The parts of the Bible people like to point to as misogynist, anti-gay, pro-slavery. etc. are pretty specific to the cultures it came from. If one takes the verse I posted seriously -- that the law of laws is to treat others as we want to be treated -- then equality is the natural result.
Or a sociopath who thinks everybody treats everyone the same way as you do? You know, because they lack empathy.
Then you should probably consider what you would want if you were the other person, not what the other person would want if they were you.
Exactly. All the laws in the world don't matter if you don't care how you treat people. And merely following laws while secretly hating people does you no good either.
http://nypost.com/2015/05/22/tea-party-operative-busted-for-child-porn/ Hey, look. Yet another right wing loony arrested on child porn charges. It seems to be their second most popular past time after shitting on the poor.
HEY NOW, I've been to some NASTY truckstops, but never seen any gay Republicans having sex, that was at Denny's
Back in the 90's my best friend had a Juno account. I still have a Hotmail account which I got in the year 2000 but I only check it a few times per year and mostly just use it for spam.
never seen any gay Republicans having sex, that was at Denny's so Denny's has a dinner theater thing going featuring live sex shows? I never gathered that from their advertising.
That was normal marriage in those days. With the Duggars, it is problematic. Remember when we were discussing people who said they admitted they had the tendency but never acted upon it and I said you can not arrest someone before the fact? Well Duggar confessed and even though the statute of limitations have run out, he can be baker acted and forced into the sex offender registry. He doesn't merely have the tendency, he confessed to the crime. That is what I found so fucking appalling with all his supporters. " Can't you forgive?" " They're a human family". " Have you never made a mistake?" It's not about forgiveness. It's not about punishment. It's about separating someone with dangerous tendencies from humanity. And no one gives a shit about that. This all becomes significant, because Michelle Duggar went on a rampage and nearly cackled herself into a coma, when she claimed to have singled handedly gotten gay friendly legislation over turned. This isn't about forgiveness and throwing stones. This is about obscenity statutes and birth control. Honey Boo Boo was a joke, but when Mama BooBoo took up with a child molester, they were out. i don't think the Duggars derserve treatment any better than that.
I've lived in Idaho for over a year now and Larry Craig is pretty much a non-person. Definitely the black sheep of a state Republican party that doesn't embarrass easily.
Why do we even have a Statute of Limitations? I've never understood the concept. Perhaps our resident lawyers can explain it. I mean come on we aren't talking about Inspector Javert chasing some poor guy over a loaf of bread for years.
Degradation of evidence. If I accuse you of raping me on June 3, 1984, what's your alibi? Good luck finding witnesses. Hope they are still alive. Things like that. It's an issue of fairness and due process.
But that argument makes no sense. Degradation of evidence would work in the favor of a possible accused. Not the prosecution.
Yes, but you can see situations where new evidence might become available. Such as discovery of a murder weapon that directly ties a person of interest (hate that term but can't think of something better) to a past homicide. That said, maybe El Chup can answer this: Didn't the United Kingdom change their laws to allow double jeopardy in some cases when new evidence not available at an original trial becomes available? Or was that just a proposal? Ah, I see. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal_Justice_Act_2003
