My bad, I'm just getting trigger happy, I guess.hadespussercats wrote:laklak wrote:Garters are always on topic, particularly when they're on Hades.
Although I'm unclear how a discussion of rape and legal procedures is a derail...
PZ accuses Shermer of rape.
- DaveDodo007
- Posts: 2975
- Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 7:35 am
- About me: When ever I behave as a man I am called sexist, It seems being a male is now illegal and nobody sent me the memo. Good job as I would have told them to fuck off.
- Contact:
Re: PZ accuses Shermer of rape.
We should be MOST skeptical of ideas we like because we are sufficiently skeptical of ideas that we don't like. Penn Jillette.
- DaveDodo007
- Posts: 2975
- Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2010 7:35 am
- About me: When ever I behave as a man I am called sexist, It seems being a male is now illegal and nobody sent me the memo. Good job as I would have told them to fuck off.
- Contact:
Re: PZ accuses Shermer of rape.
Sounds like he is a fantasist though even if he isn't. then he was 12 years old at the time. this is beyond my scope of expertise and I hope a professional gets to deal with it. I'm all for the lulz and insulting people but this is out of my league.
We should be MOST skeptical of ideas we like because we are sufficiently skeptical of ideas that we don't like. Penn Jillette.
- Boyle
- Posts: 579
- Joined: Sun Feb 28, 2010 4:37 am
- About me: I already know how this will end.
- Location: Alameda, CA
- Contact:
Re: PZ accuses Shermer of rape.
Well, and collectively felt that a false positive conviction is worse than a false negative conviction.Cormac wrote:Which effectively means that you abandon several key elements of a judicial system, including:Boyle wrote:I do not advocate for the return to presumed guilt. Personally, I'm not totally for presumed innocence either, as it also results in injustice. It's presumed that the injustice is not quite so bad in our system vs an assumed guilt system, but I've no real idea since I've never lived in one. It's not a perfect system; it's a good-enough system.Cormac wrote:The point of having an enthusiastic partner is so that it is clear that the sex is consensual. If one party, at any time during the act, decides that it isn't, then it isn't. It takes, as they say, two to tango. So if either party say later on that they didn't consent, then they didn't.
And this is as neat an exposition of why the law tries to limit the possibility of conviction based on bare assertions of one party. The scope off injustice is very high.
And why would a court take the word of someone who says they did not consent over someone who says that at the time of the event, the accused DID consent? Is there to be a presumption AGAINST the accused? This would not be a novel approach in law, but one that we've not had in the West in quite a while.
Anyway, I'm not talking about changing the law or the assumed innocence of the accused in a criminal case; I'm talking about how consent appears to work. Basically, for me, it boils down to this: If someone makes a statement about their own consent or non-consent, do I take them at their word? I, personally, do.
1. Presumption of innocence, and
2. Rules of evidence, and
3. Burden of proof.
The reason that we have these at all is that over the centuries, it was found that these principles help to lessen the chance of FALSE convictions.
Anyway, I was not extending acceptance of the accusers word as truth to the context of a criminal trial. I was stating that when I am discussing a sexual experience with someone, I take them at their word when it comes to their consent or non-consent. I do this because, as had been noted, I have no real solid way to determine the truth in that case. I also have no reason to doubt them, usually. Basically, informally, I tend to credit the victim.
I agree with all of this, and this is precisely why rape allegations are notoriously difficult to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. The only way to do it would be to have some way to get inside their head and read thoughts.It has been found that in all areas of criminal and civil litigation that accusers and accused will each lie, have faulty memories, or have different interpretations.
Taking consent as an issue away from te emotive area of rape for a moment, to the area of car theft. An accuser who says that the accused took their car without consent has not thereby established their case, they've simply told the court the basis of their accusation. Then they have to make a good argument to support that claim sufficient to overcome the burden of proof.
Back to rape. If an accuser says there was no consent, and the accused says there was, there is no way to distinguish between these claims without an exposition of the facts, as best as they can be articulated, and knowing that this articulation will be due to the human tendency to unconsciously "adjust" our memories.
Of course, this brings up the problem of the accused actually thinking it had been consensual and the accuser not consenting. Intent in these cases is important as well, especially because I know people can ignore protestations without intending to. It's easy to damage people when you don't notice that you are being an ass.
@Thinking Aloud: In a criminal trial? Presumption of innocence helps with that tremendously. In personal life? I don't know. As I said above, I have no way of knowing the truth, and tend to accept them at their word because I largely have no reason to doubt them. I mean, I'd certainly believe them if they said their wallet was stolen or if they said their house was robbed.
- Xamonas Chegwé
- Bouncer
- Posts: 50939
- Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 3:23 pm
- About me: I have prehensile eyebrows.
I speak 9 languages fluently, one of which other people can also speak.
When backed into a corner, I fit perfectly - having a right-angled arse. - Location: Nottingham UK
- Contact:
Re: PZ accuses Shermer of rape.
