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.

 

Whoopi says its not "rape-rape"

page: 4
24
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 10:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheColdDragon
Statutory Rape should be repealed. Anyone who has willing sex, regardless of age or "Consequences" that may arise, is HAVING WILLING SEX.


Drugging and incapacitating someone does not mean they CONSENT.





posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 10:12 PM
link   
What a disgusting creep.....he admitted to having sex with a 13 year old.....ENOUGH SAID!!!!!!!!!!! she is practically a baby in my eyes.....


I hate this crap.....WHY WHY WHY...........



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 10:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blanca Rose
If I found out my 12 or 13 year old daughter was having consensual sex, she wouldn't have lived to see her next birthday.


Uhh.. Up to that statement I was with ya.

I hope it's just an over reaction, but if not, it's pretty scary to think you'd rather see your child dead than having a consensual physical relationship.




posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 10:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheColdDragon
All of you people disgust me. I mean deep down, seriously disgust me.

Statutory Rape should be repealed. Anyone who has willing sex, regardless of age or "Consequences" that may arise, is HAVING WILLING SEX. I don't care if you "THINK" a thirteen year old is incapable of consenting, I don't care if you "THINK" that someone fourty years older is a pervert, I don't care if you "THINK" that it's wrong.

You should not have extra laws when rape laws are sufficient for violent, involuntary sex. Statutory Rape is just an excuse for prudes to ruin the lives of innocent adult males because there is so much hatred of men in this culture.


Finally..some sense of logic in this thread. Rape law was never intended for these kinds of circumstance. It was intended to punish those who would prey on the helpless and the weak, violently destroying lives for their own personal gratification. This is a perfect example of a prosecutor and a judge getting their day in the sun at any expense.

Thank you for the breath of fresh air.
..ex



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 10:19 PM
link   
What amazes me is this: Why does anybody truly care what Whoppi or any of the other yentas on the view say or do? You have a serious issue if you take life advice or have your opinion skewed from any actor OR talk show



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 10:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheColdDragon
Statutory Rape should be repealed. Anyone who has willing sex, regardless of age or "Consequences" that may arise, is HAVING WILLING SEX. I don't care if you "THINK" a thirteen year old is incapable of consenting, I don't care if you "THINK" that someone fourty years older is a pervert, I don't care if you "THINK" that it's wrong.


*sniff sniff* I smell a pedofile here with that kind of justification :shk: What are you doing? Reading out of some NAMBLA talking points booklet?


[edit on 10/1/09 by FredT]



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 10:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by v3_exceed

Originally posted by TheColdDragon
All of you people disgust me. I mean deep down, seriously disgust me.

Statutory Rape should be repealed. Anyone who has willing sex, regardless of age or "Consequences" that may arise, is HAVING WILLING SEX. I don't care if you "THINK" a thirteen year old is incapable of consenting, I don't care if you "THINK" that someone fourty years older is a pervert, I don't care if you "THINK" that it's wrong.

You should not have extra laws when rape laws are sufficient for violent, involuntary sex. Statutory Rape is just an excuse for prudes to ruin the lives of innocent adult males because there is so much hatred of men in this culture.


Finally..some sense of logic in this thread. Rape law was never intended for these kinds of circumstance. It was intended to punish those who would prey on the helpless and the weak, violently destroying lives for their own personal gratification. This is a perfect example of a prosecutor and a judge getting their day in the sun at any expense.

Thank you for the breath of fresh air.
..ex


The charge was Rape (originally) he plead down to a lesser charge of Statutory Rape.

Just to make this very clear... because I cannot tell by these comments if the grand jury testimony of the CHILD was actually reviewed, here it is... please tell me if this reads "consent" to you...
_______________________________________________
These are excepts from the grand jury testimony of Samantha Gailey. I warn you, her account is extremely graphic and disturbing, but it is important that we see just how horrible this event was ...

[*SNIP*]

Source

*this is but onc source quoting excerpts from the original testimony. A simple "search" will bring up many, many more*

 


Mod edit: Removed in-post graphic content. Content is now only found in the external source with the poster's original disclaimer.

[edit on 9/30/2009 by AshleyD]



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 10:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ha`la`tha


Uhh.. Up to that statement I was with ya.

I hope it's just an over reaction, but if not, it's pretty scary to think you'd rather see your child dead than having a consensual physical relationship.



Honestly, I would not want to see my daughter having a relationship at that age, but I wouldn't want her dead either.

Anyway, the threat worked on my daughter and my sons as well, so it was all good!



