Winners only.

[RobGMN Premium Member]

That's because since the beginning of humanity women have used sexuality to get their way and most men are simps. So real men stood up and took control and put women in their places.

You are completely crushing any argument you have tried to make so far. Honestly, statements like this paint you as a clueless neanderthal.
And that's not being insulting. I truly think you are more capable than you demonstrate here. Or maybe I'm just hoping it. Please tell me you're not referring to the Adam and Eve nonsense. Please.

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

The societal norms are day and night between the U.S. and the middle east...there's no comparison...

Again, just because we don't follow ALL of their norms, does not mean we are as high-thinking as you might believe.
There are major cities that still don't allow certain items to be sold on Sunday b/c it would upset god, FFS.

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

But if people do not believe without witnessing, then in 99.9999% of cases, the legal system don't mean squat, no?

It has nothing to do with belief. I said CONVICT. People lie. This is a fact. The only way for me to convict would be with proof that would clear any doubt.

Studies are things that help to find, reveal, verify, determine factual info. You said you do not need a study to know that what you know is right. Ergo, you don't care what the results of a study are, you KNOW what the truth is. If a study has findings contrary to your feelings, you don't care about the study because you know the truth.

I said people lie. The study is doomed to be flawed from the beginning. So no, I don't care what a study says where people have been known to willingly lie about the topic. In this case, ****.

Everyone lies. Anyone who claims they never have is a liar. But you swing it to the extreme, saying that women are "some of the most shady people on the planet", and use that (as you have in the past) to say that accusations of **** are lies in order to gain something in some way.

It is my opinion that women ARE some of the most shady people on the planet. Knowing what I know I will not convict anyone accused of **** without proof.

See above. Are you naive and think that men will not lie about committing a ****?
Ask anyone who has actually ***** someone if they did it. Unless they are a true psycho, they are going to deny it. Just like the extreme majority of people deny ANY wrongdoing when they are confronted. It's a self-protection, and we all do it.

You are off on a tangent. Asking people if they ***** before is not relevant to this topic.

You believe it. And if a study showed otherwise, you'd likely still believe it. Therein lies a problem within this country, and it's not just you. People are acting based on their feelings and opinions, even when there is proof out there that their feelings and opinions are wrong.
That can create a mess of trouble.

Rob, a man is accused of ****. The ONLY evidence provided by the accuser is her word that it happened. How many years do you think he should go to prison for?

 

[spokey9 5,000+ posts]

Again, just because we don't follow ALL of their norms, does not mean we are as high-thinking as you might believe.
There are major cities that still don't allow certain items to be sold on Sunday b/c it would upset god, FFS.

Yeah but sodomizing young boys isn't acceptable here as a way of preserving a woman's virginity either...it's a common practice in the middle east...

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

You are completely crushing any argument you have tried to make so far. Honestly, statements like this paint you as a clueless neanderthal.
And that's not being insulting. I truly think you are more capable than you demonstrate here. Or maybe I'm just hoping it. Please tell me you're not referring to the Adam and Eve nonsense. Please.

Women know they can get whatever they want from simps if they slang a little **** at the fella. Been happening forever. Sad but true. However, you have men that don't simp for women and many were in power all over the world. When you can make the laws you have the power. I promise you men were tired of women whoring around on them and they put an end to it... at least for a little while. You can't keep a shady woman down though or make her a house wife.

Do I think any of this was moral? Probably not but women were controlled were they not?

 

[Jimi77 Premium Member]

Allegedly against their will.
Getting scammed is not the same as **** but If they let it happen then the deserved to get scammed. They let someone trick them.
If some idiot I never met contacts me on FB and says they have more pics they can show me but need phone cards, gift cards, plane tickets to come see me.... that's a scam. Common sense people.

Some scams are much more sophisticated. Look into the Milton Group.

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

Some scams are much more sophisticated. Look into the Milton Group.

I am aware. I am 48 years old. Scams aren't new.

 

[Jimi77 Premium Member]

Joe Biden has completely f*cked the border. Our border seems gone. This is part of the UN’s population replacement or displacement:

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/world/americas/haiti/article275228016.html

Agreed. I was alright with his handling of the border so far, but now he's opening it up again. Let's Go Brandon!

 

[Eggs 5,000+ posts]

Mayorkas Heads To Border To Fire Starter Pistol When Title 42 Expires

 

[Eggs 5,000+ posts]

Daddy I wanna go on that ride

 

[Buck 5,000+ posts]

Mayorkas Heads To Border To Fire Starter Pistol When Title 42 Expires

View attachment 48941

UN Agenda:

https://www.un.org/development/desa/pd/sites/www.un.org.development.desa.pd/files/unpd-egm_200010_un_2001_replacementmigration.pdf

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

It has nothing to do with belief. I said CONVICT. People lie. This is a fact. The only way for me to convict would be with proof that would clear any doubt.

Belief has nothing to do with it? People get convicted all the time based on testimony when there is no proof. The judge or jury or both accept the testimony as credible enough to convict.
Is **** the only instance where you will not believe testimony without seeing something with your own eyes?

I said people lie. The study is doomed to be flawed from the beginning. So no, I don't care what a study says where people have been known to willingly lie about the topic. In this case, ****.

Why is a study doomed from the beginning? Because people lie? If that’s the case, then everything involving input from humans is suspect.

It is my opinion that women ARE some of the most shady people on the planet. Knowing what I know I will not convict anyone accused of **** without proof.

It’s your opinion, but if it’s an opinion not based on fact, it can lead to poor thought processes and actions. You will not believe or convict without hard evidence, but you will use your “shady” evaluation as a reason to not believe.
It’s a very inconsistent way to approach things. When done on a mass scale? Big problem. One that causes things like insurrection and coup attempts.

You are off on a tangent. Asking people if they ***** before is not relevant to this topic.

It’s ALWAYS “before” if you are asking someone whether they did something or not. You can’t ask if they did something in the future. Before s 100% relevant to things.

Rob, a man is accused of ****. The ONLY evidence provided by the accuser is her word that it happened. How many years do you think he should go to prison for?

If the victim’s testimony is enough to convince me and the jury beyond reasonable doubt, then the defendant should get whatever punishment is prescribed by law.
That’s how the legal system works.

 

[Eggs 5,000+ posts]

 

[djdilliodon!]

Belief has nothing to do with it? People get convicted all the time based on testimony when there is no proof. The judge or jury or both accept the testimony as credible enough to convict.
Is **** the only instance where you will not believe testimony without seeing something with your own eyes?


Why is a study doomed from the beginning? Because people lie? If that’s the case, then everything involving input from humans is suspect.

It’s your opinion, but if it’s an opinion not based on fact, it can lead to poor thought processes and actions. You will not believe or convict without hard evidence, but you will use your “shady” evaluation as a reason to not believe.
It’s a very inconsistent way to approach things. When done on a mass scale? Big problem. One that causes things like insurrection and coup attempts.

It’s ALWAYS “before” if you are asking someone whether they did something or not. You can’t ask if they did something in the future. Before s 100% relevant to things.

If the victim’s testimony is enough to convince me and the jury beyond reasonable doubt, then the defendant should get whatever punishment is prescribed by law.
That’s how the legal system works.

I agree, to convict someone “beyond reasonable doubt” the problem is that wasn’t the standard in this case. They changed the law purposely in the state of NY just so this case could be done in civil court. All a person on the jury has to do is think more than a 50% chance the person is credible, that’s it. It is why this isn’t a criminal “conviction” or a conviction at all. It’s just a jury believes someone over the other and money is awarded. The thing is with this it’s going to open the flood gates now. Andrew Cuomo mark my words will be in the hot seat soon cause of this law. Many others I’m sure will be too. Anyone can say sometime 20 years ago between 1994 and 1997 this person touched my twig and be sued. If you really think about it, it’s kind of ridiculous.

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

I agree, to convict someone “beyond reasonable doubt” the problem is that wasn’t the standard in this case. They changed the law purposely in the state of NY just so this case could be done in civil court. All a person on the jury has to do is think more than a 50% chance the person is credible, that’s it. It is why this isn’t a criminal “conviction” or a conviction at all. It’s just a jury believes someone over the other and money is awarded. The thing is with this it’s going to open the flood gates now. Andrew Cuomo mark my words will be in the hot seat soon cause of this law. Many others I’m sure will be too. Anyone can say sometime 20 years ago between 1994 and 1997 this person touched my twig and be sued. If you really think about it, it’s kind of ridiculous.

I think the statute of limitations on **** should be higher than for art theft, but that’s my opinion due to the severity of the crime.

I think in terms of what I would want if it was my own family that was harmed.
For example: if someone attacked and harmed my mother? I’d pursue justice until my dying day. And if it wasn’t served, I might mete it out as my final act before leaving the earth.

But that’s just me. Some people think **** is no big deal or that it is less of a big deal over time.

What law did NY change so Trump could be taken to court?