Hello again!

While no one on earth with a rationality would defend any sort of person who would behave this way (political affiliation or not), I am just wondering if you could possibly share the same thread you created that discusses Bill Clinton's ties to Jeffrey Epstein (since his wife is planning to try and run again in 2024)?

I feel from a debate (and simply human) perspective, we should condemn all that behave this way, not just those with a certain political affiliation.

This post was edited by CyrusTheGreat on Jan 28 2022 06:56pm

It gets into the unwritten rules and fine distinctions of what's expected in relationships, what pushes the boundaries. Every time a guy takes a girl on a date 'to the mall' and he's expected to buy her something, its getting iffy. These sugar daddy sites have exploited that grey area by avoiding direct exchanges of cash for sex and instead hook up wealthy men who have an expectation of sex with young girls who have an expectation of expensive gifts. And afaik, the legal system has just shied away from trying to resolve those thorny issues until now.

What thread are you talking about?

Oh, I totally agree that these issues can get thorny. I just don't think there's any ambiguity in a case like this one where they hooked up on an explicit escort/sugar daddy site.

The one I would have assumed you created? If it doesn't exist and you only consider people who take advantage of children evil if they are conservative, please let me know because that will help this all make sense.

If we are being fair here, wouldn't you have created a similar thread from the other perspective discussing what I mentioned if the above was not your stance?

Why would I create a thread about anything? I'm merely responding to a thread created by someone else.

This post was edited by Handcuffs on Jan 28 2022 05:48pm

Well, I'd have to push back on that from a debate perspective.

I do see a lot of vocality against those of a conservative nature, but, I don't see much against those on the other side who do the same things.

Wouldn't one engaging in such a sensitive topic want to draw attention to anyone behaving this way and not just those of a selective political party? That's really my question here.

I only see condemnation of one person from one political party indeed, but, the credible allegations that go so far as to suggest a former POTUS was involved in the same behavior remain unmentioned.

This isn't a left or right thing in my opinion -- as a father of children myself, I simply want to know why we are being selective here, which seems very common.

This post was edited by CyrusTheGreat on Jan 28 2022 05:54pm

The thread is about Person A. I am responding to information about Person A. Seems pretty straight forward to me.

A debate (especially of this nature) is always open to other questions of credible allegations (which were not asked and I personally believe that was intentional). It's the core spirit of debate - the sharing of ideas and keeping the playing field even. Also, when the person in question's wife has publicly stated (even in light of these allegations) that she is trying to get back into the White House, it becomes that much more relevant-a-topic to introduce.

if one is ready to negate one political party in a public debate forum, they should prepare themselves to handle the questions from someone else regarding the behaviors of the members of the opposite party they align with that are equally as deplorable.

I will restate because it can't be restated enough. This isn't a left or right thing in my opinion -- I simply want to know why we are being selective here, which seems very common.

Have a nice weekend

This post was edited by CyrusTheGreat on Jan 28 2022 06:02pm

I think central to the case is any crossing of state lines. You can't have a minor cross state lines to take advantage of a lower age of consent without invoking federal law and a subsequent age of consent of 18.