The Smearing Of Brett Kavanaugh Is Truly Evil

Hang around, grab you some popcorn, and watch the hearing tomorrow.

You will see for yourself why so many women never want to go through with reporting these kinds of he said/she said sexual assault incidents. And it doesn't matter if the assault happened an hour ago, or 26 years ago.

Because, prosecutors always put the women on trial, and paint them out to be liars, whores, and a weaker sex riddled with emotional problems. These tactics are actually taught and learned in Law Schools!

Tomorrow will just be more of that!
 
Poll: Support for Kavanaugh among GOP women drops 11 points

Support for Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation to the Supreme Court among Republican women has dropped 11 points since last week, following additional allegations of sexual misconduct against him, according to a new Morning Consult/Politico poll released Wednesday.

Just under half of GOP women polled, 49 percent, said Kavanaugh should be confirmed, compared with 60 percent the previous week.
https://thehill.com/homenews/news/408580-support-for-kavanaugh-among-gop-women-drops-18-points

:cof1:
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
Pascal argues that a rational person should live as though God exists and seek to believe in God. If God does not actually exist, such a person will have only a finite loss, whereas they stand to receive infinite gains and avoid infinite losses.
Click to expand...

Those things do not follow. If God does not actually exist, that doesn't mean a person will only have a finite loss if she lives as if God did exist. As long as we're imagining the existence of things capable of giving infinite loss, it's equally valid to imagine the existence of something that causes infinite loss if you believe in the existence of God. Similarly, even if God does exist, that doesn't mean a person will stand to receive infinite gains if she lives as if God exists. Again, as long as we're imagining the existence of things capable of giving infinite gains, it's equally valid to imagine the existence of a God who infinitely rewards those who act as if God doesn't exist, and infinite losses to those that act as if God does exist. Since there's no evidence whatsoever for the nature of God, even if one does exist, there's no basis for assuming paydays and punishments based on various actions with regard to such a God.
 
Oneuli said:
Yes. Article 2, section 2, subsection 2. That lays out the Senate's responsibility with regard to nominations.
Click to expand...

Can you now show what specifically you're referring to??

The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to Grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.
 
Oneuli said:
Those things do not follow. If God does not actually exist, that doesn't mean a person will only have a finite loss if she lives as if God did exist. As long as we're imagining the existence of things capable of giving infinite loss, it's equally valid to imagine the existence of something that causes infinite loss if you believe in the existence of God. Similarly, even if God does exist, that doesn't mean a person will stand to receive infinite gains if she lives as if God exists. Again, as long as we're imagining the existence of things capable of giving infinite gains, it's equally valid to imagine the existence of a God who infinitely rewards those who act as if God doesn't exist, and infinite losses to those that act as if God does exist. Since there's no evidence whatsoever for the nature of God, even if one does exist, there's no basis for assuming paydays and punishments based on various actions with regard to such a God.
Click to expand...

If I choose to believe in GOD and upon my death, I find I was wrong, then I've only wasted my time.

BUT

If you choose to not believe in GOD and upon your death, you find you were wrong, then you're wasted.

:dealwithit:
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
Can you now show what specifically you're referring to??
Click to expand...

Yes. "he shall... nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint.... Judges of the Supreme Court...."

That clearly lays out the responsibility the Founders envisioned for the Senate in the process.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
If I choose to believe in GOD and upon my death, I find I was wrong, then I've only wasted my time.
Click to expand...

There's no telling what you may have wasted, since you have no idea what the purpose of this existence was. Possibly the purpose was to achieve a certain level of enlightenment, entitling you to move on to a higher existence, and by choosing to believe in a fictional entity like God, you shut down your ability to gain that enlightenment, and thus squandered your only chance at a higher existence, dooming yourself to eradication.

If you choose to not believe in GOD and upon your death, you find you were wrong, then you're wasted.
Click to expand...

No. You're simply adopting the very narrow view that the only possibility of an afterlife is one where something corresponding to your own petty notion of "God" decides who is wasted and who isn't, and that He does so in accordance with His profoundly insecure need to be believed in without evidence. Why should anyone assume that's the way the universe works? Even if there is a God, isn't it equally valid to imagine a God who rewards rational skepticism rather than blind belief? Wouldn't such a being punish you for the sin of faith, while rewarding those who didn't fall into that mental error?
 
christiefan915 said:
If Ford herself didn't give a specific date for the party, how can anyone else know if they were or weren't there?
Click to expand...

