice.”

But instead of driving to the highway, Nelson said, Moore drove to the back of the restaurant and began to grope her, putting his hand on her breasts and later squeezing the back of her neck, attempting to force her head toward his crotch.

“I thought that he was going to rape me,” she said. “I was twisting and I was struggling and I was begging him to stop.”

Nelson said he eventually allowed her to open the car door and she either fell out or was pushed out. She said Moore told her that "no one will ever believe you" if she told anyone about what had happened.
Both instances go far beyond a bit of ogling or chatting up, and would be illegal under most any standard.
crescent is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th December 2017, 10:28 AM   #55
Beerina
Sarcastic Conqueror of Notions
 
Beerina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 29,062
So a guy who's been forgiven by god many times in the intervening decades should step down because a bunch of baby killers who don't give a rat's ass about the people or issues involved pulled out some ancient, embarrassing stuff to try to take over the Senate?

Sounds like a well-designed plan! His supporters should agree with the facetious left and help turn over the Senate to the baby killers.



Until people realize this is the actual argument, no progress on changing things will be made. You've pushed people into a corner and given them a terrible choice, from their point of view.
__________________
"Great innovations should not be forced [by way of] slender majorities." - Thomas Jefferson

The government should nationalize it! Socialized, single-payer video game development and sales now! More, cheaper, better games, right? Right?

Last edited by Beerina; 5th December 2017 at 10:30 AM.
Beerina is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th December 2017, 10:49 AM   #56
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 15,392
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
Here is a non date sexual assault

http://www.latimes.com/politics/wash...htmlstory.html

...
Oops I actually managed to forget about Gloria Allred - thanks for the reminder. I read ponderingturtle's "Going to the mall is not a voluntary agreement to be harassed by and adult man. Being your waitress does not give you permission to sexually assault them and should not be taken as agreeing to a date", and pictured an assault scene inside the mall, and forgot about the parking lot.

But he wrote that in response to my "Remember that all these girls voluntarily agreed to meet Moore for dates, most expressed feeling flattered, and similar positive feeling, before those dates."

I know this sounds kinda lame now, but I acknowledge that at least two of those dates went criminally wrong. He was clearly acting in a predatory way - I think I am consistently on record with that.
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)
Oystein is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th December 2017, 10:49 AM   #57
WilliamSeger
Master Poster
 
WilliamSeger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,421
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
No, it isn't, there is a clear difference in level of vileness. Much like theft isn't robbery, battery isn't manslaughter, abortion isn't murder. By accusing someone of a crime objectivly worse than what he actually did, one is aiding the actual defense and enabling an acquittal. It is the SMART thing to accuse the guilty of their ACTUAL crime, not some hyperbolic exaggeration.
I agree with all that, except that neither pedophilia nor hebephilia are crimes, per se, since they just describe sexual attraction, and as someone pointed out in the other thread, we don't really know if Moore is a pedophile. It's the behavior of molesting a child that's defined as a crime, without reference to those terms. If you think someone is taking the term itself to mean that Moore molests 4-year-olds, or if you think someone is using the term pedophile to imply that he would, then yes, the definitions matter a great deal. Otherwise, it seems to be either purely pedantic or a deflection.

Last edited by WilliamSeger; 5th December 2017 at 10:52 AM.
WilliamSeger is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th December 2017, 10:51 AM   #58
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 15,392
Originally Posted by crescent View Post
He molested a 14 year-old girl:
Senate candidate Roy Moore's accuser: I was a 14-year-old child



Report: Roy Moore had sexual encounter with a 14-year-old girl when he was 32



He assaulted a 16 year old girl:
Former waitress says Roy Moore sexually assaulted her when she was 16



Both instances go far beyond a bit of ogling or chatting up, and would be illegal under most any standard.
Yes.

I had already described the encounter with the 14-yo as "very possibly criminal", and had forgotten about Gloria Allred, which was also criminal, IMO.
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)
Oystein is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th December 2017, 11:06 AM   #59
Oystein
Penultimate Amazing
 
Oystein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 15,392
Originally Posted by WilliamSeger View Post
I agree with all that, except that neither pedophilia nor hebephilia are crimes, per se, since they just describe sexual attraction,
True - and I think we can both agree that those posters who accuse Moore of being a "pedophile" wrote this as shorthand for "he criminally acted out his pedophily by assaulting the sort of girl which pedophiles lust for" - which is untrue.