An euphemism for "When I finally sobered up"?klr wrote:"On mature recollection" is a famous phrase from Irish politics.Bella Fortuna wrote:Looking back through those comments, that person and many others are making these confessions based on 'recovered memories.' Hmmm.
A book is a version of the world. If you do not like it, ignore it; or offer your own version in return.
Salman Rushdie
You talk to God, you're religious. God talks to you, you're psychotic.
House MD
Who needs a meaning anyway, I'd settle anyday for a very fine view.
Sandy Denny
This is the wrong forum for bluffing
Paco
Yes, yes. But first I need to show you this venomous fish!
Calilasseia
I think we should do whatever Pawiz wants.
Twoflower
Bella squats momentarily then waddles on still peeing, like a horse
Millefleur
Salman Rushdie
You talk to God, you're religious. God talks to you, you're psychotic.
House MD
Who needs a meaning anyway, I'd settle anyday for a very fine view.
Sandy Denny
This is the wrong forum for bluffing
Paco
Yes, yes. But first I need to show you this venomous fish!
Calilasseia
I think we should do whatever Pawiz wants.
Twoflower
Bella squats momentarily then waddles on still peeing, like a horse
Millefleur
Re: PZ accuses Shermer of rape.
Boyle wrote:Well, and collectively felt that a false positive conviction is worse than a false negative conviction.Cormac wrote:Which effectively means that you abandon several key elements of a judicial system, including:Boyle wrote:I do not advocate for the return to presumed guilt. Personally, I'm not totally for presumed innocence either, as it also results in injustice. It's presumed that the injustice is not quite so bad in our system vs an assumed guilt system, but I've no real idea since I've never lived in one. It's not a perfect system; it's a good-enough system.Cormac wrote:The point of having an enthusiastic partner is so that it is clear that the sex is consensual. If one party, at any time during the act, decides that it isn't, then it isn't. It takes, as they say, two to tango. So if either party say later on that they didn't consent, then they didn't.
And this is as neat an exposition of why the law tries to limit the possibility of conviction based on bare assertions of one party. The scope off injustice is very high.
And why would a court take the word of someone who says they did not consent over someone who says that at the time of the event, the accused DID consent? Is there to be a presumption AGAINST the accused? This would not be a novel approach in law, but one that we've not had in the West in quite a while.
Anyway, I'm not talking about changing the law or the assumed innocence of the accused in a criminal case; I'm talking about how consent appears to work. Basically, for me, it boils down to this: If someone makes a statement about their own consent or non-consent, do I take them at their word? I, personally, do.
1. Presumption of innocence, and
2. Rules of evidence, and
3. Burden of proof.
The reason that we have these at all is that over the centuries, it was found that these principles help to lessen the chance of FALSE convictions.
Anyway, I was not extending acceptance of the accusers word as truth to the context of a criminal trial. I was stating that when I am discussing a sexual experience with someone, I take them at their word when it comes to their consent or non-consent. I do this because, as had been noted, I have no real solid way to determine the truth in that case. I also have no reason to doubt them, usually. Basically, informally, I tend to credit the victim.
I agree with all of this, and this is precisely why rape allegations are notoriously difficult to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. The only way to do it would be to have some way to get inside their head and read thoughts.It has been found that in all areas of criminal and civil litigation that accusers and accused will each lie, have faulty memories, or have different interpretations.
Taking consent as an issue away from te emotive area of rape for a moment, to the area of car theft. An accuser who says that the accused took their car without consent has not thereby established their case, they've simply told the court the basis of their accusation. Then they have to make a good argument to support that claim sufficient to overcome the burden of proof.
Back to rape. If an accuser says there was no consent, and the accused says there was, there is no way to distinguish between these claims without an exposition of the facts, as best as they can be articulated, and knowing that this articulation will be due to the human tendency to unconsciously "adjust" our memories.
Of course, this brings up the problem of the accused actually thinking it had been consensual and the accuser not consenting. Intent in these cases is important as well, especially because I know people can ignore protestations without intending to. It's easy to damage people when you don't notice that you are being an ass.
@Thinking Aloud: In a criminal trial? Presumption of innocence helps with that tremendously. In personal life? I don't know. As I said above, I have no way of knowing the truth, and tend to accept them at their word because I largely have no reason to doubt them. I mean, I'd certainly believe them if they said their wallet was stolen or if they said their house was robbed.
Ah! We have reached harmonious agreement! (More or less. I'm sure we could find a way to nitpick our way into disagreement again. This is a forum after all!).
FUCKERPUNKERSHIT!
Wanna buy some pegs Dave, I've got some pegs here...
Wanna buy some pegs Dave, I've got some pegs here...
You're my wife now!
Re: PZ accuses Shermer of rape.
Xamonas Chegwé wrote:An euphemism for "When I finally sobered up"?klr wrote:"On mature recollection" is a famous phrase from Irish politics.Bella Fortuna wrote:Looking back through those comments, that person and many others are making these confessions based on 'recovered memories.' Hmmm.
