"Free Polanski" = Liberals gone crazy

I guess i'm a liberal for my opinions, but i am disgusted that someone would even ask to free him and let him go free like nothing never happened.

Amongt the first to ask for his return was Mia Farrow.

Funny or sick; that she takes the side of a child rapist, having herself being left by Woody Allen for her adopted daughter as soon she turned 18.

I Think Polanski was involved in some satanic cult; too much movies around the subject and knowledge of it. If that is confirmed, that might even bring considerations over the all Manson case.

I believe that ''the Pianist'' was an attemp for him to get sympathy from mighty jewish lobbies to back his return in the USA.

The guy should not be jailed for a crime commited 30 years ago, but also for having fleed the punishment.

Liberals gone crazy ???????? The whole world is gone such !!!!!!

Originally posted by An0nym0use
As far as I know, there's no fundamental tenement of Liberalism that wants you to touch little boys.

As already mentioned a core value of liberalism is free sexuality. When taken to the extreme it turns into other "alternative" lifestyles.

All you people denying this is kind of knee-jerk-ish. Nobody is vilifying liberalism per se, hence the disclaimer in the OP.

I guess I should have politically correct said "Extremists gone crazy".

Originally posted by Orion65
That's the bottom line, isn't it? If he were just a "regular guy" who was 44 having a history of sex with a 13 year old they'd roast him over an open flame and crucify him in the press.

Yes, if this were a "regular guy" Hollywood would be calling for his head, no matter his politics. And liberals of every stripe would join in. But, he is a Hollywood elite, so his Hollywood peeps are standing behind him. It's sickening. I frankly don't care what his victim is saying. The punishment for a crime isn't about the victim, it's about punishing the crime. And he should be punished to the full extent of the law.

There are sexual perverts on both ends of the political spectrum. I don't believe this is about a political ideology, simply because if he was not "Hollywood", they would be carrying the pitchforks.

Originally posted by Dark Ghost
While there may be public outrage that I was not convicted and there might be fear that I will do the same thing to another person, it is still the victim's decision.

I find all of that pretty interesting. I figure of the victim forgives him, he could possibly be allowed to go free. Or not...? Its an ethical dilemma.

I was not going to reply to this thread again but the more I thought about it the more I realized that the whole premise of this thread is wrong.

First off I am a staunch liberal and most of my friends are as well and I don't know one who would even consider condoning child sexual abuse.

Second...(and this is largely the media's fault) he has already plead guilty....he would not be tried because of the sex with a minor...he would be tried if extradited for flight from justice...if he were to be tried again for the original crime...which he can't by law...its called double jeopardy.

Third...as I have said earlier the victim herself has called for the whole thing to be dropped...she is not willing to press the charges further.

Based on this as far as I can tell from the statements by the celebrities in question are calling the case to be dropped on the flight from justice charges...not from the original crime.

Originally posted by Nimrod
Funny or sick; that she takes the side of a child rapist, having herself being left by Woody Allen for her adopted daughter as soon she turned 18.

I think so too.

I Think Polanski was involved in some satanic cult; too much movies around the subject and knowledge of it. If that is confirmed, that might even bring considerations over the all Manson case.

I think so too.

I believe that ''the Pianist'' was an attemp for him to get sympathy from mighty jewish lobbies to back his return in the USA.

Never thought about that. Interesting notion.

Liberals gone crazy ???????? The whole world is gone such !!!!!!

I think so too.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


You're preaching to the choir. And sorry but I have to go OT and say you have a great avatar - cuuuuuute doggie!

Originally posted by grover
the whole premise of this thread is wrong.
First off I am a staunch liberal and most of my friends are as well and I don't know one who would even consider condoning child sexual abuse.

Just because your friends are not extremists, doesnt mean they dont exist.

the celebrities in question are calling the case to be dropped on the flight from justice charges...not from the original crime.

If you can back that up with evidence I´ll drop my case and declare my OP false.

[edit on 29-9-2009 by Skyfloating]

Originally posted by Skyfloating
As already mentioned a core value of liberalism is free sexuality.

Rape is not about sexuality, though.
Pedophilia is also not about sexuality.

These are perversions and not related to sexuality.

I don't know that a core value of liberalism is "free sexuality", but I think liberals in general are more accepting of pre-marital sex, sexual orientation and openness about sex. But that's all between consenting adults. Anything else is not acceptable, IMO.

Thanks, Orion65

Originally posted by Skyfloating
Disclaimer: This is no criticism of liberalism as such but of its darker side

How the left-wing are treating the Polanski-case is a good example of the dark-side of liberalism, a good example of what happens when a soft heart becomes a soft brain.

The guy is a child-rapist who fled the country in order not to get arrested. Now that he did get arrested, several "liberal" activists such as Harrison Ford, Monica Belluci, Harvey Weinstein, various left-wing-organizations, are calling to "Free Polanski".

And British novelist Robert Harris described the arrest as "disgusting treatment".

The Swiss Directors Association also criticised the arrest, describing it as "not only a grotesque farce of justice, but also an immense cultural scandal".

BBC Report

As is quite typical for left-wing-extremists, right/wrong are relativised and even reversed, so that not child-rape is disgusting and a scandal but arresting the rapist is "disgusting" and "an immense cultural scandal".

Im interested in hearing the viewpoints of both political sides on this...

