RE: Damn Polanski for making me agree with Republicans

Join Our Community

Collarchat.com

Home Login Search

RE: Damn Polanski for making me agree with Republicans

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Damn Polanski for making me agree with Republicans

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Login

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Damn Polanski for making me agree with Republicans - 10/1/2009 7:36:24 PM

Posts: 1586
Joined: 5/30/2006
Status: offline

quote:

You definition of "when necessary" appears to be whenever someone expresses any view that is not absolute, final, and wholly in accord with your own. Precisely what it is about that that makes it "necessary" for you to drill us on your opinion again and again and again? "The rest, we can debate at our leisure," you say, to someone who wasn't even talking to you!

May I suggest you try to get over the idea that you are moderating this thread?
ORIGINAL: Kirata

My definition of when necessary is when anyone tries to bring moral ambiguity to the subject of drugging and molesting a child. There is no ambiguity in that subject and I am unashamed of seeing it so.

To be more exact, I view it as necessary when:

Someone brings up the "sexual maturity" of a 13 year old as a mitigating circumstance
Someone brings up the idea that the 13 year old "gave consent" is a mitigating circumstance.
Someone brings up the idea that a convicted child molester having escaped punishment for any length of time is a mitigating circumstance.

There are no mitigating circumstances when it comes to the rape of a child. And I will not quietly sit by and not challenge anyone who thinks there are. If you don't like that I am of an opinion that this is a moral absolute, you are more than welcome not to read my posts on this subject.

As for your completely unfounded and wholly ficitious claim that I am in any way trying to act as a moderator, rather than just expressing my own view on this matter, rest assured I will give it all the consideration it is due.

< Message edited by SpinnerofTales -- 10/1/2009 7:49:46 PM >

(in reply to Kirata)

RE: Damn Polanski for making me agree with Republicans - 10/1/2009 7:39:52 PM

Posts: 1073
Joined: 5/4/2008
From: Tempe, AZ
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: servantforuse

It is clear to me that Whoopi Goldberg, Debra Winger and the other hollywood elites that think he is being treated unfairly have not read the courtroom testimony. She was not only raped, she was sodomized. A 13 YEAR OLD GIRL...

Yes, because as we all know, some holes are more sinful than others.

Honestly, this is the most backwards thing I've ever heard. "She was raped" is horrible. "She was sodomized" isn't even in the same league. Now, if you mean "she was sodomized against her will", then that's sort of already covered under "she was raped", and your imbelishment is irrelevant and puerile.

And on that note, I want to emphasize something further, here. Everyone gets all bent out of shape about the details of forced sexual acts. The sex shouldn't matter. Forced degradation and humiliation is evil regardless of whether it's sexual or not. Why is it magically worse when someone applies sex to the equation?

People should be treated with respect. Rape is a problem not because it's sexual, but because it's deeply disrespectful and dismissive of another human's personhood. Just like murder. Just like plenty of other acts, some of which aren't even illegal. But hey, our knee-jerk reactions were never supposed to make sense, were they?

Oh, for a culture with a consistent philosophical foundation to its morality...

< Message edited by Ialdabaoth -- 10/1/2009 7:41:12 PM >

(in reply to servantforuse)

RE: Damn Polanski for making me agree with Republicans - 10/1/2009 7:43:47 PM

Posts: 6363
Joined: 3/8/2006
Status: offline

She was 13...Obviously you do not have a daughter.

(in reply to Ialdabaoth)

RE: Damn Polanski for making me agree with Republicans - 10/1/2009 7:48:08 PM

Posts: 1073
Joined: 5/4/2008
From: Tempe, AZ
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: servantforuse
She was 13...Obviously you do not have a daughter.

I just love this argument, too. What is it about having a kid that gives you the right to abandon philosophical principles for the sake of gut-level, primal reactions?

(in reply to servantforuse)

RE: Damn Polanski for making me agree with Republicans - 10/1/2009 7:51:33 PM

Posts: 6363
Joined: 3/8/2006
Status: offline

I guess 'holes' are all the same to you. To me, innocent children are a little different.

