Wry Catcher
Diamond Member
- Banned
- #1
Is the 'Big Tent' shrinking?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Do you have evidence to support your "NO"?
How do you respond to this legislation:
Georgia State Lawmaker Seeks To Redefine Rape Victims As 'Accusers'
Link: Georgia State Lawmaker Seeks To Redefine Rape Victims As 'Accusers'
Do you have evidence to support your "NO"?
How do you respond to this legislation:
Georgia State Lawmaker Seeks To Redefine Rape Victims As 'Accusers'
Link: Georgia State Lawmaker Seeks To Redefine Rape Victims As 'Accusers'
And this is the motive behind the OP?
One can't be considered a victim unless and until it's been proven that a crime has been committed against them.
Prior to that proof they are an accuser. Is it really that hard to understand?
the right doesnt need voters they have cheating to win elections
Do you have evidence to support your "NO"?
How do you respond to this legislation:
Georgia State Lawmaker Seeks To Redefine Rape Victims As 'Accusers'
Link: Georgia State Lawmaker Seeks To Redefine Rape Victims As 'Accusers'
And this is the motive behind the OP?
One can't be considered a victim unless and until it's been proven that a crime has been committed against them.
Prior to that proof they are an accuser. Is it really that hard to understand?
I suppose the nuance of such legislation is difficult for some to understand. The question is why and why only for accusers of rape and not victims of armed robbery or burglary?
Do you have evidence to support your "NO"?
How do you respond to this legislation:
Georgia State Lawmaker Seeks To Redefine Rape Victims As 'Accusers'
Link: Georgia State Lawmaker Seeks To Redefine Rape Victims As 'Accusers'
And this is the motive behind the OP?
One can't be considered a victim unless and until it's been proven that a crime has been committed against them.
Prior to that proof they are an accuser. Is it really that hard to understand?
Do you have evidence to support your "NO"?
How do you respond to this legislation:
Georgia State Lawmaker Seeks To Redefine Rape Victims As 'Accusers'
Link: Georgia State Lawmaker Seeks To Redefine Rape Victims As 'Accusers'
And this is the motive behind the OP?
One can't be considered a victim unless and until it's been proven that a crime has been committed against them. Yes they can and are
Prior to that proof they are an accuser. Is it really that hard to understand?
In California they are like every other victim of a crime, they are a complaining witness.
A crime has occurred, the person is a victim of a crime. As to the person accused of that crime, they are an accuser until it is proved that they are the victim of the convicted.
And this is the motive behind the OP?
One can't be considered a victim unless and until it's been proven that a crime has been committed against them.
Prior to that proof they are an accuser. Is it really that hard to understand?
I suppose the nuance of such legislation is difficult for some to understand. The question is why and why only for accusers of rape and not victims of armed robbery or burglary?
Ask the Duke Lacrosse team.
Members of liberoidal identity groups are all victims until proven otherwise...Which almost never happens.Do you have evidence to support your "NO"?
How do you respond to this legislation:
Georgia State Lawmaker Seeks To Redefine Rape Victims As 'Accusers'
Link: Georgia State Lawmaker Seeks To Redefine Rape Victims As 'Accusers'
And this is the motive behind the OP?
One can't be considered a victim unless and until it's been proven that a crime has been committed against them.
Prior to that proof they are an accuser. Is it really that hard to understand?
Its right on point.
why else would a party chase every voting block away with insane rethoric?
They dont need voters to win
And this is the motive behind the OP?
One can't be considered a victim unless and until it's been proven that a crime has been committed against them.
Prior to that proof they are an accuser. Is it really that hard to understand?
I suppose the nuance of such legislation is difficult for some to understand. The question is why and why only for accusers of rape and not victims of armed robbery or burglary?
Ask the Duke Lacrosse team.