Guest shiloh357 Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 Just now, one.opinion said: You know nothing about me, other than that I've disagreed with you from time to time. Does that somehow disqualify me from being conservative? Bible-believing? Republican? or Christian? Nope, nope, nope, and nope. Based on your responses here and other things, you don't fit that description. I just don't buy it. Quote Dating teens when you are in your 30s is bad behavior. It may be legal, but it is still bad behavior. But that hasn't been proven either. Oops, I forgot, to you, allegations are proof and American, Constitutional jurisprudence should brushed aside to accommodate that kind of Stalinist line of reasoning. Quote Sorry, it wasn't your question. And it was rhetorical because I was about 97% sure I knew the answer already. You just happened to confirm it. That's not how rhetorical questions work. And no, it wasn't rhetorical. It was an accusation in the form of a question. Calling it rhetorical and assuming an answer I have not given is dishonest. I didn't confirm anything. I just didn't fall into the rabbit hole trap you were trying to lead me into. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
one.opinion Posted November 13, 2017 Group: Royal Member Followers: 6 Topic Count: 29 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 5,240 Content Per Day: 2.10 Reputation: 1,356 Days Won: 4 Joined: 07/03/2017 Status: Offline Share Posted November 13, 2017 11 minutes ago, shiloh357 said: Based on your responses here and other things, you don't fit that description. I just don't buy it. Hahaha ok :-P You go ahead and uphold the "innocent until proven guilty" rhetoric, but insist that I am somehow not telling the truth. 14 minutes ago, shiloh357 said: But that hasn't been proven either. Oops, I forgot, to you, allegations are proof and American, Constitutional jurisprudence should brushed aside to accommodate that kind of Stalinist line of reasoning. I've said it before, but I guess I'll have to repeat it. Three women have said that they dated him when they were in their teens and he was in his 30s. He has not denied this. Colleagues of his have said it was common knowledge that he dated teen girls. I think it is pretty safe to say that this is accurate. 18 minutes ago, shiloh357 said: That's not how rhetorical questions work. A rhetorical question "might also be one that has an obvious answer but you have asked the question to make a point, to persuade or for literary effect." I used the question with an obvious answer to make a point, therefore it was a rhetorical question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
other one Posted November 13, 2017 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 29 Topic Count: 598 Topics Per Day: 0.08 Content Count: 56,134 Content Per Day: 7.56 Reputation: 27,859 Days Won: 271 Joined: 12/29/2003 Status: Offline Share Posted November 13, 2017 10 minutes ago, one.opinion said: I've said it before, but I guess I'll have to repeat it. Three women have said that they dated him when they were in their teens and he was in his 30s. He has not denied this. Colleagues of his have said it was common knowledge that he dated teen girls. I think it is pretty safe to say that this is accurate. Is there something wrong with someone in their 30's dating teenagers? I was 22 and my wife 18 when we got married... I have several acquaintances that married much older men when they were in their late teens. I don't see that as proof he did things to a 14 year old.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
one.opinion Posted November 13, 2017 Group: Royal Member Followers: 6 Topic Count: 29 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 5,240 Content Per Day: 2.10 Reputation: 1,356 Days Won: 4 Joined: 07/03/2017 Status: Offline Share Posted November 13, 2017 19 minutes ago, other one said: Is there something wrong with someone in their 30's dating teenagers? If someone is known for consistently dating teens when they are in their 30s, I think it is very unwise. If a 31 year old and a 19 year old fall in love and get married, I have no problem with that. 22 and 18 is certainly fine. 19 minutes ago, other one said: I don't see that as proof he did things to a 14 year old No it isn’t proof, but it does tend to corroborate the allegation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
other one Posted November 13, 2017 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 29 Topic Count: 598 Topics Per Day: 0.08 Content Count: 56,134 Content Per Day: 7.56 Reputation: 27,859 Days Won: 271 Joined: 12/29/2003 Status: Offline Share Posted November 13, 2017 1 hour ago, one.opinion said: If someone is known for consistently dating teens when they are in their 30s, I think it is very unwise. If a 31 year old and a 19 year old fall in love and get married, I have no problem with that. 22 and 18 is certainly fine. No it isn’t proof, but it does tend to corroborate the allegation. well, did he abuse the older teens? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 9 hours ago, one.opinion said: Hahaha ok :-P You go ahead and uphold the "innocent until proven guilty" rhetoric, but insist that I am somehow not telling the truth. The two are not related. You're not. You claim to be a Bible believer. Based on our interactions over Scripture, you believe the parts of the Bible that suit you. You don't really believe the Bible. You are not conservative, either. Quote I've said it before, but I guess I'll have to repeat it. Three women have said that they dated him when they were in their teens and he was in his 30s. He has not denied this. Yes, you can repeat yourself 'till the cows come home, but you still have not justified why the allegations, themselves, should simply be accepted at face-value with NO evidence, but the historical, verifiable lack of credibility of the primary accuser should be shelved as unimportant. If we operate from your approach, any investigation would not be an valid investigation. It would be an attempt to make him guilty. Again, very Stalinesque, but unconstitutional. Quote Colleagues of his have said it was common knowledge that he dated teen girls. I think it is pretty safe to say that this is accurate. Again, that is not proof or evidence of any wrong doing and so far, nothing has come forward to verify what has been reported. Your approach highlights why we have a Constitution and why we have a jurisprudence system in this country. Quote A rhetorical question "might also be one that has an obvious answer but you have asked the question to make a point, to persuade or for literary effect." I used the question with an obvious answer to make a point, therefore it was a rhetorical question. You didn't ask a rhetorical question. You asked me if I would defend a Democrat if a Democrat were facing the same allegations. That is not rhetorical. You asked a hypothetical question, not a rhetorical question. Do not lecture me on literary devices. You don't know what your talking about. You asked a hypothetical that you assumed you