The post that was quoted here has been removedIf he's a practicing Jew, then he's even more zealous about adhering to Old Testament principles than fundamentalist Christians; because many Christians at least believe that they are no longer bound to the OT because of Jesus' death. That means he's even more zealous about the sexist,anti-gay rhetoric of the OT bible.
So Quack's not a Christian fundamentalist right-winger, but is virtually no different (except maybe even more extreme regarding gays, sexist beliefs pro-Israel bias).
1 edit
Originally posted by Eladaryes, because prosecutors have never dropped some charges simply because it was inconvenient (risk to mess up their record) to pursue them.
Been thinking about this reply.
Statutory rape is simply having sex with someone under age. If it was actual rape, as in what would be considered rape between adults, then it would have been a charge of rape, not statutory rape.
dumbass
Originally posted by vivifyApparently you cannot infer my views from Dutchess' incorrect stereotypes and I'm not sure why it would matter to you or anyone what I believe anyway. But, since you were discussing my views let's put them on the record.
If he's a practicing Jew, then he's even more zealous about adhering to Old Testament principles than fundamentalist Christians; because many Christians at least believe that they are no longer bound to the OT because of Jesus' death. That means he's even more zealous about the sexist,anti-gay rhetoric of the OT bible.
So Quack's not a Christian fundame ...[text shortened]... ly no different (except maybe even more extreme regarding gays, sexist beliefs pro-Israel bias).
I believe rape accusations need to be proved in a timely fashion, beyond a reasonable doubt after a full trial with the opportunity to vigorously cross-examine and the opportunity to have effective counsel. If a claim is made years later, when circumstances change, I'll question it's validity. If a hearing does not give the accused adequate protections, I'll point out it's invalid. Some extremists here believe that makes me sexist or a rape apologist. It doesn't. Cases need to be decided on their actual facts.
I don't believe in God and I certainly could not care what the bible says and I don't have a problem with gay marriage.
Originally posted by quackquackAh, so a right-wing fundamentalist gun-waving gay-hating xenophobic Bible-thumping bigot, eh?
Apparently you cannot infer my views from Dutchess' incorrect stereotypes and I'm not sure why it would matter to you or anyone what I believe anyway. But, since you were discussing my views let's put them on the record.
I believe rape accusations need to be proved in a timely fashion, beyond a reasonable doubt after a full trial with the opportunity to ...[text shortened]... and I certainly could not care what the bible says and I don't have a problem with gay marriage.
Just as we figured.
Originally posted by quackquackOkay. I don't remember reading that many of your posts, so thanks for filling me in on your beliefs. I do agree that rape accusations should follow due process.
Apparently you cannot infer my views from Dutchess' incorrect stereotypes and I'm not sure why it would matter to you or anyone what I believe anyway. But, since you were discussing my views let's put them on the record.
I believe rape accusations need to be proved in a timely fashion, beyond a reasonable doubt after a full trial with the opportunity to ...[text shortened]... and I certainly could not care what the bible says and I don't have a problem with gay marriage.
The post that was quoted here has been removedI'm not a public figure, nor do I influence public policy in anyway. We certainly aren't friends so just out of curiosity why would you possibly care about my religious background? Are you really so pathetic that you have nothing better to do than misrepresent my views from posts that were made years ago?