Roy Moore accused of sexual contact with 14-year old

[Mountain Man]

To be fair, it read the same way to me - it can't be the 'lesser of two evils' if he's innocent. Creepy isn't evil.

And "creepy" is a largely meaningless term because of overuse. When most people say "creepy", they mean "unwanted attention". A guy hitting on a lady in a coffee shop might be described as "creepy" just because she wasn't into him even if he was otherwise a perfect gentleman.

[carpedm9587]

Since none of the solutions you offered work with any high degree of efficiency (BC IS readily available - free from any health department) you can only minimize the conflict, not eliminate it. A woman's 'right'* to choose abortion only comes into play once she is actually pregnant - which will happen inevitably to some as BC is far from 100% effective** - so at that point, you are no longer 'pro-life' in any meaningful sense if you believe the woman has the right to kill her child. Or vise versa - you can't win, it will come to a conflict.

The position is similar to the one I held when I was much younger - but less logically tenable. Congratulations - mine was pretty danged bad as it was based on Roe.

When I am faced with a moral conundrum - there is no viable choice. That is the situation. It is not of my making, so the best I can do is seek out the best solution I can seek out. My moral code requires me to minimize harm as best I can. The current path does not do that. An anti-abortion path has not been shown to do that, and is highly unlikely to ever happen again.

That leaves me with advocating for a work-together approach that looks for the right joint messaging, the right access to BC, the right legislation around support for pregnant women and adoption incentives. If we all, including our government, put as much energy into THAT messaging as is currently being put into the pro-life/pro-choice fight, I can only imagine what we would be able to do. Frankly, it has never been done - so we have little/no data about what COULD happen.

Do I think it is likely to happen? Not really. The two camps are simply too polarized and too dedicated to seeing the other side as "evil." But a man can always hope - and continue to advocate for it. Here and there - I get a convert. Who knows? Sometimes big things start very small.

Until then - it is the only viable, ethical, route open to me.

[carpedm9587]

Looks like some polling has Moore behind by 10 points or so.

I wonder if there's a "shame factor" here.... people who won't tell the polling people they're going to vote for Moore because there is so much effort to shame them out of it.

Quite possibly. I cannot imagine Alabama electing a Democrat. If they do - it will be an amazing thing indeed.

Fox has Jones up by 10, but Emerson has Moore up by nine - for the same time period. RCP has Moore up 2.2 in the aggregate (https://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...ones-6271.html) - so basically a toin coss.

Tomorrow will tell. I'm not exactly holding my breath. I expect Moore to win.

[Teallaura]

No - the legal language of "grossly negligent" and "extremely careless" are not the same. In fact, if Comey had originally put "grossly negligent" and the phrase was changed to "extremely careless" and Comey read it as the latter, the message to ME is that he realized "grossly negligent" did not apply and would essentially contradict his original point - that there was insufficient basis for bringing charges. Comey does not strike me as a sloppy man - or an unethical one. So, again, benefit of the doubt until I have cause to question this integrity. I do not have such cause.

To be fair, it also could have been done to prevent accidentally admitting that there was a statutory violation.

[Mountain Man]

Looks like some polling has Moore behind by 10 points or so.

And other polls show Moore ahead by a comfortable margin. I guess we'll find out tomorrow who is right.

[Cow Poke]

And other polls show Moore ahead by a comfortable margin. I guess we'll find out tomorrow who is right.

Yeah, we've kinda learned you can't trust polling so much anymore.

[Mountain Man]

For the record, I think she was guilty. I also don't see the point in this argument - she isn't in office and no one is pursuing prosecution.

She should be jail. That's the point.

[Cow Poke]

And "creepy" is a largely meaningless term because of overuse. When most people say "creepy", they mean "unwanted attention". A guy hitting on a lady in a coffee shop might be described as "creepy" just because she wasn't into him even if he was otherwise a perfect gentleman.

My wife uses a much more sophisticated and technical term about such men - she calls them "icky".

[carpedm9587]

Um, I agree with Carpe - he's strongly implying that there is a major problem with the case. The most likely problem would be evidence.

You are wise, grasshopper...

But Carpe is incorrect to make the assumption. Comey just appears to be weaseling here.

Well - maybe not THAT wise...

[Cow Poke]

Quite possibly. I cannot imagine Alabama electing a Democrat. If they do - it will be an amazing thing indeed.

Fox has Jones up by 10, but Emerson has Moore up by nine - for the same time period. RCP has Moore up 2.2 in the aggregate (https://www.realclearpolitics.com/ep...ones-6271.html) - so basically a toin coss.

Tomorrow will tell. I'm not exactly holding my breath. I expect Moore to win.

Yeah, I really don't have a dog in this fight. It will be interesting, though.

[Cow Poke]

You are wise, grasshopper...



Well - maybe not THAT wise...

Dontcha hate it when that happens?

[Teallaura]

You need a membership, but this article goes into it. https://www.jstor.org/stable/825950?...n_tab_contents

The bottom line is that the terms "grossly negligent" and "criminally negligent" are essentially synonymous. "Extremely careless" is not even a legal term, as far as I have been able to determine. Grossly negligent carries with it the concept that the actions were not only careless/negligent, but that there is reason to believe the person in question knew of the defficiency and ought to have taken steps to correct it to avoid a violation of statute.

That is the crux of the discussion here. Everything I have seen indicates that Clinton simply did not know enough about what email servers were, how they worked, how they were protected, to even be aware of the negligence. That was also apparently Comey's findings - because that is what he said in his statement.

Uh, you may want to rethink this argument - Clinton didn't need ANY of that knowledge to be guilty. All she needed was knowledge regarding the IT related policies.

You do NOT have to be a tech-geek to violate technical security policy and/or related statutes. That's the poorest possible defense.

You're right about GN and CN - but Zym's point is valid - what is the meaningful difference? If the substitution was made on grounds that it wasn't actually gross negligence, then there should be a meaningful difference but I don't see one beyond 'not a legal term' which isn't a real difference at all.

[Teallaura]

Lipscomb seems to be saying Christians shouldn't get involved in anything worldly or political. That is what I was commenting on. Yet Christians are supposed to be part of God's work in the world. Helping others, making changes for the better. Sometimes that requires voting someone who is not quite as evil in power and working from there.

Let's say you have the standard streetcar dilemma. You are in control of a runaway streetcar. You can do nothing, which will end up with the streetcar hitting a mother and her two kids, or you can switch tracks and run over a 10 year old boy. What do you do?

Re-write the conditions so it's possible to win.

The Captain Kirk Solution.

[carpedm9587]

Dontcha hate it when that happens?

Makes my bunions ache... :ouch:

There SHOULD be an :ouch: emoji...

[Teallaura]

I never claimed he was convicted of anything - I've consistently said its more about him being creepy.



We don't know what he "actually did" - we just know of some of the things he's done, and some other as yet unproven allegations.



It's an expression. It doesn't necessarily have to mean he is "evil".

*emphasis mine
Um, you do realize you just contradicted yourself, right?

Like I said - it's an expression.

No, but it does mean that it's perfectly fair for Jim to take your point AS STATED. He can't read your mind and you chose the expression. It reads like you are saying Moore is guilty.