TechnicalBarbarity
Poser Disposer
... implying that people who wouldn't vote for a rapist because of morals being irrational is ridiculous. Its perfectly rational to not vote for someone who is a criminal.
... implying that people who wouldn't vote for a rapist because of morals being irrational is ridiculous. Its perfectly rational to not vote for someone who is a criminal.
ahh, got it. Just making sure you didnt mean that not voting for someone who is a rapist or a murder or whatever is irrational.I'm separating belief and knowledge here.
Tech on the left, me on the right
No that would be #ListenToWomen or something. How the fuck does the hashtag mean that? lmao.
I'm separating belief and knowledge of a fact here.
Pretty sure that's actually you and TB.
I'd encourage you to actually read more about what's behind it. You probably won't change your mind, but it's more complicated than you're making it out to be.
But as you already said, there are more facts at play than whether someone has possibly committed sexual assault. In your own words, even were two candidates both rapists, that doesn't make them equal. So rationality goes beyond this possibility.
Whatever you need for the wankbank I suppose.
Because before the hashtag accusations made by women were never investigated? It's a stupid hashtag.
Not really sure what your point is anymore in relation to what I've been talking about, which is belief. Anyway the original point I made was that I wouldn't vote for anybody I believed to be a rapist and I still stand by that.
If you bothered to read about it, you'd discover that no--many of them weren't.
I wouldn't rest so easy on my beliefs or suspicions--but I also wouldn't vote for someone convicted of rape, or proven beyond a reasonable doubt of having committed it.
I agree you're a softcock.
The majority?
Neither would I, but I'm not part of a movement based around belief.
So if 51% of cases were investigated, you'd be satisfied?