case for roy moore

Not the same, Franken's issues occurred prior to taking office. Moore and Conyer occurred while in office. Originally Posted by pyramider

Moore has not even been elected to the senate yet, let alone been sworn in. He is accused of misconduct that allegedly happened forty years ago. Again how can the senate legally throw him out based on accusations from forty years ago with no due process.

I don't recall them throwing New Jersey's Democratic U.S. Senator Bob Menendez out of the senate. And he was formally charged and went to trial. How can they throw Moore out based on only accusations?

Not the same, Franken's issues occurred prior to taking office. Moore and Conyer occurred while in office. Originally Posted by pyramider

Moore is still not in office as he has not even been elected yet. Again, how can the senate legally expel him from the senate based only on forty year old accusations with no due process or investigation of any kind?

I don't recall them removing New Jersey's Democratic U.S. Senator Bob Menendez from the senate, and he was formally charged and had to stand trial.

Conyers has been in office fifty years, used taxpayer money to pay off the women and the accusations are from his time while serving in office.

Moore is still not in office as he has not even been elected yet. Again, how can the senate legally expel him from the senate based only on forty year old accusations with no due process or investigation of any kind?

I don't recall them removing New Jersey's Democratic U.S. Senator Bob Menendez from the senate, and he was formally charged and had to stand trial.

Conyers has been in office fifty years, used taxpayer money to pay off the women and the accusations are from his time while serving in office. Originally Posted by goodolboy

Didn't you mention due process? Or is that only for select people?

Didn't you mention due process? Or is that only for select people? Originally Posted by bamscram

Do you not see the words?? Would you consider being charged and having a trial "due process"?

("Originally Posted by goodolboy Moore is still not in office as he has not even been elected yet. Again, how can the senate legally expel him from the senate based only on forty year old accusations with no due process or investigation of any kind?

I don't recall them removing New Jersey's Democratic U.S. Senator Bob Menendez from the senate, and he was formally charged and had to stand trial.

Conyers has been in office fifty years, used taxpayer money to pay off the women and the accusations are from his time while serving in office.")

Didn't you mention due process? Or is that only for select people? Originally Posted by bamscram

Due procees should be afforded to ALL, but with Conyers and Frankin BOTH paid out to their victims SHOWING guilt. Moore, has not done that OR apologized for it.

Due procees should be afforded to ALL, but with Conyers and Frankin BOTH paid out to their victims SHOWING guilt. Moore, has not done that OR apologized for it. Originally Posted by garhkal

True, however Al hasn't paid anyone to date. He has apologized is the only diff. His main complaint was prior to being elected.
The rest said he touched their butt during a photo op.

True, however Al hasn't paid anyone to date. He has apologized is the only diff. His main complaint was prior to being elected.
The rest said he touched their butt during a photo op. Originally Posted by bamscram

there was another one more recent during his tenure... I think 5 years ago.

there was another one more recent during his tenure... I think 5 years ago. Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

Wait! They can run Moore off for shit that allegedly happened 40 years ago, but give Al a pass on shit that happened 10-20 years ago ... with a friggin' PHOTO?

And all they have on Moore is a forged Yearbook and no witnesses from a mall trespassing notice claim!

Oh, yea, he is alleged to have dated you women who were of legal age to fuck and suck in Alabama, because he was "too old" to be dating them?

[QUOTE=garhkal;1060234375]


THERE are a laundry list of over a HUNDRED+ different medical (and mental) issues that disqualify someone from serving, from flat feet, to color blindness etc..
SO WHY SHOULDN'T the mental issue of Gender dysphoria, be counted?? is it cause the LGBTQ wish to redefine it from being a mental disorder??

You REALLY need to educate yourself on mental disorders. The ignorance you are showing is beyond belief. Maybe you should move into the 21st century.

I thought i DID answer it.. YES I DO FEEL that Muslims should not be allowed to serve whether in the Military OR IN US Government offices..

And there we have it folks. A 100% bonafide BIGOT.

[QUOTE=SpeedRacerXXX;1060237138]

THERE are a laundry list of over a HUNDRED+ different medical (and mental) issues that disqualify someone from serving, from flat feet, to color blindness etc..
SO WHY SHOULDN'T the mental issue of Gender dysphoria, be counted?? is it cause the LGBTQ wish to redefine it from being a mental disorder??

You REALLY need to educate yourself on mental disorders. The ignorance you are showing is beyond belief. Maybe you should move into the 21st century.

