View Single Post
Old August 23rd, 2013 (6:28 PM). Edited August 23rd, 2013 by Paladin.
Paladin's Avatar
Paladin Paladin is offline
    Join Date: May 2013
    Posts: 294
    It seems I have to reiterate myself again in this same thread.

    "To further stress my standing, I do not, and wouldn't, assume honesty nor deceit with any such matter."

    "To make an assumption is to form a theory before you learn the facts. When you have a theory before the facts, you'll bend them to fit what you assumed.

    "In this particular case, I have damned neither the alleged victim, nor the accused. All I said was that basing a legal system on religious beliefs is hogwash. I personally do not believe that I have enough facts to judge intelligently."

    I have been saying the same thing this whole time. I do not trust nor disbelieve anybody.
    I have only said that assuming innocence or guilt doesn't matter, both are wretched mistakes on the part of the observer.

    My reasoning behind explaining the difference between Victim Blaming and caution was that;
    I still can't believe that people think that because some women lie about rape that every woman that says they were raped deserves extreme scrutiny and mistrust. Why are we putting pressure on the victims? Yes, some women say they were raped when they were not—so what? This is victim blaming at its finest.
    You seemed to have confused them.

    By the by, how does;
    "As terrible as it may well sound, emotions cannot play into this kind of situation, or at least not in a legal case."
    Read to you as me saying that I automatically distrust any one who says they were raped?

    Edit: Hum, Live, you don't mind us conversing general rape in this thread, do you? I didn't even think about it, but this thread is supposed to be for the Dubai case; and we seem to have drifted a bit. This line of discussion is still relevant, I hope?
    Reply With Quote