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 10:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by LadySkadi

The charge was Rape (originally) he plead down to a lesser charge of Statutory Rape.

Just to make this very clear... because I cannot tell by these comments if the grand jury testimony of the CHILD was actually reviewed, here it is... please tell me if this reads "consent" to you...
[edit on 30-9-2009 by LadySkadi]


As I had stated in my earlier post, I think that the child's testimony in this case is suspect. Given the position that Polanski had in the Hollywood film industry I think it's likely that someone was going for a career as an actress and was willing to do whatever it takes to make it.

The testimony of the rape victim in some cases must be considered suspect if enough personal motivation is present.

In example The Woman who claimed the 11 football players raped her. (recently reported on CNN and BBC) She was adamant that it was entirely non consensual and the only reason that she didn't report it right away was it would be her word against theirs. That was until......the video came out. Once the video evidence of the "Rape" came out her story changed dramatically.

Now I am in no way condoning rape, or suggesting that it isn't a heinous crime. I think that many women suffer at the hands of some men and in no sense should that be considered consensual.

I am also not naive enough to believe that some women won't use the Rape card if they feel used, or slighted or embarrassed after the fact. The testimony of the attention starved actress at a grand jury should be suspect.

When you add in the rest of the facts of the case I just don't believe that Polanski was some sex crazed predator, given the availability of sex within his demographic.

..Ex



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 10:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by v3_exceed

Originally posted by TheColdDragon
All of you people disgust me. I mean deep down, seriously disgust me.

Statutory Rape should be repealed. Anyone who has willing sex, regardless of age or "Consequences" that may arise, is HAVING WILLING SEX. I don't care if you "THINK" a thirteen year old is incapable of consenting, I don't care if you "THINK" that someone fourty years older is a pervert, I don't care if you "THINK" that it's wrong.

You should not have extra laws when rape laws are sufficient for violent, involuntary sex. Statutory Rape is just an excuse for prudes to ruin the lives of innocent adult males because there is so much hatred of men in this culture.


Finally..some sense of logic in this thread. Rape law was never intended for these kinds of circumstance. It was intended to punish those who would prey on the helpless and the weak, violently destroying lives for their own personal gratification. This is a perfect example of a prosecutor and a judge getting their day in the sun at any expense.

Thank you for the breath of fresh air.
..ex


Rape laws were never intended to encompass a man drugging someone and pursuing them and ignoring them saying no.....

I can only assume that you are a real Leviticus kind of guy.

She asked for it. Stone her. Let him pay his goat and get on with it.



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 10:59 PM
link   
reply to post by TheColdDragon
 


All the men I know would not take kindly to your assumption that you deserve to be in the same category as them.



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 11:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by John Matrix



The whole story is that he already plead, and he was convicted. He knew she was underage because he got the permission of her mother for the photo shoot. He drugged her. He gave her alcohol. He ignored her saying no. He pursued her when she removed herself from the situation.

You can read my quote from earlier in the thread, where he specifically cops to it.

There is no debate. The guy is guilty beyond (WAY beyond) a reasonable doubt.

He merely got away from sentencing.

The fact is that it isn't if he's guilty. He is. It is if he DESERVES to go to jail because he's special, and there are enough people who think that raping people is okay particularly if your famous.



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 11:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by DevilJin
Well, people criticize Elizabeth Hasselbeck for her views but count on Whoopi to say something absolutely stupid. This is the same woman who said dog-fighting was a part of Southern culture during the whole Michael Vick thing, despite being a complete lie and generalization.

I do think the case should be dropped because the woman who was "rape" but not "rape-raped", settled it out of court for a large sum and she is on Roman's side in wanting the case to be dropped.

[edit on 30-9-2009 by DevilJin]


but that's making the justice system about money. she got a settlement, and in time, forgave him. hey, i'm sure many women would forgive, especially if given money, later on in their years.

Did he get the thirteen year old drunk like a gentlemen?
Did the old man politely give it to the thirteen year old?

these quesitons are irrelevant. the only issue is that he did it.
period.

seems tho, that some of the "family" in hollywood think such questions actually matter. like they actually pertain.

The whole reason such things are illegal is because everyone knows that children are easy to manipulate.
They learn. And if they learn that life is okay if you're being manipulated, even if they don't see it as manipulation, then they are losing some of their potential.

I'm trying to imagine my li'l sis when she was thirteen, being taken advantage of by a thirty or fourty year old.....
No matter what probability i think of, it never works out well for the guy.



