Elections Alabama Special Senate Election Live Results Thread

JosephDredd said:
More than likely, they get spurned or verbally abused by friends and family members. As recently as 50 years ago they might have been assaulted or killed, with no legal consequences, and that still happens in many parts of the world.

Society has never handled that properly and it's only through the involvement of modern laws that its punishment is kept in proportion to the "crime".

Alcoholism was perfectly societally acceptable for all of human history. Most societies relied on alcoholism because alcohol was safe to drink, whereas there water sources probably weren't. As recently as fifty years ago it was fine to drink and drive with your kids in the car. We still live in a society where there is a concerted effort by the law to discourage drinking and driving because, left to its own devices, moral society is pretty shitty at this stuff.

The only reason an alcoholic would have trouble holding a job before the law was involved was because he couldn't physically do his job. Now if you get a couple of impairment charges it could affect your employment. Nothing to do with society upholding morals.

This is wrong. For the last 2000 years of western society, what they did was not a crime. They only became crimes in the last half-century or so and society is still so accepting of these old, repulsive beliefs that they argued Moore did nothing wrong. Plenty of people came forward and talked about how Moore's actions were seen as perfectly fine back then and even flattering. If people had never gotten the law changed, we would never be having this conversation.

And as for Weinstein and the fallout from the #metoo campaign... we've had laws against sexual assault for years, but it's only now that women are able to speak out against their abusers and authorities feel pressure to take action. It is literally only now that society is using its weight to enforce any sort of morality on the subject. And there's still a huge part of society, with their old ideas of morality, pushing back against them.
Click to expand...
[/quote][/QUOTE]

I think i get your point more thoroughly, i still think that a lot of American morality laws are too draconian.

I still think that society itself can do a better job than government in a lot of cases (not as much in others).

As you pointed out the #metoo campaign is not something that the government made but society itself. But society can also be quite negative in a lot of cases as you mentioned.

I was thinking about the case where the teen was forced to masturbate in the sexting case.
 
TheGreatA said:
I thought this post in particular would've echoed a little bit:
Click to expand...
Bald1 said:
Yeah. The "that was then and this is now" relativsm bs reeks of Mo defense. Especially in light of the fact that nobody has ever claimed that Moore is the most perfect man to ever live, compounded with the fact that the age difference in the newer case is drastically less, while the maturity level of the recent "victim" is significantly higher. Consistency - what is it, and how does it work?
Click to expand...

Yeah, your view of consistency is fucking stupid.

You're conflating cultural relativism in comparing 2017 to 1980, and comparing 2017 to 1500. There was a pretty obvious shift on this topic circa 1890 when the average age of consent in the United States was 11 damn years old.

You're being intentionally obtuse.
 
Trotsky said:
Yeah, your view of consistency is fucking stupid.

You're conflating cultural relativism in comparing 2017 to 1980, and comparing 2017 to 1500. There was a pretty obvious shift on this topic circa 1890 when the average age of consent in the United States was 11 damn years old.

You're being intentionally obtuse.
Click to expand...

Relatively-speaking, Muhammed having sex with a 9-year old in ancient Middle East, is every bit as questionable as Roy Moore hypothetically having sex with a 16-year old in 1970's Alabama (even though there are no actual accounts of him having had sex with anyone below 18).

Obviously I understand the "relative" differences between the two cases. I wouldn't have brought them up if it weren't for the very drastic relative difference (16, to 9 years old).

Not to mention the outright hypocrisy of heckling a person for defending "pedophiles" and brushing off any attempt at explaining the "semantics", when one had blamed others for doing the exact same thing to him in a previous argument, regarding a similar subject.
 
Last edited:
Grenz said:
Did he give a reason why?
Click to expand...

Well, after all his buddies got banned as a result of the “secret war room” his attitude quickly changed to this:

41caDQc%2BEXL.jpg
 
Trotsky said:
Yeah, your view of consistency is fucking stupid.

You're conflating cultural relativism in comparing 2017 to 1980, and comparing 2017 to 1500. There was a pretty obvious shift on this topic circa 1890 when the average age of consent in the United States was 11 damn years old.

You're being intentionally obtuse.
Click to expand...
Yup, that's a difference maker.

As are the acts -
Sex vs accusations.
As are the ages of the females involved. 9 vs 16.
As are the age differences. 14 vs 34.
As is the character description of the two "perps". The most perfect man vs sleezeball politician.

No, it's not an apples to apples comparison, but to excuse one while condemning the other takes some olympic level mental and moral gymnastics.
 
MiniCraque said:
But the retarded christian family values gimmick is gone, so I guess it doesn't matter.
Click to expand...
Maybe he's one of the trump bots who have been posting non stop about how great they think underage girls are.
 
Bald1 said:
Yup, that's a difference maker.

As are the acts -
Sex vs accusations.
As are the ages of the females involved. 9 vs 16.
As are the age differences. 14 vs 34.
As is the character description of the two "perps". The most perfect man vs sleezeball politician.

No, it's not an apples to apples comparison, but to excuse one while condemning the other takes some olympic level mental and moral gymnastics.
Click to expand...

What the hell is with the weird skewed numbers? Roy's youngest victim was 14 when he was 32.

And, again, the big difference is that one was in 1975 and the other was in the 1500s, when life expectancy was 35 years old (literally, less than half of modern times), so naturally marriage and child birth occurred much earlier in life to accommodate raising children.

In 1975, the age of consent was 17 and hadn't been as low as 14 in ninety years. Life expectancy was 75 years old.

You can normatively denounce Muhammad's child wife by today's standards, but to compare it to modern times and to say that holding otherwise is "mental/moral gymnastics" is ludicrous.
 
Trotsky said:
What the hell is with the weird skewed numbers? Roy's youngest victim was 14 when he was 32.

And, again, the big difference is that one was in 1975 and the other was in the 1500s, when life expectancy was 35 years old (literally, less than half of modern times), so naturally marriage and child birth occurred much earlier in life to accommodate raising children.

In 1975, the age of consent was 17 and hadn't been as low as 14 in ninety years. Life expectancy was 75 years old.

You can normatively denounce Muhammad's child wife by today's standards, but to compare it to modern times and to say that holding otherwise is "mental/moral gymnastics" is ludicrous.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I screwed up a couple of numbers there. Apologies.

Youngest victim 14 not 16, and Mohammad was 53 not 43. That equates it, in todays terms to a 105 year old having sex with a 16 year old. Much better. Thanks.

Edit : and just so there's no misunderstanding, I'm not excuse making as I find both acts reprehensible.
 
Last edited:
1980 - "I bet we'll have space colonies in 2017".

2017 - the president is a guy from the tv and people defend old white guys preying on teen girls.

fdb.gif
 
@Trotsky

Mo was alive in the 600s, not 1500s.

They're comparing sexual behavior/norms between one near mythical figure from over 1000 years ago, and a guy that's living an breathing today preying on children that are still alive to remember it.

<Dany07>
 
Rational Poster said:
@Trotsky

Mo was alive in the 600s, not 1500s.

They're comparing sexual behavior/norms between one near mythical figure from over 1000 years ago, and a guy that's living an breathing today preying on children that are still alive to remember it.

<Dany07>
Click to expand...

Idk what the fuck I was thinking posting 1500s. I mean 500s.
 
So my question is, is roy Moore still gonna be under investigation now that the election is over or are they gonna sweep it under the rug cause he lost?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,716
Messages
55,436,920
Members
174,775
Latest member
Ruckus245

Share this page

Back
Top