They can state they were never at a party where such an event occurred. But you do see the massive hole in your argument? It is impossible to defend yourself completely if the accuser can't state such basic things as when it occurred and where it occurred. Ford may have had something happen to her and from the news today it was two OTHER men, which would explain the situation.
 
christiefan915 said:
Any evidence will be produced on Thursday. Love the way you guys say there's no evidence, without any knowledge of what Ford will talk about.
Click to expand...

Try reading moron. I stated 'at this time'. Also, if she can't provide the basics... then what 'evidence' is she going to present? The only thing she claims to be 'positive' about is that Kavanaugh was there and the guilty party.
 
Oneuli said:
There's no telling what you may have wasted, since you have no idea what the purpose of this existence was. Possibly the purpose was to achieve a certain level of enlightenment, entitling you to move on to a higher existence, and by choosing to believe in a fictional entity like God, you shut down your ability to gain that enlightenment, and thus squandered your only chance at a higher existence, dooming yourself to eradication.



No. You're simply adopting the very narrow view that the only possibility of an afterlife is one where something corresponding to your own petty notion of "God" decides who is wasted and who isn't, and that He does so in accordance with His profoundly insecure need to be believed in without evidence. Why should anyone assume that's the way the universe works? Even if there is a God, isn't it equally valid to imagine a God who rewards rational skepticism rather than blind belief? Wouldn't such a being punish you for the sin of faith, while rewarding those who didn't fall into that mental error?
Click to expand...

OHHHH, please explain how I have shut down my ability to gain that enlightenment??

As to your own last paragraph; since when does your opinion become the guiding light for everyone else?
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
OHHHH, please explain how I have shut down my ability to gain that enlightenment??
Click to expand...

To be clear, I'm not claiming you have. Like you and like everyone else, I have no idea what the ultimate purpose of life is -- whether there is any afterlife, whether there is any possibility of a divine enlightenment, etc. But, it shouldn't be hard to understand why embracing a fake answer could make it harder to find the real one. Think of it in other scientific terms -- like if you believe 100% in faith healing, you're not going to be the one who discovers penicillin, because while better people are spending their efforts pursuing promising medical paths, you'll be wasting yours on ineffectual superstitions. The God delusion could be similar. If it gives you a sense of self-satisfaction with a fictitious answer, it deprives you of much of the impetus for finding the real answer.

As to your own last paragraph; since when does your opinion become the guiding light for everyone else?
Click to expand...

Do you imagine I said it became that? If so, what led you to that weird conclusion? I'm not claiming I know the nature of God -- whether God punishes faith or skepticism, rewards believers or atheists. I'm not even claiming I know the existence of God. I'm just pointing out the glaring irrationality of Pascal's Wager, which relies on small-minded people to make a series of unfounded assumptions about what "bets" are possible and what outcomes could result from the bets.
 
Oneuli said:
To be clear, I'm not claiming you have. Like you and like everyone else, I have no idea what the ultimate purpose of life is -- whether there is any afterlife, whether there is any possibility of a divine enlightenment, etc. But, it shouldn't be hard to understand why embracing a fake answer could make it harder to find the real one. Think of it in other scientific terms -- like if you believe 100% in faith healing, you're not going to be the one who discovers penicillin, because while better people are spending their efforts pursuing promising medical paths, you'll be wasting yours on ineffectual superstitions. The God delusion could be similar. If it gives you a sense of self-satisfaction with a fictitious answer, it deprives you of much of the impetus for finding the real answer.



Do you imagine I said it became that? If so, what led you to that weird conclusion? I'm not claiming I know the nature of God -- whether God punishes faith or skepticism, rewards believers or atheists. I'm not even claiming I know the existence of God. I'm just pointing out the glaring irrationality of Pascal's Wager, which relies on small-minded people to make a series of unfounded assumptions about what "bets" are possible and what outcomes could result from the bets.
Click to expand...

You are the one who made the statement; therefore it's not my fault that you didn't clarify your position, from the get go.

The rest is your definition of what you want to believe or not, which has nothing to do with my beliefs.

What I find amusing, is the number of people who work towards denouncing what others believe; but I don't see any where near the number of those on the other side, trying to convince others to believe as they do.
 
Oneuli said:
No. You're simply adopting the very narrow view that the only possibility of an afterlife is one where something corresponding to your own petty notion of "God" decides who is wasted and who isn't, and that He does so in accordance with His profoundly insecure need to be believed in without evidence. Why should anyone assume that's the way the universe works? Even if there is a God, isn't it equally valid to imagine a God who rewards rational skepticism rather than blind belief? Wouldn't such a being punish you for the sin of faith, while rewarding those who didn't fall into that mental error?
Click to expand...

the fact you think that doesn't actually make you any less fucked.......
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top