I thought i DID answer it.. YES I DO FEEL that Muslims should not be allowed to serve whether in the Military OR IN US Government offices..

And there we have it folks. A 100% bonafide BIGOT.
Originally Posted by garhkal

Are you suggesting that a man wanting to cut off his penis and grow boobs is perfectly normal? According to the World Health Organization, being transgender is a mental illness.

[QUOTE=goodolboy;1060238561]

Are you suggesting that a man wanting to cut off his penis and grow boobs is perfectly normal? According to the World Health Organization, being transgender is a mental illness. Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

Transgender is a term used to define people ranging from simply transvestite to people like Bruce Jenner to transsexuals.

“Transgender is an umbrella term for people whose gender identity is different from the sex they were assigned at birth,” says Annette Verster, a technical officer in the HIV Department at the World Health Organization (WHO) in Geneva.

The times they are a changing. There has been next to no focus on transgender individuals to date. You are right that the WHO considered such individuals under the category of "mental and behavioural disorders" but that will change in 2018.

"In the original version of the current edition, ICD-10, “gender identity disorders” were classified under “mental and behavioural disorders”. But in the next edition, ICD–11, which was released for Member State comments last month and is due to be published in 2018, transgender health issues appear in a new category of “gender incongruence”."

Source: http://www.who.int/bulletin/volumes/94/11/16-021116/en/

I don't know what "normal" is when it comes to people. Individuals on this board seek out hookers for sex. Is that "normal"? Some people are into BDSM. Is that "normal"? Whether transgender people are considered "normal" or not by anyone's definition, the point I return to is if they can do the job to which they are assigned as well as you or I, then I have no problem with their sexual identification as someone to work with.

Yes, the times have been changing, and have changed a LOT over the 8 years of the Obama administration. I read a story a about a older man who now "self identifies" as a 5 year old little girl. There are many other examples of people now self identifying as a different sex and race.

It appears that things being rooted in reality are less important these days and many demand that you join in and accept their delusions as reality, regardless of how bizarre their delusion may be. But as of today, yes WHO still does in fact list being "transgender" as a mental disorder.

https://youtu.be/3CYC1L1ckt0

Yes, the times have been changing, and have changed a LOT over the 8 years of the Obama administration. I read a story a about a older man who now "self identifies" as a 5 year old little girl. There are many other examples of people now self identifying as a different sex and race.

It appears that things being rooted in reality are less important these days and many demand that you join in and accept their delusions as reality, regardless of how bizarre their delusion may be. But as of today, yes WHO still does in fact list being "transgender" as a mental disorder.

https://youtu.be/3CYC1L1ckt0 Originally Posted by goodolboy

And in a very short time, what you say about the WHO will change.

I really don't care about one's sexual identity. Lesbian, gay, bi, transgender . . . or straight. Their lifestyles are their own business and whether you or I agree or disagree with their choices is irrelevant. We can argue ad infinitum as to why people are the way they are and again, to me, the argument is irrelevant. What IS important to me is that ALL people should have equal rights under the law no matter their race, religion, sex, or sexual orientation.

....Conyers and Frankin BOTH paid out to their victims SHOWING guilt. Originally Posted by garhkal

You and I disagree "on the law" again!

Settlement agreements are "evidence" of nothing, but the terms and conditions of the "settlement agreements"! And probably 99% of them, unless written on a cocktail napkin, provide in them SPECIFICALLY that the parties do not acknowledge ANY WRONG DOING!

Most also provide they can only be used to enforce the contract.

People settle for a lot of reasons: Particularly sex cases.

I would suggest to you that many, if not most or all of these victims who settled, do NOT WANT THE SORDID DETAILS OF THEIR EXPERIENCES TO BE SPREAD ALL OVER TV AND THE INTERNET .... most, if not all, have "moved on" with their lives and have a relationship or seeking one. All this clamor for RELEASING their private information is just another "rape" for them.

So both ways: The settlement PROVES NOTHING AGAINST THOSE TWO, except they "settled" and perhaps illegally paid out of fund that were not for that purpose.

There are many other examples of people now self identifying as a different sex and race. Originally Posted by goodolboy

That doesn't mean it grew out of the past 8 years under Obaminable. All that means is people can disclose it now with less fear of reprisals and some "acceptance" among certain elements of our society ... thanks to the media who caters to it, if not thrives on it.

It's the Dr. Spock - "Feel Good" philosophy gone mad! IMO.