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.


Democrats now contend 'drunken mistake' is a criminal offense

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Oct, 4 2018 @ 04:13 PM

originally posted by: fredrodgers1960
I have two words for ya.

Ted Kennedy.


that's 3 words..

posted on Oct, 4 2018 @ 04:22 PM

originally posted by: JBurns
According to democrat commentators on a popular news outlet, even a drunken mistake between two otherwise consenting adults should constitute a sex crime for the male participant only. Ridiculous assertion - either both parties are equally guilty (which is unreasonable) or no person is guilty, and it is a mistake not a criminal act

I am curious how others here differentiate stupid mistake vs. sexual assault vs. rape. Please think about this question for a minute before moving on to the next.

Now let me ask, does your opinion/standard also apply to the inevitable lonely middle aged female at the bar who had a few too many to drink and is making close-but-not-necessarily-invited physical contact with other individuals?

Does it apply to the nervous 14 year young man that goes for his first kiss, but is rejected?

Leftists should carefully consider their attempts to define criminal acts by the way it makes someone feel (yes, they actually believe that) vs. an objective standard of criminal conduct

Yes. We must protect the women. Unless they want to be treated equal.

edit on 4-10-2018 by highvein because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 4 2018 @ 04:28 PM

Thanks Dems!

edit on 4-10-2018 by chiefsmom because: spelling

posted on Oct, 4 2018 @ 06:28 PM
link yale dailynews blog from 2011

Sexual regret does not equal rape. We should not use its existence to defend the term “rape culture,” which is alienating, inaccurate and ultimately prevents us from creating a more positive sexual atmosphere. We should prevent behavior that prevents people from giving consent, such as alcohol abuse, unfair hook-up expectations, and mutual disregard. We should recognize that there are sexual problems on campus that have nothing to do with consent. The boyfriend who bullies his girlfriend into saying yes to sex seems more of a perpetrator than the intoxicated party boy. We should prevent the word “rape” from becoming meaningless rhetoric by adding other, more accurate and less offensive words to the table. Words like “sexual regret,” “high-risk sexual behavior,” and “sexual bullying.” If we don’t clarify our terms, we’ll end up in a state of perpetual fear. If we don’t know which real, specific situations cause the problem, we’ll have no way of fighting them. Antonia Czinger is a junior in Timothy Dwight College.
seems some what prophetic now...... then there is this which has pretty much been turned into a meme now and it goes directly to the ops topic much more hostile article

There is something to be learned from the story of "Grace," the anonymous woman who claims that she was assaulted by Aziz Ansari. She was not assaulted, as I've already argued. She willingly came back to his apartment on a first date, willingly took her clothes off, willingly performed sex acts on him, and did not attempt to leave until she’d spent many minutes making out with him, naked, in his kitchen and his living room. No rape occurred. What did occur was a cheap, awkward, degrading sexual encounter. A year ago, a story like this would not have been news. It probably would not have been published at all. But the atmosphere today allows for a man’s career and life to be destroyed so long as any woman steps forward to accuse him of any sexual wrongdoing, real or imagined or embellished. The truth does not matter, nor do the individual details of each case. There is one pre-ordained narrative — "men are awful, predatory pigs" — and any accused man is pushed into that pit, where actual sex predators reside alongside men whose only crime was a lack of chivalry. It’s a dangerous situation, and we have yet to see the worst of it. That said, the #MeToo crusaders do seem to have picked up on one important truth. They have gone in entirely the wrong direction with it, and learned all the wrong lessons from it, but they are right, at least, about this: there is something wrong with the way we approach sex in modern society, and it’s leaving a lot of people feeling hurt and abused. But, beholden always to their narrative, they read a story like Grace’s and automatically interpret it as a struggle between an innocent woman and a depraved rapist of a man. When they hear that Grace felt violated after the fact, they declare that it must have been her “consent” that was violated. After all, the only thing either participant is required to respect is consent. It’s the only rule. The One Commandment. The only thing that can be violated. There are, in the modern mind, only two types of sex: consensual and rape. Whatever falls under the first umbrella must be good. So if a woman feels not-good the next morning, it must have been the not-good type, which means it must have been rape. But the effort to fit begrudging yet consensual sex into the rape category requires the formation of a bunch of new and confusing and constantly changing rules. The overly simplified "good or rape" formula suddenly turns into an overly complicated calculus, and the only way for a man to really know whether he has committed rape or not is to ask his partner the next day. And even then, she may not make the determination until the following week, or next month after she sees you on TV winning a Golden Globe. And suddenly we have fixed the problem of sex in modern society by turning it into a criminal act. Ironically, conservatives are always accused of wanting to criminalize promiscuity but liberals have actually done it.