Nah. It is usually along the lines of: "We most certainly did not bug those journalists. It is ridiculous to even suggest it. It would have been a breach of their constitutional rights, and a massive over-reaching by government".
Conclusive proof to the contrary is put into the public domain:
"On mature recollection, yes...Yes we did bug those journalists. Did I mention it was on MATURE recollection?
FUCKERPUNKERSHIT!
Wanna buy some pegs Dave, I've got some pegs here...
Wanna buy some pegs Dave, I've got some pegs here...
You're my wife now!
- Boyle
- Posts: 579
- Joined: Sun Feb 28, 2010 4:37 am
- About me: I already know how this will end.
- Location: Alameda, CA
- Contact:
Re: PZ accuses Shermer of rape.
I'd say our agreement is more cordial than harmonious.Cormac wrote:Ah! We have reached harmonious agreement! (More or less. I'm sure we could find a way to nitpick our way into disagreement again. This is a forum after all!).
Re: PZ accuses Shermer of rape.
Boyle wrote:I'd say our agreement is more cordial than harmonious.Cormac wrote:Ah! We have reached harmonious agreement! (More or less. I'm sure we could find a way to nitpick our way into disagreement again. This is a forum after all!).
I'd say more friendly than cordial.
FUCKERPUNKERSHIT!
Wanna buy some pegs Dave, I've got some pegs here...
Wanna buy some pegs Dave, I've got some pegs here...
You're my wife now!
- Boyle
- Posts: 579
- Joined: Sun Feb 28, 2010 4:37 am
- About me: I already know how this will end.
- Location: Alameda, CA
- Contact:
Re: PZ accuses Shermer of rape.
More good-natured than friendly.Cormac wrote:Boyle wrote:I'd say our agreement is more cordial than harmonious.Cormac wrote:Ah! We have reached harmonious agreement! (More or less. I'm sure we could find a way to nitpick our way into disagreement again. This is a forum after all!).
I'd say more friendly than cordial.
Re: PZ accuses Shermer of rape.
Keep going .. you'll get to the evolutionary imperative eventually
no fences
Re: PZ accuses Shermer of rape.
Well, some kind of "natured" anyway, but "good" might be overstated...Boyle wrote:More good-natured than friendly.Cormac wrote:Boyle wrote:I'd say our agreement is more cordial than harmonious.Cormac wrote:Ah! We have reached harmonious agreement! (More or less. I'm sure we could find a way to nitpick our way into disagreement again. This is a forum after all!).
I'd say more friendly than cordial.
Edit: Oh, sorry. Forgot for a sec:
FUCKERPUNKERSHIT!
Wanna buy some pegs Dave, I've got some pegs here...
Wanna buy some pegs Dave, I've got some pegs here...
You're my wife now!
Re: PZ accuses Shermer of rape.
Brayton is next witch of the week at this rate. Straying dangerously far away from FTB dogma with this. Waiting for the baboons to notice and pile on about believing the victim and suchlike
http://freethoughtblogs.com/dispatches/ ... um=twitter
http://freethoughtblogs.com/dispatches/ ... um=twitter
Outside the ordered universe is that amorphous blight of nethermost confusion which blasphemes and bubbles at the center of all infinity—the boundless daemon sultan Azathoth, whose name no lips dare speak aloud, and who gnaws hungrily in inconceivable, unlighted chambers beyond time and space amidst the muffled, maddening beating of vile drums and the thin monotonous whine of accursed flutes.
Code: Select all
// Replaces with spaces the braces in cases where braces in places cause stasis
$str = str_replace(array("\{","\}")," ",$str);
- rachelbean
- "awesome."
- Posts: 15756
- Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 12:08 am
- About me: I'm a nerd.
- Location: Wales, aka not England
- Contact:
Re: PZ accuses Shermer of rape.
Moved LP's post and responses to the Pics, Vids and Tales of your kids thread, where it was meant for
lordpasternack wrote:Yeah - I fuckin' love oppressin' ma wimmin, like I love chowin' on ma bacon and tuggin' on ma ol' cock…
Pappa wrote:God is a cunt! I wank over pictures of Jesus! I love Darwin so much I'd have sex with his bones!!!!
- tattuchu
- a dickload of cocks
- Posts: 21851
- Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2009 2:59 pm
- About me: I'm having trouble with the trolley.
- Location: Marmite-upon-Toast, Wankershire
- Contact:
Re: PZ accuses Shermer of rape.
So what's going on with this thing? Was there ever any resolution to this PZ/Shermer affair?
People think "queue" is just "q" followed by 4 silent letters.
But those letters are not silent.
They're just waiting their turn.
But those letters are not silent.
They're just waiting their turn.
- Thinking Aloud
- Page Bottomer
- Posts: 20111
- Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 10:56 am
- Contact:
Re: PZ accuses Shermer of rape.
They were having an affair as well?tattuchu wrote:So what's going on with this thing? Was there ever any resolution to this PZ/Shermer affair?
http://thinking-aloud.co.uk/ Musical Me
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 25 guests