(in reply to Ialdabaoth)

RE: Damn Polanski for making me agree with Republicans - 10/1/2009 7:53:47 PM

Posts: 1073
Joined: 5/4/2008
From: Tempe, AZ
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: servantforuse

I guess 'holes' are all the same to you. To me, innocent children are a little different.

What?

(in reply to servantforuse)

RE: Damn Polanski for making me agree with Republicans - 10/1/2009 7:59:21 PM

Posts: 1586
Joined: 5/30/2006
Status: offline

quote:

I guess 'holes' are all the same to you. To me, innocent children are a little different.
ORIGINAL: servantforuse

Servant, I think you are reading Iald's post differently than I. I do not think he is saying that any "hole" when it comes to children is ok or better than another. What I believe he is saying (and I do invite him to correct me if I am wrong) is that ANY molestation is equally bad. That the problem is not the specific act or specific "hole". The sexual abuse of a minor is equally wrong no matter what it's form. To take it a bit further as illustration, I would say that his post suggested more that a man who fondles a minor sexually is every bit as bad as one who sodomizes one. I believe this to be his point and in that, I agree with him.

(in reply to servantforuse)

RE: Damn Polanski for making me agree with Republicans - 10/1/2009 8:01:24 PM

Posts: 1073
Joined: 5/4/2008
From: Tempe, AZ
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SpinnerofTales

quote:

I guess 'holes' are all the same to you. To me, innocent children are a little different.
ORIGINAL: servantforuse

Servant, I think you are reading Iald's post differently than I. I do not think he is saying that any "hole" when it comes to children is ok or better than another. What I believe he is saying (and I do invite him to correct me if I am wrong) is that ANY molestation is equally bad. That the problem is not the specific act or specific "hole". The sexual abuse of a minor is equally wrong no matter what it's form. To take it a bit further as illustration, I would say that his post suggested more that a man who fondles a minor sexually is every bit as bad as one who sodomizes one. I believe this to be his point and in that, I agree with him.

That is PRECISELY what I am saying, thank you. I'm actually taking it a step further: I think you can do just as much damage to a kid non-sexually as you can sexually, and I think our hangups about "sexual" abuse being some sort of special damage that is worse than other forms of abuse actually winds up hurting the kids WORSE.

(in reply to SpinnerofTales)

RE: Damn Polanski for making me agree with Republicans - 10/1/2009 8:09:04 PM

Posts: 1586
Joined: 5/30/2006
Status: offline

quote:

That is PRECISELY what I am saying, thank you. I'm actually taking it a step further: I think you can do just as much damage to a kid non-sexually as you can sexually, and I think our hangups about "sexual" abuse being some sort of special damage that is worse than other forms of abuse actually winds up hurting the kids WORSE. ORIGINAL: Ialdabaoth

Once again, I agree entirely.

(in reply to Ialdabaoth)

RE: Damn Polanski for making me agree with Republicans - 10/1/2009 8:22:22 PM

Posts: 1073
Joined: 5/4/2008
From: Tempe, AZ
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SpinnerofTales
Once again, I agree entirely.

So, if I may do so civilly, let me hone in on where I have a problem with most conventional attitudes about child sexuality:

To me, the true crime in abusing a child isn't that they're a child. The true crime in abusing a child is that you're disrespecting the sovereignty of another person, in the worst way possible.

I hear a lot of rhetoric about "some things you just shouldn't do to children", and how children need "absolute protection", and whenever I hear it, I cringe... because I feel like it's taking away childrens' innate right to work out for themselves what they want and don't want to happen to them.

And yeah, I fully get that children are often not as prepared as adults to make certain decisions. And I think it's vile to take advantage of anyone's disadvantage. But I think that there aren't certain kinds of disadvantage that are more wrong than others, and I think oftentimes that children need to be given more credit than our culture is currently prepared to regarding making their own choices.