Originally Posted by WilliamSeger View Post
and as someone pointed out in the other thread, we don't really know if Moore is a pedophile.
We don't know if you or I are pedophiles. So would it be okay if someone called you or me a pedophile - with the implied understanding that we criminally assaulted a pre-pubescent child? Hell no - some evidence would be needed for that!
There is plenty of evidence that Moore lusted for, preyed on, hit on and assaulted post-pubescent teenagers when he was twice their age. There is ZERO evidence that he lusted for pre-pubescent girls. Zero. Hence calling him a pedophile, with or without implication of criminal misbehaviour towards objects of pedophiliac inclination, is objectively without any evidence.

Originally Posted by WilliamSeger View Post
It's the behavior of molesting a child that's defined as a crime, without reference to those terms. If you think someone is taking the term itself to mean that Moore molests 4-year-olds, or if you think someone is using the term pedophile to imply that he would, then yes, the definitions matter a great deal. Otherwise, it seems to be either purely pedantic or a deflection.
Right. And the crime does indeed have cutoff ages X and Y. And I, at least, have been saying explicitly that his conduct with the 14-yo, on account of her being below the legal age of consent, was (very probably) criminal according to contemporary Alabama law ("very probably" because I do not know how Alabama courts actually evaluated the sort of conduct Moore actually perpetrated on her back in those days; they did not have all-out sex, after all). And you are right, that law does not refer to "pedophily", so that's irrelevant here.


I am being a pedant here, because pedophily is a very real thing that happens all too often, and acting all-out on it is much more heinous than going too far on a date with a pre-consent but post-pubescent minor. I feel it diminishes the experience of victims of actual (pre-pubescent) pedophily of we use the term too often, too lightly.
__________________
Thermodynamics hates conspiracy theorists. (Foster Zygote)

Last edited by Oystein; 5th December 2017 at 11:08 AM.
Oystein is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th December 2017, 11:45 AM   #60
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 63,744
Originally Posted by Beelzebuddy View Post
It's too late to get anyone else on the ballot. It's Moore or nothing for them.
I don't know why anyone expected the party of Trump supporters 'R' Us to do anything else.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th December 2017, 11:50 AM   #61
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 63,744
Originally Posted by phunk View Post
It doesn't make it better at all and it's not a defense. It's just a fact that there is a serious difference between molesting a 14 year old and a 4 year old, and there are different terms for them. Both are disgusting crimes but they are not the same thing or even on the same level of disgusting.
In this case, we all know she was 14 and not 4. The issue is Moore's behavior. Tackling the misuse of the word by the public and the news media needs to addressed separately or it serves as a distraction from an important matter.

Write letters to the editors or the idiot news broadcasters that keep misusing the term, pedophile. That's where I think the issue is best addressed.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th December 2017, 11:51 AM   #62
eeyore1954
Philosopher
 
eeyore1954's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 6,069
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
Can we agree that the GOP is the party of child molestation? That is true whether the girl was pre- or post pubescent.
Can we agree the Democratic Party was the party of rape and sexual harassment when they stood by President Clinton.
eeyore1954 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th December 2017, 12:02 PM   #63
Roger Ramjets
Illuminator
 
Roger Ramjets's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 3,359
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
I feel it diminishes the experience of victims of actual (pre-pubescent) pedophily of we use the term too often, too lightly.
Terms should be used correctly of course, but elevating pedophilia to a higher level of vileness diminishes the experience of other victims.

Quote:
I had already described the encounter with the 14-yo as "very possibly criminal", and had forgotten about Gloria Allred, which was also criminal
And that's just what we know about. Criminal or not, this guy is sick - and dangerous. He certainly should not be in a position of power where he can continue the abuse.

But what am I saying? Winning is everything, and if your best option is a serial child molester then go for it!!!

Originally Posted by eeyore1954
Can we agree the Democratic Party was the party of rape and sexual harassment when they stood by President Clinton.
Only if we can agree that he was guilty of rape and sexual harassment, and the party stood by him knowing this behavior.
__________________
We don't want good, sound arguments. We want arguments that sound good.

Last edited by Roger Ramjets; 5th December 2017 at 12:03 PM.
Roger Ramjets is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th December 2017, 12:05 PM   #64
Beelzebuddy
Philosopher
 
Beelzebuddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 5,678
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
I don't know why anyone expected the party of Trump supporters 'R' Us to do anything else.
I wouldn't say "expected," but I had hoped better of them.

Seth Abramson's take on the support has been the most cogent of the analyses I've read: when Trump threw in with Moore the RNC had to follow, not because they support Trump but because the instant they break from Trump the party will splinter, and they're desperate to avoid that happening right now.
Beelzebuddy is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th December 2017, 12:05 PM   #65
The_Animus
Master Poster
 
The_Animus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,644
Originally Posted by eeyore1954 View Post
Can we agree the Democratic Party was the party of rape and sexual harassment when they stood by President Clinton.
Bill Clinton raped Lewinsky? And Lewinsky was underage? And then voters elected him to office after the fact?
__________________
Straw Man, Ad Hominem, Moving the Goalposts, and a massive post count are all good indicators that a poster is intellectually dishonest and not interested in real discussion.

Feeding trolls only makes them stronger, yet it is so hard to refrain.
The_Animus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th December 2017, 12:11 PM   #66
eeyore1954
Philosopher
 
eeyore1954's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 6,069
Originally Posted by The_Animus View Post
Bill Clinton raped Lewinsky? And Lewinsky was underage? And then voters elected him to office after the fact?
I wasn’t referring to Lewinski. I was referring to allegations of rape and sexual harassment.

Last edited by eeyore1954; 5th December 2017 at 12:12 PM.
eeyore1954 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th December 2017, 12:16 PM   #67
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 40,299
Originally Posted by eeyore1954 View Post
Can we agree the Democratic Party was the party of rape and sexual harassment when they stood by President Clinton.
It was the 90 and sexual assault was in, how else did Thomas get on the court with his history? People liked men who knew how to sexually harass their female coworkers then.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th December 2017, 12:22 PM   #68
crescent
Graduate Poster
 
crescent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,821
Originally Posted by The_Animus View Post
Bill Clinton raped Lewinsky? And Lewinsky was underage? And then voters elected him to office after the fact?
Juanita Broaddrick

This was daylighted during the Paula Jones legal proceedings.

I liked Bill Clinton, I think he was an effective president. But by current standards he would be un-electable.
crescent is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th December 2017, 12:27 PM   #69
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 40,299
Originally Posted by crescent View Post
Juanita Broaddrick

This was daylighted during the Paula Jones legal proceedings.

I liked Bill Clinton, I think he was an effective president. But by current standards he would be un-electable.
Maybe this year, but we had a president elected last year despite being on record as bragging about his sexual assaults and improprieties. So I see no reason to view Bill as unelectable. We have a significantly worse predator in the white house now after all.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th December 2017, 12:31 PM   #70
Babbylonian
Penultimate Amazing
 
Babbylonian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 10,078
Originally Posted by crescent View Post
I liked Bill Clinton, I think he was an effective president. But by current standards he would be un-electable.
Rightly so...of course, bringing Clinton up every time a Republican is accused of sexual misconduct is a scummy derail worthy of only the most deplorable.
Babbylonian is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th December 2017, 12:45 PM   #71
WilliamSeger
Master Poster
 
WilliamSeger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,421
Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
True - and I think we can both agree that those posters who accuse Moore of being a "pedophile" wrote this as shorthand for "he criminally acted out his pedophily by assaulting the sort of girl which pedophiles lust for"
OK, provided that we can both agree that all posters have been referring to the alleged assault on a 14-year-old, not a 4-year-old, when they used that term.

Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
- which is untrue.
Well, yeah, pedantic arguments are required to at least be technically true; otherwise they're called something else. As far as I know, that's the only requirement.

Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
We don't know if you or I are pedophiles. So would it be okay if someone called you or me a pedophile - with the implied understanding that we criminally assaulted a pre-pubescent child? Hell no - some evidence would be needed for that!
Shouldn't the question be, if we assaulted 14-year-olds, would it be okay to call us pedophiles? Hell no - we could hit 'em upside the head with a dictionary for that!

Originally Posted by Oystein View Post
[snip]
I am being a pedant here, because pedophily is a very real thing that happens all too often, and acting all-out on it is much more heinous than going too far on a date with a pre-consent but post-pubescent minor. I feel it diminishes the experience of victims of actual (pre-pubescent) pedophily of we use the term too often, too lightly.
I understand that, and I'm not objecting to anyone making that argument, provided they make it clearly and in context, rather than just say "Moore is not a pedophile."
WilliamSeger is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th December 2017, 12:53 PM   #72
crescent
Graduate Poster
 
crescent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,821
Originally Posted by Babbylonian View Post
Rightly so...of course, bringing Clinton up every time a Republican is accused of sexual misconduct is a scummy derail worthy of only the most deplorable.
I agree, and was hesitant to post. It was not clear to me if The_Animus was aware of those allegations.