knew answer to. That is not rhetorical. I will say this much, though. If a Democrat were under this kind of allegation, my response would be the same regarding the evidence. I would NOT behave the way you are, and just assume that an allegation is proof. I would not actively seek to violate his or her constitutional rights by assuming guilt on the basis of no evidence. If this were a Democrat, I would follow the Constitution and I would be fair about it. I would not be like you, at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Running Gator Posted November 13, 2017 Group: Royal Member * Followers: 8 Topic Count: 91 Topics Per Day: 0.03 Content Count: 10,596 Content Per Day: 3.69 Reputation: 2,743 Days Won: 25 Joined: 06/16/2016 Status: Offline Share Posted November 13, 2017 5 hours ago, shiloh357 said: The two are not related. You're not. You claim to be a Bible believer. Based on our interactions over Scripture, you believe the parts of the Bible that suit you. You don't really believe the Bible. You are not conservative, either. Yes, you can repeat yourself 'till the cows come home, but you still have not justified why the allegations, themselves, should simply be accepted at face-value with NO evidence, but the historical, verifiable lack of credibility of the primary accuser should be shelved as unimportant. If we operate from your approach, any investigation would not be an valid investigation. It would be an attempt to make him guilty. Again, very Stalinesque, but unconstitutional. Again, that is not proof or evidence of any wrong doing and so far, nothing has come forward to verify what has been reported. Your approach highlights why we have a Constitution and why we have a jurisprudence system in this country. You didn't ask a rhetorical question. You asked me if I would defend a Democrat if a Democrat were facing the same allegations. That is not rhetorical. You asked a hypothetical question, not a rhetorical question. Do not lecture me on literary devices. You don't know what your talking about. You asked a hypothetical that you assumed you knew answer to. That is not rhetorical. I will say this much, though. If a Democrat were under this kind of allegation, my response would be the same regarding the evidence. I would NOT behave the way you are, and just assume that an allegation is proof. I would not actively seek to violate his or her constitutional rights by assuming guilt on the basis of no evidence. If this were a Democrat, I would follow the Constitution and I would be fair about it. I would not be like you, at all. Moore is not being tried in a court of law, he is being tried in the court of public opinion, as that is what election are. Was your response to the charges against Harvey Weinstein the same as they are for Moore? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
one.opinion Posted November 13, 2017 Group: Royal Member Followers: 6 Topic Count: 29 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 5,240 Content Per Day: 2.10 Reputation: 1,356 Days Won: 4 Joined: 07/03/2017 Status: Offline Share Posted November 13, 2017 5 hours ago, shiloh357 said: The two are not related. You're not. You claim to be a Bible believer. Based on our interactions over Scripture, you believe the parts of the Bible that suit you. You don't really believe the Bible. You are not conservative, either. I do believe the Bible, and I use it, along with the Holy Spirit that dwells within me, to guide the steps of my life. While it is true that I am not as conservative as you, I certainly qualify as conservative by today's standards. 5 hours ago, shiloh357 said: Again, that is not proof or evidence of any wrong doing and so far, nothing has come forward to verify what has been reported. Your approach highlights why we have a Constitution and why we have a jurisprudence system in this country. "Innocent until proven guilty" is a legal principle. We are not (yet) talking about legal issues, we are talking about potential actions (ie stepping out of the race or being asked to step out) based on the allegations. If there was legal action against Moore based only on these allegations, THAT would certainly be unconstitutional. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 1 minute ago, one.opinion said: I do believe the Bible, and I use it, along with the Holy Spirit that dwells within me, to guide the steps of my life. While it is true that I am not as conservative as you, I certainly qualify as conservative by today's standards. No, you don't believe the Bible. You routinely discard/disregard the parts that don't fit your liberal, evolutionist approach. You don't accept the Bible as 100% true and inerrant/infallible. I a have no doubt you are led by "a" spirit, but if you were led by the Holy Spirit, you would believe the whole Bible and would not be an evolutionist. If you were a conservative, we would not be having this kind of discussion. Quote "Innocent until proven guilty" is a legal principle. We are not (yet) talking about legal issues, we are talking about potential actions (ie stepping out of the race or being asked to step out) based on the allegations. If there was legal action against Moore based only on these allegations, THAT would certainly be unconstitutional. We are talking about your attempt to present allegations as equal to proof and that allegations are enough all on their own to assume guilt. That's a legal issue and you are the championing that approach. And yes we are talking about legal issues, given your backwards, Stalinesque approach. The truth is that you are hoping he is guilty, which is why you think we should just proceed on the assumption of guilt. That is another reason why you are NOT a true conservative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
one.opinion Posted November 13, 2017 Group: Royal Member Followers: 6 Topic Count: 29 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 5,240 Content Per Day: 2.10 Reputation: 1,356 Days Won: 4 Joined: 07/03/2017 Status: Offline Share Posted November 13, 2017 1 hour ago, shiloh357 said: No, you don't believe the Bible. And once again, you are wrong about this. 1 hour ago, shiloh357 said: If you were a conservative, we would not be having this kind of discussion. I may not be a conservative to your standards, but I am a conservative. 1 hour ago, shiloh357 said: We are talking about your attempt to present allegations as equal to proof and that allegations are enough all on their own to assume guilt. That's a legal issue and you are the championing that approach. This is also in error since I have never suggested that legal action should be taken against him. I have also agreed on several occasions that proof is lacking, but the allegations and patterns of behavior are too serious to be ignored. I happen to hold a view shared by John McCain, Mitt Romney, John Kasich, and Pat Toomey. They are also Republicans and conservatives. I have wasted too much time on this thread already. I offer you the last word since I will not respond further here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts