It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Should all women be believed???

page: 4
4
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 18 2019 @ 02:34 PM
link   
a reply to: JustJohnny

Do you believe that anyone should be innocent until proven guilty?

That might be a better question.




posted on Jul, 18 2019 @ 02:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

There is a difference between having one's accusation investigated and what people think "being believed" should constitute these days though.

Look at what they tried to do to Kavanaugh because Blasey-Ford should be believed.

They wanted him kicked off the bench. They wanted him kicked off of coaching his daughters. They basically wanted him barred from ever holding any kind of anything again. You know, because Blasey-Ford should be believed.

And that was before there was any kind of attempt at a credible investigation, trial, cross-examination, defense ... anything.

So if that's what it means to believe a woman, then no. Women should not be believed because that's not believing, that's bypassing the trial and skipping straight to the public execution.
edit on 18-7-2019 by ketsuko because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 18 2019 @ 02:40 PM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

Even after the act has occurred? If consent is given at the beginning and all the way through the act, can it be withdrawn afterwards? Would you consider that to be in the same category as forced rape?


Do you see any potential issues with allowing consent to be withdrawn afterwards?



posted on Jul, 18 2019 @ 02:43 PM
link   
“should all women be believed?? “

No



posted on Jul, 18 2019 @ 02:53 PM
link   
a reply to: paraphi

In a normal crime one is innocent until proven guilty.. by law the state is required to assume you did nothing wrong..

That doesn’t work with he said, she said situations.. and for smaller infractions it is worth deciding “there is no way to know... he says one thing and she the other...”, but for rape, where her testimony is likely the ONLY evidence....


That same assumption of innocence translates into basically every rapist that is not a stranger , going free...


Worse... being found innocent



posted on Jul, 18 2019 @ 02:58 PM
link   
a reply to: JustJohnny

If a woman is raped, there is evidence of it especially if she goes and reports it after the fact.

But if two college age kids get drunk and something happens and in the morning she decides she didn't consent after the fact, is that a rape because she would rather it hadn't happened?



posted on Jul, 18 2019 @ 03:07 PM
link   

Should all women be believed???


Should all men be believed?



posted on Jul, 18 2019 @ 03:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: spiritualarchitect
“should all women be believed?? “

No



Yet another that couldn’t be bothered to read the post...


It is funny it is only conservatives who have done that..



posted on Jul, 18 2019 @ 03:09 PM
link   
a reply to: JustJohnny

No. Trust but verify. Blindly believed because of some social movement? Hah.



posted on Jul, 18 2019 @ 03:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Creep Thumper

Read the OP....

Obviously it answers your question..



posted on Jul, 18 2019 @ 03:10 PM
link   
a reply to: Creep Thumper

What a pointless comeback.



posted on Jul, 18 2019 @ 03:11 PM
link   
a reply to: hombero

That is believing every woman....

That’s the trust part...


I thought the OP made that. Clear



posted on Jul, 18 2019 @ 03:12 PM
link   
a reply to: hombero

Did you read the OP??? It obviously answers his question



posted on Jul, 18 2019 @ 03:14 PM
link   
a reply to: JustJohnny
I believe every one of my patients when they report an assault or a rape. One of the things I love most about my job is that is not my job to determine guilt or innocence.

An interesting thing about lying when reporting an assault is that it will usually backfire on you, especially when the collected evidence does not support the reported data.



posted on Jul, 18 2019 @ 03:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: JustJohnny
a reply to: hombero

That is believing every woman....

That’s the trust part...


I thought the OP made that. Clear



posted on Jul, 18 2019 @ 03:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: projectvxn

YES !


Did...did we just agree?



posted on Jul, 18 2019 @ 03:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: hombero
a reply to: Creep Thumper

What a pointless comeback.


The truth hurts.



posted on Jul, 18 2019 @ 03:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: JustJohnny

Because if you DO NOT give the accuser the benefit of the doubt, then you are inherently giving the accused the benefit of the doubt... 



Giving the accused the benefit of the doubt is not something we do to be nice when it makes sense.

Giving the accused the benefit of the doubt is the fundamental bedrock of our legal justice system.

Yes this method of administering legal justice does mean that the guilty will sometimes go free. This is not just an unfortunate consequence; it is long thought out, tested and agreed to result of exercising our societal ideals.

We as a society agree and believe that it is a much better outcome to allow the guilty to go free than it is to punish the innocent. The reverse; accepting the punishment of some innocent people so that we may punish all guilt people; flys in the face our most cherished beliefs. Those beliefs involving individualism, liberty, human rights and ect.

There are many crimes, violent or otherwise, that occur with little to no evidence; in that regard rape is not special among crimes. And so there is no compelling reason to abandon our way of administering legal justice and the practice of our most cherished beliefs in order to accommodate the victims of rape; just as we would not abandon those ideals in order to accommodate the victims of other crimes.

"Should the victims of rape (male or female) always be believed?". Of course they should be; just like the victims of all crimes should be believed. There is a difference between "believing" the victim (and witnesses) of a crime and finding a person legally guilty of that crime. The two are not the same action; they are not mutually exclusive; the first does not always need to lead to the second.

A lot of things have to occur between when a victim reports a crime and when someone is found guilty of that crime. An investigation has to occur, pretrial activities have to occur, a trial has to occur and jury deliberations have to occur. Through out that process two things can happen:

1) The victim is not believed. In which case detectives might not do their best to investigate the crime. The DA may not do their best prosecuting the crime. And the jury may not take their decision making seriously.

2) The victim is believed. In which case detectives will do their level best to investigate the crime. The DA will do their level best to prosecute the crime. And the jury will do their level best in making their decision of whether the accused is guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt.

If the first occurs I'm sure we would all agree there was a miscarriage of justice no mater the outcome of the trial. These situations do unfortunately occur and we as a society should strive to correct the problem.

If the second occurs it is still not necessary true that a guilty party will be found and brought to justice. The detectives and DA could make honest mistakes. The jury may find that there is not enough evidence to erase all doubt. If this occurs it does not mean the victim was not believed; just that not enough went right to bring the guilty to justice.

In the end your question, "Should the victim be believed or should the accused be given the benefit of the doubt?", is steped in false logic...

... The victim should be believed ... and
... The accused should be given the benefit of the doubt

Both should occur when our legal justice system is working correctly.

And yes sometimes that means the guilty will not be found legally guilty. It's the price we pay for being a free people who cherish their individuality and liberty.
edit on 18-7-2019 by DanDanDat because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 18 2019 @ 03:54 PM
link   
a reply to: JustJohnny

So you think that a female coming forward with a claim of rape should always be believed, regardless of the situation? Do you think there are any instances where further investigation should be performed or maybe a claim of rape where it wasn't rape at the time?

Why are you pushing for the only answer is to believe the female, always?

Do YOU see any problems with that approach?

You really haven't added much to the discussion yourself other than to keep the your thread going. Almost smells a little trollish.



posted on Jul, 18 2019 @ 03:56 PM
link   
No.

Next!




top topics



 
4
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join