It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Innocent until proven guilty

page: 1

log in


posted on May, 30 2011 @ 08:21 PM
While I enjoy this site and believe we should be allowed to question things, people need to show some discernment. People read a headline or article and presume it is the truth if it attacks a group that they are already against. Some of what is written here is outright libel. People ignore the words accused and alleged and presume that accusations are true and then pass it on to others who don't investigate it.

Many of you have heard about the 15 year old (now 29 years old) who alleged that she had was raped by force 14 years ago. She also alleges that she was forced to apologize to her whole church for the event. Now, if it is true than it is a terrible thing; but, nothing has been proven yet. People should be allowed to defend themselves against such allegations. After all the anti-Christians have brow beaten Christians over this, will there be any apologies if it turns out to be untrue? No guilty until proven innocent seems to popular on this site.

I don't want to limit this discussion to anti-Christians. Claiming the queen of England is a murderer who drinks blood is also pretty unfair. I don't like royalty, don't believe in Kings and I am of Irish decent and family members died during the famine; but, that doesn't justify my being unfair either. Have you ever been accused of anything falsely, doesn't feel to good.

posted on May, 30 2011 @ 08:29 PM
Well unfortunately in this society no matter how much people say different. You are guilty until proven innocent.
Just look at how the media destroys peoples image within days of them becoming part of a scandal. Its sad how that statement is one of the biggest lies the justice system spreads.

You're only innocent if you have money to buy the case.

posted on May, 30 2011 @ 08:30 PM
I personally looked into that case, and all the evidence pointed to that priest being guilty. Innocent until proven guilty, to me, only matters when direct punishment is involved. Any reasonable doubt he could be innocent, yes some, but is he guilty, still most likely.

Using you're previous mentalities over issues, or groups, to interpret any new information though, is a human flaw. I mostly think of this when I try to decide my stance on controversial issues, especially religion. "Am I being too lenient on accepting one side because of prior bias? Or is that side genuinely making more sense."

People like their ego stroked by having their beliefs reinforced, and don't want to listen to things disagreeing with that. Unfortunate, but true, even when they don't acknowledge it.

posted on May, 30 2011 @ 08:31 PM
reply to post by xxsomexpersonxx

The accused rapist was not a priest, it was one of the congregation. You need to look into the case some more.

posted on May, 30 2011 @ 08:37 PM

Originally posted by AQuestion
reply to post by xxsomexpersonxx

The accused rapist was not a priest, it was one of the congregation. You need to look into the case some more.

I looked into it a few months ago, I honestly didn't even see that it was being talked about now until after I posted. Looks like the same case I looked at though.

I thought priest was wrong when I said it, I'm not gonna reexamine the case though.

posted on May, 30 2011 @ 08:40 PM

you are guilty

regardless of culpability

in our system

its how much you pay

or how much others are willing to pay for you

posted on May, 30 2011 @ 09:05 PM
reply to post by AQuestion

It's not unusual human behavior for people to repeat what they have heard, read, seen regardless of the subject being based in fact or fallacy. Same goes for people who are so cock-sure of their own opinions they state them as fact.

There are people who claim to know "just what you're thinking" or "what you are about to say" in conversation. I've never seen one of them use these magical powers for the purchase of a Lottery Ticket with the winning numbers.

There are many flaws to peoples personalities. There are a lot of traits associated with mental illness whether or not the person is a patient.

No one is perfect.

Perhaps pointing out to an OP that they may be mistaking fact for opinion could help that person to realize an undesirable trait in themself as well as strengthen your side of a debate.

By the nature of some of the Forum topics on ATS you're going to read all sorts of supposition, anger, theory and non-facts being mis-represented. I think it goes hand-in-hand with fringe topics and the unknown.

One of the largest errors of the Internet, IMHO: Regardless of IQ most anyone can participate most anywhere.

posted on May, 30 2011 @ 09:12 PM
reply to post by LargeFries

Dear LargeFries,

I do understand why it happens. Here is what my deepest concern is, the coming backlash. There are laws against libel and slander and people are already getting sued for things they have said on the internet. At the G-8, right now they are discussing restricting the internet and they will because people refuse to show restraint. If the moderators do allow slander and libel then it puts the whole site at risk for publishing slander. It is unclear if the courts will treat it as slander or libel; but, it could treat it as libel as it is the written word. Saying as a fact that someone has committed a crime is not protected speech unless it is true.

new topics

top topics


log in