If someone takes advantage of a kid and fucks them up, that person has done a horrible thing, regardless of whether they're a bad teacher training a kid to think they're stupid, or a molester training a kid to think they're sexually broken, or an overbearing parent training a kid to think they're helpless and can't do anything right.

The crime isn't one of "ruining" a kid, or somehow "deflowering" some mystical innocence, and the attitude that projects those values onto kids (without their consent) does more harm than raping them, in my opinion.

18 is not some magical "switch" where a child instantly becomes an adult, and can magically be thrown all the things that they were too precious and innocent to handle 3 seconds before their birthday, without even explaining these things to them.

18 is a point on a continuum, and that continuum is different for each person. There will come an age where children are ready to be explained how sex works, and given ideas about what are smart and not-so-smart decisions to make. There will come an age, usually soon after this, where children are ready to be explained why their bodies are changing, and why they suddenly feel the way they do, and what are healthy and less-than-healthy things they can do with those feelings. There will come an age sometime after this, where they can be given opportunities to explore and experiment with their sexuality, as safely as we can provide for them, so that they aren't entering the adult world completely fucking blind.

Sex isn't special. It's no different than any other vitally important act that we perform as a species. Just like every other aspect of growing up, we need to be talking to kids frankly, fully respecting the adult they're going to become, and not oohing and ahhing about the precious little snowflake we think they are now. Maturity is a continuum, and we need to stop treating it like a black-and-white line.

For one thing, this will take away all the bizzare "forbidden fruit" lore that our culture uses to cultivate certain kinds of pedophiles (Lolita, The Professional, Lazy Town, Kate Moss, American Beauty... I'm talking to you.) For another, it's a far more realistic way of addressing the situation. And on the third hand, for those freakish mutants in the audience, it's the right thing to do for the kids.

(in reply to SpinnerofTales)

RE: Damn Polanski for making me agree with Republicans - 10/1/2009 8:23:27 PM

Posts: 28072
Joined: 5/2/2008
Status: offline

I'm a lifelong Democrat and have no clue why ANYONE could sympathize with Polanski.

There's no question that he did it, and that the victim did not consent. Thus, rape.

The victim was underage, so it's statutory rape.

He drugged her. I'm not sure, but I believe that that's assault.

So much for the original crime.

Then he ran from justice.

There is not a single poster on this board who would not be in deep shit if they pulled this. Why a celebrity who evaded arrest is considered somehow to be a superior being above the law, beats the hell out of me. The whole thing is so cut and dried.

That said, does anyone know why he was not tried and convicted in absentia after he bolted?

_____________________________

"You women....

The small-breasted ones want larger breasts. The large-breasted ones want smaller ones. The straight-haired ones curl their hair, and the curly-haired ones straighten theirs...

Quit fretting. We men love you."

(in reply to SpinnerofTales)

RE: Damn Polanski for making me agree with Republicans - 10/1/2009 8:27:28 PM

Posts: 1073
Joined: 5/4/2008
From: Tempe, AZ
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DarkSteven
That said, does anyone know why he was not tried and convicted in absentia after he bolted?

Because the judge fucked up. That's what I mean by "it's complicated". The judge allowed emotion to get the better of him, and broke the understood balance of rules that had been worked out over thousands of cases before this one. Thus, it provided Polanski with a shred of sympathy that he would not otherwise have deserved.

This is one of those situations where everything is lined up to be cut-and-dry, and you just have to turn to your idiot friend who's going overboard, and say "dude, stop 'helping', because you're not!"

This is why it's vital to stay rational about things, even when horribly irrational things have happened. Otherwise justice starts looking like revenge, and even if it's still just, the appearance of impropriety can undermine the entire system. So now we've got a clusterfuck.

(in reply to DarkSteven)

RE: Damn Polanski for making me agree with Republicans - 10/1/2009 8:29:14 PM

Posts: 6363
Joined: 3/8/2006
Status: offline

I didn't get it wrong Spinner. Ialdaboath is getting it wrong. UM's that are 13 cannot make certain choices. That is why we have laws to protect them.

