• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Does the Evidence Weigh In Favor of both Clinton and Moore being sexual predators?

Are Clinton and Moore probably guilty?

  • Moore and Clinton are probably innocent

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • It is more convenient if Moore is guilty, but Clinton is innocent, so therefore that.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • It is more convenient if Clinton is guilty, but Moore is innocent, so therefore that.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    10
The poll is stupid, and not worth even voting in.

You are equating a man who had sex with adults, to a man who had sex with children.

So disingenuous. I would expect to see a poll like this from Fox News, in between the hard hitting stories like, "Does the cheese go on the bottom or the top of a burger?" or "Are garlic powder and garlic salt the same? We find out next!"
 
Clinton was damaged by the accusations of infidelity with consenting adults. How damaged should Moore be by similar accusations regarding illegal relationships with children who cannot give consent?
 
The case for both is (roughly)

1. Multiple victims who don't know each other, but who all came up with similar stories (including victims who are political allies of the accused)
2. Many different witnesses who attest to the event being relayed to them over a period of years
3. A pattern of behavior over several years

4. Against the word of the man involved.

Oddly, it seems that folks think that this standard works for one individual, but not for another. Let's see if anyone is willing to plug their name down, and how.

One thing is for sure: The Republicans and the Democrat's are using the victims/possible victims as political weapons. And Trump went over the top with that last minute BS that he pulled.

So lets take a moment to remember just what Trump did. ANd that as soon as Trump was elected he discarded those women on that panel.

https://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/donald-trump-bill-clinton-accusers-229441

 

For a country that has such severe sentencing for crimes, the statute of limitations is unreasonable short. In cases such as this, as we well know decades pass for even some to surface.
And I agree, no statute of limitations. Just prevents many of these perverts from being charged.
30 years later, if convicted in a court of law, let them rot.
 
The case for both is (roughly)

1. Multiple victims who don't know each other, but who all came up with similar stories (including victims who are political allies of the accused)
2. Many different witnesses who attest to the event being relayed to them over a period of years
3. A pattern of behavior over several years

4. Against the word of the man involved.

Oddly, it seems that folks think that this standard works for one individual, but not for another. Let's see if anyone is willing to plug their name down, and how.

Probably. Clinton is a bit muddled by the era. We probably would have gotten more earnest pursuit of the case if it were coming out now. People tend to view the 90's as being just as progressive as today in terms of consent, but it wasn't. Let's keep in mind there were still states where spousal rape was legal into the 90's. Yes, really.

But yeah, probably.
 
Alabama- 3 years or age 21.
I posted it previously. And no one challenged it, I do hope I am in error, as Moore would/could be brought to trial.
Feel free to drop a dime on me - taking a line from Bannon.

Well, I found this:

No statute of limitations: rape, violent sexual abuse, sexual abuse with the threat of violence, and any sexual abuse of a victim under the age of 16, Other felony sexual abuse: three years, and; Misdemeanor abuse: one year.
https://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/alabama-statutes-of-limitations-for-sexual-abuse.html

But from all reports, there was no actual sexual abuse of the 14 year old, only an allegation which might be considered felony enticement. This is currently a Class C felony Alabama Code Title 13A. Criminal Code § 13A-6-69 | FindLaw

Class C. *No less than one year and one day and no more than 10 years.
https://www.criminaldefenselawyer.c...fense/felony-offense/alabama-felony-class.htm

So this act would fall under the 3 year statute of limitations or the one year if the act is reduced to a misdemeanor type.
 
You know, I often love debating with you because you use excellent logic!

But you're building your case upon the supposition that the girl may be lying. Yet in this case there's nothing to show the alleged victim is lying. However, a time to judge has been forced upon us; i.e., the election.

As a citizen and a voter, I can only work with the data I have at my disposal. And her's is one more data-point to evaluate.

My point was: We often have to work with limited data when forced to make decisions. So we use our best inference.

The election forces us to make this decision, not a "rush to judgement" as you claim.

That is exactly the problem. These allegations come at the strangest of times. When he is running as a Republican candidate for Senate. In an era where partisanship is so high and allegations of all sorts are flying about Republican candidates for (IMO) reasons we need not discuss here. ;)

Yet this is not the candidates first go round in Politics. He was elected to the Alabama Supreme Court 2013 - 2016, and previously sought the Republican nomination for Governor in 2006 and 2010. Where were the allegations back then?

Should sexual child abuse have a Statute of Limitations?

Yes it should, for all sorts of reasons which may have already been discussed in other Sub-Forums.

They include false memory, revenge for other slights, attention/sympathy-seeking, etc. Meanwhile, ever since the McMartin Preschool investigation and several noted child kidnap/killings, the idea has been "believe the child" for over 20 years.

So, I prefer to presume innocence and not allow allegations to sway my views on candidates beyond noting the claims have been made and the reaction of the candidate to such allegations when making my choice.
 
The poll is stupid, and not worth even voting in.

You are equating a man who had sex with adults, to a man who had sex with children.

So disingenuous. I would expect to see a poll like this from Fox News, in between the hard hitting stories like, "Does the cheese go on the bottom or the top of a burger?" or "Are garlic powder and garlic salt the same? We find out next!"

Wait, who had sex with children? Wouldn't that be statutory rape for the 14 year old? I didn't read that. The others were 17 and 18, not children.
 
Clinton was damaged by the accusations of infidelity with consenting adults. How damaged should Moore be by similar accusations regarding illegal relationships with children who cannot give consent?

Obviously not very damaged, if some of the posters here are any indication.
 
Well, this is odd. For some, unknowable reason, this thread is much less active than the thread solely about Moore.
 
But the public perpetuates the lie well past the time of the alleged act...as I stated in both cases, the news made much of the allegations...was meek in the later recantations.

That is one thing I do not like about the media. They do destroy a lot of people without evidence. I think the solution is lucrative civil court settlements. The media clearly does not care if they destroy lives only how much money they make. The only way to keep them in check is to hit them in the pocket book. Maybe than they will be more hesitant to slander people without strong evidence.
 
I certainly believe that both Moore and Clinton (and a helluva lot of other smarmy politician, caught and uncaught) are probably guilty. This crap is pervasive in our society, all walks of it, and has been for as long as I've been on this planet. Almost every woman, and all too many men, have a story of harassment, abuse or even assault in their lifetimes.
 
I certainly believe that both Moore and Clinton (and a helluva lot of other smarmy politician, caught and uncaught) are probably guilty. This crap is pervasive in our society, all walks of it, and has been for as long as I've been on this planet. Almost every woman, and all too many men, have a story of harassment, abuse or even assault in their lifetimes.

Of course a lot of this has happened back then. I think it is very likely both parties were consenting in a lot of these cases from back at that time period. Especially with powerful people or celebrities. I remember going to concerts as a teenager and there were a hell of lot of teenagers that would have sold their soul for one night with a star.

Plus when you start going back 38 years a lot of teenagers parents were married and raising a family at 15 or 16. I think you had whole different mindset than we do today. The parents of a 14 year old 38 years ago would have most likely been a part of the hippy generation. There was a lot of different thinking back then. A minor and adult was almost acceptable behavior if both parties consented.

Just an opinion from someone who lived through that era.
 
Back
Top Bottom