Roy Moore accused of sexual contact with 14-year old

[Cow Poke]

Would they, CP?

Yes, Carp, this is a different time. Back then, a lot of the racism, shamefully, was in the church itself. There were even people defending racism based on the Bible.

There is no biblical justification for the vicious murder of persons in the name of Christ.

(interestingly enough, a lot of those thugs and murderers were your fellow liberals - Robert Byrd was one of the heroes)

[demi-conservative]

Yeah right, just like all of christendom loudly and publicly and universally condemned the torture, hanging, drowning and burning alive of witches.

Sounds more like execution according to law, so not murder. Whether justified or not, of course is another thing!

[shunyadragon]

Source: http://www.cnn.com/2017/11/15/politics/ivanka-trump-roy-moore/index.html

Washington (CNN)Ivanka Trump spoke out for the first time against embattled Alabama Senate Republican candidate Roy Moore, who has been accused of pursuing sexual relationships with teenagers when he was in his early thirties. Her father, President Donald Trump, meanwhile, has largely stayed mum on the issue.

"There's a special place in hell for people who prey on children," Trump told The Associated Press in an interview otherwise focused on tax reform published Wednesday.
"I've yet to see a valid explanation and I have no reason to doubt the victims' accounts," the first daughter and presidential adviser said.

© Copyright Original Source

[Teallaura]

Would they, CP? In the early/mid 20th century, when the KKK was at it's peak, and black men and women were being hanged and dragged and beaten to death, and crosses were burning on the front lawns, history does not record "all of Christendom loudly and publicly and universally condemning the actions." These were likewise thugs and bullies claiming the badge of a major religion, but people were afraid. The KKK had power. They were killing people. They were targeting people who spoke out against them. The further you went from the sphere of KKK influence, however, the louder the voices got, so there WERE some speaking out. There were MANY speaking out.'....

Carpe, you're wrong.

Lynching reached its zenith in the early 20's - it was exceptionally rare by the mid-century point. So too, were racial murders - the trend actually began anew with the rise of the Civil Rights Movement - probably closer to late 50's/early '60's. I honestly can't think of a major one earlier than mid 60's. That decline was started in large part by Billie Holliday - and the white audience she reached.

The KKK was already in decline - that was set off by what you deny happened - a very loud, large public outcry after the leader of the KKK was accused of rape - his victim having been white. It was largely done by the 60's - it had only a shadow of its greatest numbers. In the 1970's, Bill Baxley helped in large part to finish it off - by prosecuting. That was in Alabama, in case you were wondering.

Do you know where King suffered his one major defeat? Albany Georgia. It wasn't accomplished with fire hoses or cops - it was accomplished by just leaving the protesters alone. No fire hoses, no six o'clock report - no public attention and no progress.

The reason that's important is because Billie Holliday accomplished a heck of a lot with a song - but King accomplished far more with TV cameras. In both cases, they awakened outrage not in the black community but the white - both North and South.

Racial relations are a danged site more complex than most people want to believe. The Northern exodus in the 20's/30's did a lot more to segregate blacks than Jim Crow had - in the North, blacks were largely isolated from whites and it's at that time that so called 'ebonics' begin to develop - despite a lack of education, Southern blacks prior to that time spoke better English than many whites today (audio recordings of the periods are telling) - due to that isolation. Atrocities occurred throughout the country - not merely in the South - and whites turned blind eyes both to atrocities against blacks and even against whites.

Until TV shows up. It's really hard to turn a blind eye to what's staring at you in your own home.



As for CP's point, it's happened - more than once. My point? You made the mistake you're condemning.

[Mountain Man]

Source: http://www.cnn.com/2017/11/15/politics/ivanka-trump-roy-moore/index.html

Washington (CNN)Ivanka Trump spoke out for the first time against embattled Alabama Senate Republican candidate Roy Moore, who has been accused of pursuing sexual relationships with teenagers when he was in his early thirties. Her father, President Donald Trump, meanwhile, has largely stayed mum on the issue.

"There's a special place in hell for people who prey on children," Trump told The Associated Press in an interview otherwise focused on tax reform published Wednesday.
"I've yet to see a valid explanation and I have no reason to doubt the victims' accounts," the first daughter and presidential adviser said.

© Copyright Original Source

Ivanka Trump is an idiot. She also happens to be a raging liberal. I'm sure these two things are related.

[Teallaura]

Yeah right, just like all of christendom loudly and publicly and universally condemned the torture, hanging, drowning and burning alive of witches.

Um, actually, most of the acquittals and the calls for reform came from the church. All of the reform came from Christians.

[shunyadragon]

Ivanka Trump is an idiot. She also happens to be a raging liberal. I'm sure these two things are related.

Still trashing and denigrating everyone who disagrees with you.

[Cow Poke]

Testimony of eight women is evidence.

(The "eight", of course, is in dispute, there being more like "two", but let's leave that alone for now)

Me accusing you of having a fake beard is evidence.

Not credible evidence!

BINGO!!!! Good job, Jimmy. You get a gold star for the day!

See, the reason my "evidence" wouldn't be credible, Jimmy, is because all we would need to do is tug on Shuny's beard to prove it's not fake, and I'm wrong! (Assuming, of course, that that's a picture of Shuny and he really does have a real beard)

Now, supposedly there's a yearbook as "evidence". It would really help if that "evidence" were allowed to be "tugged on", so to speak.

But, keep your gold star, Jimmy, you earned it.

Shuny, is that a picture of you, and do you have a 'for really' beard?

[carpedm9587]

Carpe, you're wrong.

Lynching reached its zenith in the early 20's - it was exceptionally rare by the mid-century point. So too, were racial murders - the trend actually began anew with the rise of the Civil Rights Movement - probably closer to late 50's/early '60's. I honestly can't think of a major one earlier than mid 60's. That decline was started in large part by Billie Holliday - and the white audience she reached.

The KKK was already in decline - that was set off by what you deny happened - a very loud, large public outcry after the leader of the KKK was accused of rape - his victim having been white. It was largely done by the 60's - it had only a shadow of its greatest numbers. In the 1970's, Bill Baxley helped in large part to finish it off - by prosecuting. That was in Alabama, in case you were wondering.

Do you know where King suffered his one major defeat? Albany Georgia. It wasn't accomplished with fire hoses or cops - it was accomplished by just leaving the protesters alone. No fire hoses, no six o'clock report - no public attention and no progress.

The reason that's important is because Billie Holliday accomplished a heck of a lot with a song - but King accomplished far more with TV cameras. In both cases, they awakened outrage not in the black community but the white - both North and South.

Racial relations are a danged site more complex than most people want to believe. The Northern exodus in the 20's/30's did a lot more to segregate blacks than Jim Crow had - in the North, blacks were largely isolated from whites and it's at that time that so called 'ebonics' begin to develop - despite a lack of education, Southern blacks prior to that time spoke better English than many whites today (audio recordings of the periods are telling) - due to that isolation. Atrocities occurred throughout the country - not merely in the South - and whites turned blind eyes both to atrocities against blacks and even against whites.

Until TV shows up. It's really hard to turn a blind eye to what's staring at you in your own home.

As for CP's point, it's happened - more than once. My point? You made the mistake you're condemning.

OK - color me lost. You seem to say my dates are wrong, but then you give me those exact dates (20s, late 50s, 60s - and I said "early/mid 20th century"). So I'm not sure how the timeframe I provided is wrong.

I also have no clue what mistake I am making that you think I am condemning? I didn't say no one spoke up, I said that the speaking up took time, and tended to be stronger the further it was from the violence of the KKK. My studies indicate the clan peaked in the mid 20s at nearly 6 million members. This was the period when widespread Christian outrage was simply not the case. Yes - there were voices - and there was outrage. But CP's claim is simply not accurate - in that period. After the 1920s, the Klan losses a lot of power. It comes to the fore again during the civil rights era, but a shadow of its former self (fewer than 50,000 members). Still - the claim that there would be universal outrage is simply not true. Indeed, in the deep south, there was significant resistance to integration by both Christian and non-Christian whites.

I think my point stands, Teal - we have had bad from isolated segments of every religion that has ever existed (that I have studied), and the outrage often takes time to express itself. Islam is no different in that, except that right now Islamic extremist have access to a global travel system, and the megaphone and recruitment tool of the Internet. But to paint all of Islam with the same brush is simply unjust - as unjust as painting all of Christianity with the same brush because the KKK claimed Christian membership.

The KKK was no more Christian than ISIS or the Taliban is Islamic - in both cases, you have thugs flying the banner of a religion for their justification. Unfortunately, too many people are buying it, and giving them the exact credibility they seek - damaging an incredible population of good people in the process.

Now what exactly was the mistake I made that I was condemning? Were you under the impression I was saying "all Christians are bad because they didn't all stand up to decry the KKK?"

[Mountain Man]

Still trashing and denigrating everyone who disagrees with you.

And not just because they disagree with me.

[JimL]

(The "eight", of course, is in dispute, there being more like "two", but let's leave that alone for now)




See, the reason my "evidence" wouldn't be credible, Jimmy, is because all we would need to do is tug on Shuny's beard to prove it's not fake, and I'm wrong! (Assuming, of course, that that's a picture of Shuny and he really does have a real beard)

Now, supposedly there's a yearbook as "evidence". It would really help if that "evidence" were allowed to be "tugged on", so to speak.

But, keep your gold star, Jimmy, you earned it.

Shuny, is that a picture of you, and do you have a 'for really' beard?

I see the point still escapes you, eh CP?

[Cow Poke]

I see the point still escapes you, eh CP?

Feel free to enlighten me, Jimmy.

[Tassman]

Um, actually, most of the acquittals and the calls for reform came from the church. All of the reform came from Christians.

So it should, seeing as it was the church that started the process of torturing and burning witches. It's like giving the church credit for stopping the Inquisitions.

[Tassman]

So, Politco seems to think that, IF Moore wins, it might be the media who helped him over the finish line...



This same media is the one our local Tweb liberals worship and parrot.

No, it's the "same media" that attempts to present a credible assessment of Trump's compulsive lying and call out the hypocrisy of evangelical leaders standing behind a man credibly accused of sexually assaulting a minor. Without the media we'd have a dictatorship and moral reprobates getting away with sexual exploitation.

[Cow Poke]

No, it's the "same media" that attempts to present a credible assessment of Trump's compulsive lying and call out the hypocrisy of evangelical leaders standing behind a man credibly accused of sexually assaulting a minor.

You're becoming a parody of the alt-left, Tassy. Or, maybe their wanna-be spokesperson. Do you foam at the mouth when you repeatedly type these hate-filled tirades?