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 11:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aeons

I can only assume that you are a real Leviticus kind of guy.

She asked for it. Stone her. Let him pay his goat and get on with it.



Ok, that makes no sense what so ever. Leviticus 18 deals with sexuality, and has noting to do with she asked for it, stone her etc.Wiki

All I can say is that one day I hope you have male children so that when they have a girlfriend who cries rape, you too can feel the balance of Justice based on "Mob mentality". I can see where you would have got that from reading my post...NOT. Deny Ignorance? My bet is you would have nothing left.

..ex



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 11:07 PM
link   
reply to post by v3_exceed
 


Power. How many women throw themselves at you doesn't matter.

These men think of those women as dirty.

But a young girl, she's CLEAN. They DESERVE a clean ripe girl.

The fact that his mother was a prostitute would add to this little psychological disorder. The Mary-Magdalene complex.

And his behaviour in this proves his ENTITLED expection out as well.

The guy is a classic sexual predator. You could literally use him as a case study.

[edit on 2009/9/30 by Aeons]



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 11:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by v3_exceed

Originally posted by Aeons

I can only assume that you are a real Leviticus kind of guy.

She asked for it. Stone her. Let him pay his goat and get on with it.



Ok, that makes no sense what so ever. Leviticus 18 deals with sexuality, and has noting to do with she asked for it, stone her etc.Wiki

All I can say is that one day I hope you have male children so that when they have a girlfriend who cries rape, you too can feel the balance of Justice based on "Mob mentality". I can see where you would have got that from reading my post...NOT. Deny Ignorance? My bet is you would have nothing left.

..ex


Boys in an age appropriate sexual exploratory relationship is not rape.

That this isn't clear to you is disturbing.



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 11:16 PM
link   
Whoopie said that? Hmm I think it's easy to say it's not rape-rape when it wasn't your child. I read somewhere the girl who was the victim forgave him but it does not excuse a couple of issues. The drugging sexual violation of a minor and the fleeing of jurisdiction. The statute of limitations of both matters may have run out on this case which may provide him with a get out card but again I think that sends an imbalanced message. There have been folks who committed non violent crimes, ran just to be found twenty odd years later living respectable lives and sent to prison.



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 11:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Aeons
 


you forget the organizations who signed this.

I think every nation's justice system on Earth should put these signers on their watch-list and start investigating what potential crime they might have committed. After all, supporting an admitted rapist does say something of their wicked mindsets.....



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 11:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by FredT
What amazes me is this: Why does anybody truly care what Whoppi or any of the other yentas on the view say or do? You have a serious issue if you take life advice or have your opinion skewed from any actor OR talk show


Yep, but that's their job. Spinning, shaping, lying, framing events for other people. They get out there, and the impressionable BELIEVE it.

Some "culture" people come out and say the "French" believe this is okay. Do they really? I highly doubt it.

They give people talking points - YOU believe THIS. This is why. Without critical thought.

Then those poor blighters run into the people with a personal agenda - the ones who really want to be allowed to have sex with children without consequences, but cannot say so. Those people then promote this attitude.

So you have to confront them. Because in ignoring them, people think they must be right. And people want to be on the "right side" of things. So they go with the freaks and pervs who speak up.

I don't call people sheep. But I would say that most of the World's people exist in a hive, and only some in the hive can think for themselves. It is the way of the World.

The only way to break through to them is to keep slogging the Critical Thinking meme, until it takes with enough people that it hits the watershed mark in the global population.

So while it may seem pointless, in ignoring these blighters you actually give in to them. They don't need your compliance. They only need your silence.



posted on Sep, 30 2009 @ 11:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aeons
Boys in an age appropriate sexual exploratory relationship is not rape.
That this isn't clear to you is disturbing.


Actually it is. In many states consensual sex between minors is not legal. In addition, these same laws apply if parental consent has not been given even if both parties has consented.

Currently many US citizens are being arrested for "Sexting" under the laws meant to protect children from being exploited in child pornography. In these cases the victim is also the perpetrator. Nice draconian system you have there.

The entire concept is quite clear to me, I assure you. What IS disturbing, is that you and many others, refuse to consider the motivation of the accuser(s) in these kinds of cases or consider that a "Pure underage girl" could have the type of personality that would all her to be manipulative, how very 70's of you.

Either you are unable or unwilling to see the logic of my earlier posts and chose to spout bible nonsense in your attempt to deride my position. In any case you have proven yourself to be entirely without logic and now beneath my contempt, and only deserving my pity.

..ex



new topics

top topics



 
24
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join