But our front-page story Sunday — on legal challenges by students punished for campus sexual assaults — raises such provocative questions, I just couldn't help myself. University officials around the country are ratcheting up efforts to protect female students by reining in sexual misconduct. But as Times reporter Teresa Watanabe explained, that campaign is raising concern about the rights of the accused. Young women have long complained that their reports of sexual violations weren't taken seriously enough, that campus investigations were half-hearted and discipline was lax. Now men are claiming that the adjudication process doesn't give them a fair shot; what they contend are consensual sex acts their universities consider assaults. Our story — with details from cases at Vassar, Duke, the University of Michigan and Occidental College — highlights the combustible mix of sex and alcohol, and illustrates colleges' clumsy efforts to regulate the messy tangle of student sexual encounters. What do you do when two young people — both drunk and amorous — have sex that neither completely remembers, both belatedly regret and each sees through a different lens the morning after? In my day, we called that a lesson; you might cry privately, commiserate with friends, and then life goes on. Today, we call that a crime; lives unravel, lawyers intervene and years of therapy ensue.
from 2014 but people have been talking about the regret=removing consent aspect for a while

posted on Oct, 4 2018 @ 06:31 PM

originally posted by: Parishna

originally posted by: Fallingdown
If drunken mistakes were criminalized. I would be doing life .

But as of now I was only sentenced to two ex-wives .

Yeah but a drunk mans actions are a sober mans thoughts.

When it comes to ex wives.

A sober man’s fantasies are drunk man’s tragedies .

posted on Oct, 4 2018 @ 06:42 PM
a reply to: JBurns

I question whether we should have a Supreme Court Justice who clearly has a drinking problem. Abusing alcohol can be just as bad as abusing drugs. I just think all Supreme Court Justices and Judges in general shouldn't have anything questionable in their pasts, nor should they have a negative perspective on either political party or align themselves with a political ideology. His abuse of alcohol and his defensive demeanor against Democrats can easily sway his decisions when Judges are supposed to be impartial.

Than again, how can anyone be impartial when the American people have to affiliate themselves with a political party instead of electing government representatives without political labels?

posted on Oct, 4 2018 @ 07:23 PM
How should a person act when being accused of something like this?
Anyone accused of this will of course be defensive ANYONE.
The ones you should be worried about are the ones who don't get defensive.
Hell even bill sounded pretty defensive when he said I DID NOT HAVE SEXUAL RELATIONS WITH THAT WOMAN.

posted on Oct, 4 2018 @ 07:24 PM

originally posted by: SKEPTEK
Until the Democrats clean their own house up, they have no information I wish to hear from them.

posted on Oct, 4 2018 @ 07:35 PM
See and I have people at work question my "no drinking around co-workers at social functions policy", not that I'm going to get so wasted that something like this happens, but that I don't want there to even be a question. I've been told by partners and directors that it looks bad to be at a Christmas party without a drink in hand, I don't really care, not leaving myself open for any of that.

Same with an Uber ride to the airport with co-workers, there needs to be myself and at least two others aside from the driver, otherwise I take my own Uber.

The only woman I spend time alone with is my wife, I follow the Mike Pence philosophy of that. Why even leave yourself open to a hint of an allegation against you because you ticked someone off.

posted on Oct, 4 2018 @ 08:06 PM
The mistake most of you are making is you seem to believe logic has something to do with this.

top topics

<< 1   >>

log in