The butt whacker turns out to be a youth minister and scout leader

[Mashmont]

true. if the victim wishes to press charges , he should be penalized. I thought he did say he was very sorry though?

The apology was enough. That should be the end of it. But I have a feeling Marxist leftwing groups are in this girl's ear. Promising to foot the bill. Promising to give her face time. Promising to advance her career if she keeps their agenda of hate and division going. Just like they did for David Hogg and the imbecile AOC.

 

[Mashmont]

There are different kinds of assaults. And different penalties.

Just because he didn't commit the worst kind -- and therefore doesn't deserve the worst penalty -- doesn't mean he doesn't deserve any penalty.

The reporter girl spoke of being objectified. If she's really concerned about objectification, she ought to call out the leftwing's attempt to undermine marriage and commitment towards women by promoting sex outside marriage. She ought to criticize the godless public school systems for degrading girls by handing out condoms to unmarried young adolescents. THAT is the true objectification of women and girls.

 

[Divine_Wind]

Nobody did.

I don't know anything about so-called incels, but I would guess they are mainly leftwingers who do indeed lack spines and hate women.

I don’t know you very well, but are you admitting that you are in the habit of just making random comments and/or straw man arguments for no reason at all?

There was no crime. Calling a married guy with children and incel is absurd.

FWIW, I doubt this case will go to court since the offender will likely plead out to community service and a fine. Maybe even have his name put on the “sex offender” registry.

 

[nota bene]

The reporter girl spoke of being objectified.

You've just explained where you're coming from in referring to this woman as the "reporter girl." Thank you.

 

[Amelia]

I was pretty sure Mashmont would take this thread over with a passionate defenses of the middle aged creep who hadn't managed to learn in all his decades of "Christian" living that it was wrong to strike any woman who wasn't physically attacking him, much less a professional woman who was a stranger to him while she was doing her job.

But it was an interesting thread before he found it, so I thank the rest of you for that.

*wandering away from another of Mashmont's "Christian" exhibitions*

 

[Questerr]

Oh, so Trump isn't allowed to go after child actress Greta Thunberg on her insane Marxist talking points she's been coached to give? Why not?

He didn’t attack her talking points. He attacked her. A child. A 70 year old supposedly Christian “thoroughly good man” spent all morning personally attacking a child.

And once again you fail to say a word about how men should not touch women without their consent.

 

[Questerr]

The apology was enough. That should be the end of it. But I have a feeling Marxist leftwing groups are in this girl's ear. Promising to foot the bill. Promising to give her face time. Promising to advance her career if she keeps their agenda of hate and division going. Just like they did for David Hogg and the imbecile AOC.

What bill would any group have to “foot”? If she presses charges the state foots that bill.

 

[Mashmont]

Maybe even have his name put on the “sex offender” registry.

If he's not convicted, he won't be on the registry. That would be a horrible travesty.

 

[Questerr]

The reporter girl spoke of being objectified. If she's really concerned about objectification, she ought to call out the leftwing's attempt to undermine marriage and commitment towards women by promoting sex outside marriage. She ought to criticize the godless public school systems for degrading girls by handing out condoms to unmarried young adolescents. THAT is the true objectification of women and girls.

You know who’s a big fan of sex outside of marriage? Your “thoroughly good man” Trump.

How is handing out condoms degrading? Does a little piece of latex scare you that much?

 

[bullseyelqcs]

He didn’t attack her talking points. He attacked her. A child. A 70 year old supposedly Christian “thoroughly good man” spent all morning personally attacking a child.

And once again you fail to say a word about how men should not touch women without their consent.

Because he doesn't believe they shouldn't be able to. Just not man enough to actually own it. He keeps deflecting to it being overblown while completely ignoring what actually happened. She needs to just toughen up so that the next time someone wants to cop a feel, she can be better equipped to deal with it.

On that front, I think next time, she should put two rounds in his chest and just say she warded off a potential rape.

 

[Mashmont]

You've just explained where you're coming from in referring to this woman as the "reporter girl." Thank you.

Sorry, but I don't play your PC game. Yeah, she's a girl. I have a 23-year-old daughter. She's a girl, too. I call her 'baby' quite frequently as I do all my daughters. I've always done that. I call my wife that too.

 

[Hypothetical]

If he's not convicted, he won't be on the registry. That would be a horrible travesty.

I think sex offender status for this is a bit much , but misdemeanor assault is quite possibly justified.

 

[bullseyelqcs]

Sorry, but I don't play your PC game. Yeah, she's a girl. I have a 23-year-old daughter. She's a girl, too. I call her 'baby' quite frequently as I do all my daughters. I've always done that. I call my wife that too.

Heres hoping that the implication of that word is different depending on the recipient. Would hate for someone to think you look at one of your daughters as a hot piece of ass. Reminds me of someone high profile and elected......

But back to your BS stance on the feel-copper. No woman should ever have to "toughen up" because a man can't keep his hands to himself. This isn't a problem with her, its a problem with him, and by extension, you, for defending that kind of **** like its supposed to be acceptable ANYWHERE. Spare me the locker room or sports field analogy....that is a group of people who came together for a common purpose. That isn't what happened here.....he came to run a race and apparently grab some ass....she came to do her job. Those are NOT common purposes.