I do think Clinton would be un-electable in the current political and cultural climate - because he is a Democrat. The Dems are actually showing some spine and consistency in the current situation. Conyers is out, Franken has apologized. Poor behavior by dems has been met with actual reckoning, while poor behavior by Republicans has been met by denials and obfuscation, as we see with Moore and Trump.
crescent is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th December 2017, 02:17 PM   #73
eeyore1954
Philosopher
 
eeyore1954's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 6,069
Originally Posted by crescent View Post
The Dems are actually showing some spine and consistency in the current situation. Conyers is out, Franken has apologized. Poor behavior by dems has been met with actual reckoning, while poor behavior by Republicans has been met by denials and obfuscation, as we see with Moore and Trump.
Except it is easier to show some spine when Democrats know they will be replaced with a like vote.
eeyore1954 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th December 2017, 02:20 PM   #74
eeyore1954
Philosopher
 
eeyore1954's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 6,069
Originally Posted by Babbylonian View Post
Rightly so...of course, bringing Clinton up every time a Republican is accused of sexual misconduct is a scummy derail worthy of only the most deplorable.
Maybe but I don't think being accused of sexual misconduct should cause someone to no longer be supported by their party be it Clinton or Moore.
eeyore1954 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th December 2017, 02:49 PM   #75
Stacko
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 8,970
A Second Chance: This Amazing Organization Helps Disgraced Pedophiles Rebuild Their Lives By Getting Them Elected To Political Office

Quote:
While most Americans are openly disgusted by pedophiles, the bighearted people over at the GOP seek to help them find decent, well-paying jobs where they can shape national policy. You only need to look at the amazing work the GOP is doing with pedophile Roy Moore in the special U.S. Senate election in Alabama to know that this organization is looking out for the people society tries to put in the margins.

“Men like Roy Moore are left without many options for getting back on their feet,” said Paul Ryan, one of the senior leaders over at the GOP. “A lot of people want nothing to do with him just because he routinely preyed on teenage girls at shopping malls and other public places, but at the GOP, we believe he deserves the basic dignity of being elected to an incredibly powerful national office.”

“The smiles on pedophiles’ faces when they’re elected with the help of our financial resources, public relations know-how, and endorsements are one of my greatest joys,” added Ryan.

The GOP also offers one-on-one mentorship and the legitimacy a candidate needs to make it to Capitol Hill, all at no cost to the pedophile. With the GOP behind them, pedophiles have a strong chance at becoming representatives, senators, and even speaker of the House, as was the case with noted pedophile Dennis Hastert, who served in Congress for over 20 years.
Stacko is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th December 2017, 02:52 PM   #76
crescent
Graduate Poster
 
crescent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,821
Originally Posted by eeyore1954 View Post
Except it is easier to show some spine when Democrats know they will be replaced with a like vote.
That's a dodge. Franken comes from a very competitive state, yet he admitted to it and apologized.

Moore comes from a very safe state - he could have admitted and apologized and still would have won easily. He could have publicly withdrawn and endorsed a write-in replacement - and such a write in would have won easily. The only thing that makes the race close is Moore's intransigence and the GOP refusal to do anything about it.

Your point holds for Conyers but not for anyone else.
crescent is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th December 2017, 02:55 PM   #77
Stacko
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 8,970
Jeff Flake donates to Doug Jones.
Stacko is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th December 2017, 03:10 PM   #78
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 68,642
Originally Posted by Stacko View Post
It's amazing how little people (not you) are about the meaning of words like "pedophile". It's almost as if they prefer to use confusing language to reach their goals.
__________________
渦巻く暗雲天を殺し 現る凶事のうなりか

Argumemnon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th December 2017, 03:12 PM   #79
Cleon
King of the Pod People
 
Cleon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 25,138
Originally Posted by Stacko View Post
Too little, too late, IMO.
__________________
"People like me are what stand between us and Auschwitz." - Newt Gingrich
Cleon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 5th December 2017, 03:30 PM   #80
TubbaBlubba
Knave of the Dudes
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 11,921
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
It has NOTHING to do with whether it's an evil thing to do or not. It's a correction on the use of the TERM.

What's your alternative? To continue to use the incorrect, emotionally-charged term? Doing that maintains the idea that molesting a minor and having a preference for pre-pubescent children are exactly overlapping concepts, which is a dangerous idea. Isn't it exactly the sort of thing this forum is meant to address? Or has it become only a dual echo chamber where both sides merely post to broadcast how moral they are?
Yes, why care about the matter at hand when we can go into high dudgeon in a semantic meta-discussion? Good going.
__________________
"The president’s voracious sexual appetite is the elephant that the president rides around on each and every day while pretending that it doesn’t exist." - Bill O'Reilly et al., Killing Kennedy
TubbaBlubba is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:46 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.