[edit on 29-9-2009 by Skyfloating]

c'mon sky...left wing??? the ENTIRE LEFT-WING??? right....i gues that means limbaugh and beck represent the ENTIRE RIGHT-WING.

i am a liberal, and i think polanski should be turned over and his #ss thrown in jail for the rest of his life. this guy is a child rapist...period.

because a few celebrities are giving him the benefit of the doubt, still means the vast majority of liberals still thinks this guy should be put in the big house. their is no politics here. maybe over in europe this is acceptable, but if you'll notice he slithered out of the country, because both right and left thought he was a disgusting human, and should be locked up for good.

Originally posted by Skyfloating
Then it must be a coincidence that those behind the various free-polanski campaigns are very well-known left-leaning-activists...

No, it's no coincidence. There's a common cause. They're liberal because they are from Hollywood. They are also perverts because they are from Hollywood. But they are not perverts because they are liberal.

Originally posted by The Vagabond

Originally posted by Skyfloating
Then it must be a coincidence that those behind the various free-polanski campaigns are very well-known left-leaning-activists...

No, it's no coincidence. There's a common cause. They're liberal because they are from Hollywood. They are also perverts because they are from Hollywood. But they are not perverts because they are liberal.

well...that makes ronald reagen (president), sonny bono (senator), fred thompson (congressmen) all from hollywood and actors for years, all republicans, all perverts.

nice logic there. even i don't believe that.

I actually didn't know anything about this case before yesterday. Out of touch, I guess. So, the more I discover, the more confused I am.

I found this interesting...

The director had pleaded guilty to unlawful sexual intercourse in 1977 with a 13-year-old girl. He was sent to prison for 42 days, but the judge tried to renege on the plea bargain.
...
His victim, Samantha Geimer, who long ago identified herself, has joined in Polanski's bid for dismissal, saying she wants the case to be over. She sued Polanski and reached an undisclosed settlement.

So, I think I'd have to know more about the case itself to say what I THINK about it. I'm just not sure. Being a victim of child molestation and rape myself doesn't help me to be very objective about how I FEEL about it.

But, he has served some jail time, is in jail now and paid a settlement to his victim. So, perhaps his business around the rape is finished? Maybe he has paid his dues. I don't know.

Source

reply to post by jimmyx


I don't suppose I could save my little joke by pointing out that the only stars you can name who weren't whoremongers made careers out of whoring themselves could I?

edit to add:
speaking of specious logic, I'd also like to mention on a serious note that it is absolutely possible for a given thing to cause an effect in one person but not in another.

For example, I'm crude and belligerent because I'm drunk. Yet other people get drunk and all they want to do is cry and tell you how much they love you. Would the case of the later group prove that alcohol has nothing to do with my character flaws? (and if so, would you call up my aunt cathy and tell her that AA isn't going to help me?)

[edit on Tue 29 Sep 2009 by The Vagabond]

Originally posted by jimmyx
c'mon sky...left wing??? the ENTIRE LEFT-WING???

but I think liberals in general are more accepting of pre-marital sex, sexual orientation and openness about sex.

I can only repeatedly state that we are talking about left-wing-extremism, about liberalism taken too far. We are not talking about liberalism as such and we are not talking about the left-wing as such.

Dont you guys discern between left-wing and left-wing-extremism?

you can be a conservative homosexual , or a liberal heterosexual

what people seam to miss is the grammatic pun in it all , and it has nothing to do with political ideologies.

its a veil thats been put over your eyes ,

is a conservative pedophile one who only does it with a certain age and a liberal one, one who can do it with a range of 1-4 years in difference ?

do conservatives uphold stoneage philosofies where polygamy is common or is it liberal ?

all i can say is that politics ruined the life of many because it has nothing to do with real life.

you can be a democratic conservative with liberal views
you can be a democratic liberal with conservative views
you can be a liberal with democraticly conservative views

you get the drift i hope , because its all nonsence

its just a word game where they try to put you in a group that they can enslave.

Originally posted by The Vagabond
But they are not perverts because they are liberal.

Right. They are perverts because they are stretching and bending the borders of liberalism, giving liberalism a bad name.

The bad name is not inherent in liberalism. Its perverted liberalism born from moral relativism and is worth pointing out as it is presented in the media on a daily basis.

Quite possibly correct sky, which would indicate that it is not a case of extreme liberals making a farce of morality but extreme immorality making a farce of liberalism, so your thread title would seem to miss the point just a bit.

Likewise it would be unfair to call a polygamist movement in Utah an example of conservatism gone wild.

It's not liberal or conservative principles run amok. It's a lack of principles hiding itself behind any excuse it can get, and soiling the ideologies which are used to that end in the process.

reply to post by The Vagabond

The whole premise is wrong...you could just as easily say that conservatives/libertarians with their emphasis on civil liberties would be opposed to prosecuting Polanski any further and it would still be wrong.

Liberalism has nothing to do with it.

Originally posted by Skyfloating
Dont you guys discern between left-wing and left-wing-extremism?

I do. But I also discern between sexuality and perversion.

Originally posted by grover
The whole premise is wrong...you could just as easily say that conservatives/libertarians with their emphasis on civil liberties would be opposed to prosecuting Polanski any further and it would still be wrong.

Or that conservatives, with their emphasis on less government would be in favor of the woman's right to choose. So, the right to abortion is a core conservative value.

I'm really confused now.