You really should just stop, you're embarassing yourself at this point.

 

[Divine_Wind]

I was pretty sure Mashmont would take this thread over with a passionate defenses of the middle aged creep who hadn't managed to learn in all his decades of "Christian" living that it was wrong to strike any woman who wasn't physically attacking him, much less a professional woman who was a stranger to him while she was doing her job.

But it was an interesting thread before he found it, so I thank the rest of you for that.

*wandering away from another of Mashmont's "Christian" exhibitions*

FWIW, Christians don't support sexual battery. I don't know what anyone has claimed previously but if they are supporting sexual battery, they are not acting like Christians.

 

[Mashmont]

He didn’t attack her talking points. He attacked her. A child. A 70 year old supposedly Christian “thoroughly good man” spent all morning personally attacking a child.

And once again you fail to say a word about how men should not touch women without their consent.

Thunberg is a prop, and this is a technique used by the Marxist left. They put up a child or a woman, often with an acting background, and feed them lines to say where they trash every conservative in sight. Then when conservatives respond, you leftwings scream "How dare you attack a child?" "How dare you attack a woman?" Same with the floppy-eared disaster 0bama. You couldn't crticize his extremist policies because that made you a racist. I don't fall for that that game, and neither does President Trump.

Note Thunberg, AOC, and David Hogg ALL have acting backgrounds. That's why they were recruited. Then they're put out there as highly intelligent energetic newcomers, despite having no accomplishments, background, or education in the areas they push.

Anybody who thinks Thunberg has any sort of credentials to become the spokesgirl of the climate change movement is a moron. Anybody who thinks she isn't completely financed, scheduled, and coached is also a complete moron.

 

[Mashmont]

Heres hoping that the implication of that word is different depending on the recipient. Would hate for someone to think you look at one of your daughters as a hot piece of ass. Reminds me of someone high profile and elected......

But back to your BS stance on the feel-copper. No woman should ever have to "toughen up" because a man can't keep his hands to himself. This isn't a problem with her, its a problem with him, and by extension, you, for defending that kind of **** like its supposed to be acceptable ANYWHERE. Spare me the locker room or sports field analogy....that is a group of people who came together for a common purpose. That isn't what happened here.....he came to run a race and apparently grab some ass....she came to do her job. Those are NOT common purposes.

You really should just stop, you're embarassing yourself at this point.

That's a pretty twisted thing for you to say. No, 'baby' is a term of endearment. The women in house see it as just that. Lot's of people use that term. Men and women alike.

As for the man, you people continually lie about the act. He didn't grab a feel. There was nothing sexual about it. She wasn't hurt. He just made an unfortunate snap-decision. Nobody said it was acceptable, but it IS minor. The vast majority of Americans would agree with me that an apology is appropriate, then it should be dropped. It's just the far left loons that think he should lose everything he has over this.

Why do you people despise men this much? That's the question we should be asking.

 

[Divine_Wind]

I think sex offender status for this is a bit much , but misdemeanor assault is quite possibly justified.

The specific charge is "Sexual Battery". It's possible he may plead guilty to a lesser offense, but the prosecutor may want to have the consent of the woman who was battered to avoid backlash from voters. It appears he won't have to register as a sex offender unless he's been convicted of this before.

Georgia Sexual Battery Laws | CriminalDefenseLawyer.com
Sexual Battery in Georgia
A person in Georgia commits the crime of sexual battery by making physical contact with the intimate part (genitals, buttocks, or a woman’s breasts) of another person’s body without the consent of the other person.

Sexual battery is punished more severely if the victim is under 16 years old or if the defendant has previously been convicted of sexual battery.
(Ga. Code Ann. § 16-6-22.1.)

For example, fondling a woman’s breast without her consent is sexual battery.

Sexual battery is a misdemeanor of a high and aggravated nature, punishable by up to 12 months in jail and a fine of up to $5,000. A second or subsequent conviction for sexual battery or a conviction for sexual battery against a child under the age of 16 is punishable by one to five years’ imprisonment.

(Ga. Code Ann. § § 16-6-1, 16-6-2, 16-6-22.1, 16-6-2.22.)

Sex Offender Registration
People in Georgia who are convicted of rape, sodomy, or aggravated sexual battery are required to register as sex offenders, as are people are convicted a second or subsequent time of sexual battery.

(Ga. Code Ann. § 42-1-12.)

 

[Mashmont]

I was pretty sure Mashmont would take this thread over with a passionate defenses of the middle aged creep who hadn't managed to learn in all his decades of "Christian" living that it was wrong to strike any woman who wasn't physically attacking him, much less a professional woman who was a stranger to him while she was doing her job.

But it was an interesting thread before he found it, so I thank the rest of you for that.

*wandering away from another of Mashmont's "Christian" exhibitions*

Oh man. SORRY people found my posts interesting enough to respond to. I guess I did build your post count up far beyond what it would have been. You're welcome. And yes, the four posts that were there before I joined were probably interesting. I guess.

