Wtf are you babbling about now Drich?  I plainly explained to you what you made up.  

Are you and I discussing the civil war?  No.
Are you and I discussing whether or not obama represents the majority?  No.
Are you and I discussing whether or not people are diametrically opposed to "that" (wtf "that" is...?)  No.
Did I ever claim that you were about finding a middle ground?  No.  

You claimed that obama was far left, that clinton was more of the same, that you were a "balance guy", and indicated your support for Romney.  I'm simply informing you that the reality of the matter is that obama is center right, clinton is further right, and romney is far right stratosphere.  Or, you know..all of the shit you -just- quoted me as saying...and then decided not to respond to.

(October 19, 2016 at 5:43 pm)Crossless1 Wrote: You're right, of course, but Hitler's memoir is significant in this context, as well, since his attitude toward Slavs goes directly to the point that his policies were racially motivated.

Hitler more or less ontinued Bismarck's social model. Keep the population nice and quiet by offering them candies. That often is interpreted as being left, which he certainly wasn't. I guess hardly anyone in their right mind and having some historical knowledge would call Bismarck left. But Bismarck was a very intelligent politician. He observed the rise of social democtrats and gave the people social security. Not because he cared about the great unwashed, but because he knew a content population was less prone to rebellion.

Same goes for Hitler. The only difference being that Hitler didn't have the financial means to do so. He drove the country deeper and deeper into debt. Which didn't concern him much, since his ultimate goal - one of the few true parts of Mein Kampf - was to occupy new territories to pay for his loans.

Yes, he despised Slavs and Jews, but the only difference to other leaders and prominent figures was his radicalism in these days. He associated jew with communist and ironically at the same time with capitalist. The reason for that being that Bela Kuhn in Hungary and Kurt Eisner had been jews, as well as some of the prominent figures of the Russian revolution.

Does this count as leading the thread off-topic yet?

(October 19, 2016 at 5:58 pm)Jesster Wrote: Does this count as leading the thread off-topic yet?

Uninformed Dirch vs information. Not that much off topic, given recent attempts at making even more a fool of himself.

(October 19, 2016 at 11:51 am)Drich Wrote: If we assign the word rape outside of a court room then that effectively removes all presumption of innocence to any alleged attacker.
why? because rape is a legal term that describes a criminal act. IF the act of Rape is not prosecution then by the legal defination it ceases to be a criminal act. yet we still have a victim.

I understand you are looking from the victim's prespective and to you when someone says they are raped you put your self in that position and take the mantle of the victim onto yourself. Meaning you would not claim to be raped unless you were. therefore you assume than when someone says they are raped, they are raped.

Got it.

Thank you. I appreciate you acknowledging that you understand which point of view I am coming from. I also understand your point that legally speaking, this alleged ACT will not be recognized as a "rape" in any court of law if it is never reported, and/or prosecuted.

But, what I am saying is, doesn't any TRUE victim have the right to declare privately, to themselves, "I was raped"? Why do you want to rob that word of its power and meaning for the victim so badly?

Quote:Now I am asking you to suspend that for a moment and put someone like EP or some poor guy who's thing is to play rape with his GF. Now ask yourself what if a girl like that (who likes to play raped) isn't.. exactly stable. and they break up.. All is quite until 4 or maybe 10 years later. then she decides they were not play raping one another when she finds out EP is married with kids and has a new house (everything she wanted with him)

Now, we take the word rape out of a courtroom and apply it here, then all due process/All justice (by the truest defination of the word) is gone. especially if she taped one of those play rape sessions.

Well, that would be...a rape allegation...like you've already said. (a false one in your scenario which is - as it SHOULD be - punishable by law). As in...we have an alleged victim AND an alleged offender. The two are not mutually exclusive.

You can still allow that word personal meaning to actual victims without "taking it out of the court room", or stripping away due process, as you say. You seem to think it has to be one or the other?

Quote:All people would judge is what they saw and plug it into a narritive (like you good people did with me and my selection of words in this thread without thinking.) Then no matter what EP is screwed.

Horse crap! If the event was reported as a rape, then an investigation would ensue, a DA would decide if there is enough evidence to go forward with formal charges, and the accused would get a fair trial. There is your due process! What are you complaining about? And, "poor EP"? Now, now, let's not encourage that victim mentality. [emoji57]

Quote:which brings us to a broader application of the law. What if.. by accusation alone we are convicted of a crime, then must prove our innocence (as a legitmate means of 'protecting our victims?') Rather than the presumption of innocence we have now? (All are innocent until proven guilty.) For one arrests would not be so...

Ofc, that would be a TERRIBLE idea, and I don't think anyone here was suggesting such a thing. What I have been advocating for this entire time is granting the word "rape" its personal meaning to actual victims as a way of privately legitimizing the terrible thing that happened to them so that they may begin to move forward. That's all. Do you not think this is a fair thing to allow to those who have suffered?

Snipped for brevity-

Quote:That is why giving power to this word outside of a courtroom is so dangerous.

It's about empowering the victim on a private, internal level; not handing out power to any old person who wants to see their boyfriend in jail...

Quote:Forced sex is a neutral term that can describe what you identify as rape, but it does not connote guilt or a guilty party. It describes from a victims perspective how they have been violated. forced/ 2nd definition sexual contact.) if consent was not given.

Bold mine. Yes, I agree with this. This is (more or less) what I have been trying to communicate to you.

Is it possible that we are coming at least close to a mutual understanding of each other, and the issue? [emoji57]

(October 19, 2016 at 5:58 pm)Jesster Wrote: Does this count as leading the thread off-topic yet?

It happens all the time here.

Not really a big deal.

Sorry for probably one million typos; I'm on my damn phone...[emoji39]

(October 19, 2016 at 5:58 pm)Jesster Wrote: Does this count as leading the thread off-topic yet?

LOL< Nah.  Just bog standard low information evasion.  If people got into hot water for this then we couldn't even -have- the discussions we've had n these boards.

"Evolution is not a fact!"
-Actually, it is, vis a vis a, b, and c
"Well, soviet russia was an atheist state!"
-okaaaaay.......?
"You can't prove the earth isn't 5k years old!"
-WTF is wrong with you?

(October 19, 2016 at 11:57 am)Drich Wrote:

(October 19, 2016 at 11:49 am)Shell B Wrote: I think Drich likes to imagine that he's actually schooling us on something. He has this idea in his head that he makes us think more intellectually by posting somewhat illiterate drivel. It doesn't really get under my skin because it's sadfunny.

Sad funny indeed.

The truth is unless you are a stump intellectually, we all learn something from one another given enough time.

I simply proactively push the topics and thoughts I want out there.

True - I've learned that if I'm ever so much as in the same country as you, I'll be sprinting to the nearest plane screaming "TAKE ME! PLEASE, JUST LET ME ON YOU BASTARDS! MERCY!!"

(October 19, 2016 at 5:58 pm)Jesster Wrote: Does this count as leading the thread off-topic yet?

Not really...it's the most active posters in the thread slowly gravitating away from the original topic. It happens in the course of conversation naturally. But I suppose the thread could be split if anyone was really concerned. I'm kinda liking the change tbh