By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
sundin13 on 04 March 2020
Edit Thread
Dulfite said:
sundin13 said:

My ex-girlfriend's grandmother would basically force me to kiss her every time she visited even though I was uncomfortable. Was she a pedo sexual predator or just an old person? Like, old people do that shit all the time. It is weird? Sure, but we have a President who has been accused by, what, twenty women of rape, sexual assault or sexual harassment and you want to talk to me about long hugs? Come on...

This shouldn't be a conversation given that context.

I believe in innocence until proven guilty with everyone. With Biden I've seen video of him doing weird things. With Trump we only have audio (that I'm aware of at least) and even that was to another man about women, not to a woman directly. So, because I believe in that principle for all people, I have to judge things based on what has physically happened for us to see. I've physically seen Biden do creepy physical things. I have not seen Trump do creepy physical things to people. 

Trump may very well be guilty with all twenty of those women, or not. I can't judge that as I didn't see any of that nor was I there when they apparently happened.

I would hate for someone to accuse me of something and people just believe it. That would be incredibly terrible.

As we are talking about a non-courtroom setting, I don't believe that this standard is reasonable. To only rely on clear and overwhelming evidence is to handicap our ability to process data and our ability to come to nuanced conclusions.

Say you have a babysitter for your kids. This babysitter has been accused by another individual's child of sexual assault. No one else was around and that case cannot be proven beyond a reasonable doubt because there is a lack of physical evidence. This is exceptionally common in sexual assault cases. Do you continue to leave this individual alone with your children? I believe any reasonable individual would at least have some very serious reservations.

As such, what do we do?

We would utilize all of the information available to weigh the possibility of both options being true, while also considering the effects of both conclusions. We need to understand that there is often not a 100% sure option available, and there are repercussions to both conclusions, whether they be true or false. (You also need to understand that to hold all individuals innocent until proven guilty, is to believe the accuser and the accused, which creates an inherent contraction).

So, how do we apply this to Donald Trump? Well, one we need to weigh the testimony of twenty five women against the testimony of a habitual liar who brags about sexually assaulting women. How great are the odds that at least one of these accounts is true? I would put it well above 50%, but that is just me. Then we need to evaluate the repercussions of the two conclusions. I'll let you do that on your own.

But the grand overarching point is that someone who is 50% likely to be a rapist and brags about sexually assaulting women is significantly more dangerous than my ex's grandma or someone who gives long hugs, to the extent that the two are not even comparable.