 

[Mashmont]

The specific charge is "Sexual Battery". It's possible he may plead guilty to a lesser offense, but the prosecutor may want to have the consent of the woman who was battered to avoid backlash from voters. It appears he won't have to register as a sex offender unless he's been convicted of this before.

Georgia Sexual Battery Laws | CriminalDefenseLawyer.com
Sexual Battery in Georgia
A person in Georgia commits the crime of sexual battery by making physical contact with the intimate part (genitals, buttocks, or a woman’s breasts) of another person’s body without the consent of the other person.

Sexual battery is punished more severely if the victim is under 16 years old or if the defendant has previously been convicted of sexual battery.
(Ga. Code Ann. § 16-6-22.1.)

For example, fondling a woman’s breast without her consent is sexual battery.

Sexual battery is a misdemeanor of a high and aggravated nature, punishable by up to 12 months in jail and a fine of up to $5,000. A second or subsequent conviction for sexual battery or a conviction for sexual battery against a child under the age of 16 is punishable by one to five years’ imprisonment.

(Ga. Code Ann. § § 16-6-1, 16-6-2, 16-6-22.1, 16-6-2.22.)

Sex Offender Registration
People in Georgia who are convicted of rape, sodomy, or aggravated sexual battery are required to register as sex offenders, as are people are convicted a second or subsequent time of sexual battery.

(Ga. Code Ann. § 42-1-12.)

He said he swatted her in the back, so it's not sexual battery.

 

[Mashmont]

The butt whacker currently in the news turns out to be a youth minister and scout leader ... oh and a loving husband and father ... with daughters.

Tommy Callaway: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know | Heavy.com

Tommy Callaway may face charges for slapping reporter Alex Bozarjian’s butt



He says it was a "mistake". Apparently he didn't know it was a bad thing. I guess he was okay with creeps doing that to the women in his family until now when he could possibly face criminals charges over it.

I think it's disgusting the way the OP makes it out like swatting the reporter, being a scoutmaster and running a Methodist youth group are all three bad things. Like they go together. It's like "Whoops. No surprise there. Look what ELSE he does". I know leftwingers hate churches and the Boy Scouts, but that just beyond pathetic to say.

 

[Questerr]

Thunberg is a prop, and this is a technique used by the Marxist left. They put up a child or a woman, often with an acting background, and feed them lines to say where they trash every conservative in sight. Then when conservatives respond, you leftwings scream "How dare you attack a child?" "How dare you attack a woman?" Same with the floppy-eared disaster 0bama. You couldn't crticize his extremist policies because that made you a racist. I don't fall for that that game, and neither does President Trump.

Note Thunberg, AOC, and David Hogg ALL have acting backgrounds. That's why they were recruited. Then they're put out there as highly intelligent energetic newcomers, despite having no accomplishments, background, or education in the areas they push.

Anybody who thinks Thunberg has any sort of credentials to become the spokesgirl of the climate change movement is a moron. Anybody who thinks she isn't completely financed, scheduled, and coached is also a complete moron.

Trump didn’t criticize any climate change policies. He attacked her personally. He attacked a child on social media. Your supposedly good Christian “thoroughly good man” spent all yesterday morning flinging despicable personal attacks at a child.

Is that what a good man does? Is that what a Christian does? And for you, is that the kind of man a Christian is supposed to defend? Or are Christians supposed to protect children from being attacked by adults?

 

[Questerr]

He said he swatted her in the back, so it's not sexual battery.

And of course a man facing criminal charges has no reason to lie, right?

Certainly the kind of man who would slap a woman he doesn’t know in public is the kind of man who should be trusted at his word, right?

 

[Questerr]

That's a pretty twisted thing for you to say. No, 'baby' is a term of endearment. The women in house see it as just that. Lot's of people use that term. Men and women alike.

As for the man, you people continually lie about the act. He didn't grab a feel. There was nothing sexual about it. She wasn't hurt. He just made an unfortunate snap-decision. Nobody said it was acceptable, but it IS minor. The vast majority of Americans would agree with me that an apology is appropriate, then it should be dropped. It's just the far left loons that think he should lose everything he has over this.

Why do you people despise men this much? That's the question we should be asking.

What exactly is your source for this claim that the vast majority of Americans agree with you?

 

[Divine_Wind]

He said he swatted her in the back, so it's not sexual battery.

Ahh, which makes him a lying Boy Scout leader and Christian Youth group leader. I'm sure the parents of all the children under him will be interested in exploring the video of his actions and the court case.

 

[Mashmont]

Trump didn’t criticize any climate change policies. He attacked her personally. He attacked a child on social media. Your supposedly good Christian “thoroughly good man” spent all yesterday morning flinging despicable personal attacks at a child.

Is that what a good man does? Is that what a Christian does? And for you, is that the kind of man a Christian is supposed to defend? Or are Christians supposed to protect children from being attacked by adults?

Have any leftwingers ever attacked Trump personally? Is that what a Christian does? Did any leftwingers attack Nick Sandmann? Those at the Washington Post sure did. That's why they're getting their asses sued. Was that Christian for all those leftwing adults to attack 16-year-old Nick Sandmann?