The Forum > General Discussion > Rolf Harris
Rolf Harris
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- 3
- ...
- 24
- 25
- 26
- Page 27
- 28
- 29
- 30
- ...
- 121
- 122
- 123
-
- All
Posted by R0bert, Thursday, 10 July 2014 5:28:18 AM
| |
RisR To say <<Just about every star in the history of entertainment has groped hundreds of girls ... are we to put them all in jail?>>
Like Indi's claim that all his mates are "doing it" down at his local or some such place, is simply denying the reality of the situation. You play down the seriousness with which the community, and consequently the courts, views Harris's actions. You, like Indi seem to choose to ignore, or failed to read, what the judge had to say about what Harris actually done. No wonder so many victims wont come forward when so many in our community hold the views that you and others do. Not only do victims have to live with the personal torment as to what happened to them when they were children, but then have to be subjected to another form of abuse when seeking justice as adults! Your attitude to sex abuse victims is not uncommon, its not uncommon for the victim to be blamed for what happened by family members, by the police, and by many in community in general. Talk about making a tough situation, tougher, you people take the cake! Posted by Paul1405, Thursday, 10 July 2014 5:58:47 AM
| |
right is wrong
but i see where he is comming from lest/we forget getting a rock band/is a good way to get layed where right became wrong/was boringly/wrong is/labling all 8 year olds as gold =diggers-and horn-bags then implYING there making it up/when we know what comes off on tour stays in the tour rEcords. thing is if loving 8 is wrong/then mr right/needs see he is wrong sure in the ideal world/its possible to say to the\super/ego's..[stars] i love ya music but not ya dong a nong. there lies the crux of the issue/we guys say she is a nice sort go up to the super starle/hoping she is a harlot/but with these stars/front is all they got/the parts they play/get confused if someone comes up gushing saying they will do anything well mr right/taking advantage of such adulation is wrong if their under age/even if one did COME UP TO Mr RIGHT CRYING DO ME RIGHT OH RITE ROTE ONE...ignore the age limitation/you go to jail..[regardless is right feels right or wrong.] we all know the rules are there to protect the weakest so mr right/simply admit it was put out there wrong. right is often a matter/of meeting need within the law/ even if the law seems wrong/change it dont ignore it/ look the kiddy sex topic/must end. if adult woman hate you realize\your chasing the wrong sex. Posted by one under god, Thursday, 10 July 2014 8:36:22 AM
| |
RObert and Paul,
I think we can dismiss Right is Right's boneheaded comments with the contempt they deserve. No better way than to reprise Pericles' comment to individual and apply it to those of Right is Right... "This is fascinating. A classic example of trolling. After all, no-one in real life could actually hold the views espoused by individual, could they? Outside a fully-operational paedophile ring, that is." Posted by Poirot, Thursday, 10 July 2014 8:43:19 AM
| |
the courts have now ruled*
christian kiddy camps must admiot homo.s it shares a bit of a moral/guidence http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=16482&page=0 <<>.Instead of allowing greater freedom to express religious belief in the public sphere, the impact of a tyranny of tolerance religion is to confine religion to the private, subjective realm of the mind. But belief and practice are inseparable. Freedom to believe must surely be accompanied by the freedom to speak so long as no threat is posed to social cohesion and the well-being of others. However, it may often be the case that those whose ways of life are guided by the search for meaning and solemn obligation to live dutifully may clash with the values of the secular state. For example, if the search for ultimate truth leads to an individual believing that same sex marriage is wrong, she or he may face accusations of hate speech and homophobia. Yet it is in just such circumstances that the religious believer may demand the freedom to express in public his or her religiously inspired views about human sexuality. It is not hard to see that if those actions are met with the coercive force of the state, broader rights of freedom of association and freedom of expression are bound to be put at risk.>> so now we know/the difference between whats right and whats wrong till next time the pedophiles[meaning siply child-lover.]..move on/but i find these kiddy fiddlers are all deficient;..in something that feels much like empathy or c0mpassion misguided missdirected. Posted by one under god, Thursday, 10 July 2014 8:54:41 AM
| |
I said in my opening post:
>> Sorry but this doesn’t add up << Well, having studied the judge’s sentencing remarks, I’ve got to say that there are definitely things that don’t seem to add up. I struggle with this issue. I find myself vacillating somewhat as to the extent of accepting Harris as a pedophile, or a bit of a grub, or just a pretty normal human being. I am inclined to see him as a flawed human being in much the same way as has been evident amongst many others throughout the eons…. and indeed in a manner in which literally millions of men behave and get away with without ever being brought to task. In short, I often feel as though the sort of things he did are just par for the course. Many young women, in many cultures around the world including ours, must have similar and much worse experiences. Indeed we all have seminal moments where people wrong-do us in a manner that changes us and relieves us very suddenly of some of our naivety. In that regard, we shouldn’t be pulling out sexual activity as being significantly different or worse than all manner of other stuff that affects us. It is very hard to come to terms with. But ultimately I find myself strongly disagreeing with Paul1405, Pericles and others who have condemned Harris. Posted by Ludwig, Thursday, 10 July 2014 9:43:44 AM
|
For others who may not have followed the detail, there were a number of victims who as far as we know did not know each other making similar allegations regarding Harris's abuse of them. Very similar patterns of behaviour on Harris part.
The onus at this point is for those who claim its a setup to provide some evidence to back those claims. Evidence that the women had colluded before going to the police or some other credible cause to question the evidence. At this point there is no sign of credible evidence that Harris has been unfairly convicted, just an apparent desire from some that victims of abuse not be believed.
R0bert