Kasz216 said:
Actually, he likely would of found her guilty for rape. The actual judicial arguement is "This State's interest in requiring minor parents to support their children overrieds the State's competing interest in protecting juveniles from improvident acts, even when such acts may include criminal activity on the part of the other parent.... This minor child, the only truly innocent party, is entitled to support from both her parents regardless of their ages."
In otherwords... it would happen to a woman as well. Do i agree with the ruling? No. Is it any proof of any sort of sexism vs men? Also no. Which is the issue. You aren't actually proving any sexism.
Also why did Galieo start offending church figures? Because church figures perferred that things be taught as hypotheticals that disagreed with scripture unless you had demonstrable proof. This being an era where the burden of proof was higher then it was now, pure mathmatical arguements being considered not good enough. Galieo wasn't happy with teaching things just as a hypotehtical, even with an equally valid model out there. The arguement wasn't even about heliocentrinism so much as mathematics, and even then likely wouldn't have been tried for hearsey if he didn't call the pope a simpleton in his book, a couple dozen times.
Also, as far as I can tell Carl Wilhelm Sheele never fled Germany for America. I can't find refrence of him anywhere, fleeing anywhere. I'm not sure if your confusing him with someone else or what is going on with that or if it's just more misinofrmation. Was trying to figure out who outsed him... and it appears to be... noone. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Wilhelm_Scheele#Disproving_the_theory_of_phlogiston Aside from which... you keep talking about non-experts trying to foist a different opinion on a group of experts. Which is exactly what you are trying to do.
Do you perhaps have a case of a scientist being run out of a country by other scientist in the same field, perferably with a source so we're both sure this has happened? |
Statutory rape covers corruption of a minor; however the minor conceded wanted to have sex with her that does not give standing for an injunction to be placed on a minor... but that's not for me to call as far as legal rights go this is the case.
Also at your flip side - that would require women impregnating men and so the argument meets a dead end there, as far as reality applies your argument can't be taken seriously even if it is a word game.
You didn't read my later post apologizing and correcting which scientist I intended to call on, I'm not sure if you still need me to answer your questions after that.
Anyway why did the Pope John Paul apologize for the persecution of Galileo and why did the church even put him on trial if it was the scientific community even more so the secular scientific community that objected to his claim?
I'm honestly curious about this and feel it's a loop hole, I did only a little fact checking but would like some resources if you're willing to share.
Again you're categorizing sexism in the same line as racism where as one is a issue based on physical and social differences and the other solely social differences. I call them the fairer sex and I've heard them called the adjacent species. My point is there are things that women can do that men cannot do naturally and those things are not a result of social understandings, they just are.
I'm Unamerica and you can too.
The Official Huge Monster Hunter Thread:









