Whoopi Goldberg: Polanski Child Rape Wasn't Rape, Rape

originally posted by: Jefferton

originally posted by: Butterfinger
The American Left ladies and gents!

Major generalization ladies and gents!

Just Deplorables being deplorable Ladies and Gents!

a reply to: loam

So I guess qualudes and alcohol to minors is ok.....thanks Whoopi

Nah it wasn’t rape. It was just screwing a 13 year old girl..

How on earth could anyone think that is rape?

/sarcasm.

a reply to: projectvxn

Just baffled.

I really do suffer from the delusion that there are some things that most people can really agree upon.

Sad.

Whoopi also said, of the Michael Vick case "They're just dogs..."

I'll never forget that if I live to be 120.

Sal

a reply to: loam

a reply to: loam

I don't know what planet she's living on, but on this one, drugging someone, then having sex with them, is called rape. She's as bad as he is, making excuses.

a reply to: loam

I hate that show and the vile ignorant actors,so over the top liberal,saying the most ignorant things,I had them shut TV off at my Drs appt,or change channel,as my blood pressure was rising

a reply to: loam

What in the hell is that all about?

Look, its pretty damned simple, when you cut to the bones of the issue.

A child of any age, cannot legally provide consent. Therefore, any sexual activity they engage in with an adult, whether desired by them or not, is rape, and it does not matter what the situation is, the adult in the equation has a legal obligation NOT to engage in activity of any kind, with that child.

That means that, of course, an adult forcing themselves on the child is rape, and it is also rape if a child, for some reason instigates or succeeds in seducing the adult. Put another way, a carrot is still a carrot, no matter whether you cut it julienne style, or coin cut the thing.

a reply to: loam

I have a rather simplistic view on things like this - a nonce is a nonce and no amount of sugar coating can alter that.

Polanski and his like deserve their balls chopping off and ramming down their throats.

I used to think Whoopi Goldberg was ok, but she seems to have become a bit of an apologist for the excesses of the entertainment business hierarchy, I can't think of any sort of justification for her stance.

a reply to: loam

I guess in her mind, he was showing compassion by drugging her so she wouldn't feel it as much or remember it as much.

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: loam


Oh. I thought, the View was on in 1977! My mistake.

But, I stand by my opinion that Whoopi was painfully trying to justify that her own exploitation wasn't rape. That was the culture in those days.

Sincere questions:
When were Statutory Rape laws first enacted. Wouldn't they have to have been enacted AFTER age of consent laws were enacted? Wouldn't those laws differ from state to state?

Maybe she was justifying things went thru. i considered the same. It doesnt change the fact her words are harmful to those who would take her seriously without seeing the underlying psychological issues taking place... Like younger women who look up to her.

a reply to: 3n19m470


Trust me, I jumped off the Whoopie bandwagon a long time ago. She's a Disney brainwashed corporate shill and a (Democrat) government mouthpiece. And yes, her words did not help, but worsened the situation.