(in reply to DarkSteven)

RE: Damn Polanski for making me agree with Republicans - 10/1/2009 8:30:12 PM

Posts: 1073
Joined: 5/4/2008
From: Tempe, AZ
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: servantforuse

I didn't get it wrong Spinner. Ialdaboath is getting it wrong. UM's that are 13 cannot make certain choices. That is why we have laws to protect them.

I still don't get it... what does that have to do with whether the butt is a worse hole than the vagina to rape someone in?

(in reply to servantforuse)

RE: Damn Polanski for making me agree with Republicans - 10/1/2009 8:33:02 PM

Posts: 217
Joined: 6/14/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ialdabaoth

quote:

ORIGINAL: DarkSteven
That said, does anyone know why he was not tried and convicted in absentia after he bolted?

Because the judge fucked up. That's what I mean by "it's complicated". The judge allowed emotion to get the better of him, and broke the understood balance of rules that had been worked out over thousands of cases before this one. Thus, it provided Polanski with a shred of sympathy that he would not otherwise have deserved.

This is one of those situations where everything is lined up to be cut-and-dry, and you just have to turn to your idiot friend who's going overboard, and say "dude, stop 'helping', because you're not!"

This is why it's vital to stay rational about things, even when horribly irrational things have happened. Otherwise justice starts looking like revenge, and even if it's still just, the appearance of impropriety can undermine the entire system. So now we've got a clusterfuck.

So how did the judge fuck this up? The prosecutor and lawyer had a plea arrangement, the jude did not accept it. It is his right to do. Nowhere does it say that a judge "has" to accept any plea deal, and often times they do not. He was within his right as the sitting judge at the time hearing the case to do so, which is ANY judge's right to do.

(in reply to Ialdabaoth)

RE: Damn Polanski for making me agree with Republicans - 10/1/2009 8:38:35 PM

Posts: 1073
Joined: 5/4/2008
From: Tempe, AZ
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: slutslave4u
So how did the judge fuck this up? The prosecutor and lawyer had a plea arrangement, the jude did not accept it. It is his right to do. Nowhere does it say that a judge "has" to accept any plea deal, and often times they do not. He was within his right as the sitting judge at the time hearing the case to do so, which is ANY judge's right to do.

He fucked up before that. He allowed an appearance that he was being abusive to the defendant, which the defendant (with his star power) was able to play for sympathy before ditching. He allowed the defendant to construct a narrative where the severity of his guilt was ambiguous. Once he had a little wiggle-room, the defendant (again, through star power and all the tricks he's learned from Hollywood) spun it as far as he needed to, and now we have a quagmire.

I hate being all realpolitik about things, but the actual facts of what happens in a case rarely matter. What matters is what the public will accept, and what it will demand. And I think the judge walked into the case expecting to be able to launch a (perhaps completely justified) moral crusade, and then discovered that he could be out-maneuvered on the propoganda department. As horrible as it is, the DA's (admittedly extraordinarily lenient) plea deal was probably the right thing to do, because it would have prevented the media circus we see now. The fact is, power and fame and money can buy a different kind of justice; it's where the word "privilege" come from. Modern cultures try to minimize that, but to a certain extent we still have to work with its effects. The DA understood this far better than the judge did.

(in reply to slutslave4u)

RE: Damn Polanski for making me agree with Republicans - 10/1/2009 8:57:47 PM

Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ialdabaoth

So, if I may do so civilly....

Thank you. Not that much of what you wrote hasn't been said fairly civilly before, but maybe you'll have better luck.

K.

(in reply to Ialdabaoth)

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Damn Polanski for making me agree with Republicans

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Jump to:

New Messages	No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages	Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages	Locked w/o New Messages

Post New Thread

Reply to Message

Post New Poll

Submit Vote

Delete My Own Post

Delete My Own Thread

Rate Posts

Collarchat.com © 2024

Terms of Service

1.811