Total topics: 8
I just find the whole idea inhumane, not only the homeless but especially so.
I am absolutely as a cop I'd feel sick inside to have to arrest a desperate person who pissed onto a bush or whatever.
I am not discussing exposing one's genitals in a very public manner, I am discussing specifically the crime of pissing in public, urination in and of itself.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
I just found this debate site and like it so far, but I am curious as to why there is no law enforcement or legal/law section for debates?
Seeing as there is a big push on the left to argue cops are bad and the law is racist, it would be a great section to debate under.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
- Why was someone who blatantly is affiliated with white supremacists (ones whom paid instantly to get him bail and have been socialising with him frequently before and after he was inititally arrested) at a BLM protest? If he was there to 'defend' then who was it who requested a 17-year-old to carry an AR-15 across state lines in order to 'defend' something? Isn't requesting that illegal?
- Why did he murder Rosenbaum? I am aware of the things Rosenbaum has been found guilty of and that he was very high asking to be shot but nobody in their right mind would presume that the right action would be to literally kill him just because he's asking to be shot.
- Do you agree that if (and it is the case that) the 'mob' only set on Rittenhouse after the Rosenbaum murder on an unarmed man, then it suddenly becomes much clearer who was the fundamental attacker vs defender in the aggression that ensued. Huber was proactively trying to get Rittenhouse to disarm and not escape so thata) he can't go on to murder any othersb) cops could arrive before he's gotten away, to arrest him for the Rosenbaum murder
- After he'd also murdered Huber instead of surrendering, what exactly is he using as his moral high ground?
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
To those who think BLM haven't changed anything and that 'it hasn't happened since the slavery days'
Tell me right now that the way she was treated in her trial and lack of representation she had would have happened if she were a Caucasian American.
Do not look '.co.uk' and tell me she was British, read the article. It was a British lawyer that saved her. That is irrelevant to the piece, I am just clarifying before people try to correct me on this. The British legal system also has needed a lot of work pushed forward by BLM protests and campaigns in order to improve, it's just further along the way, I believe.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
A mandated reporter is a person who is legally required to report any suspicion of child abuse or neglect to the relevant authorities. Teachers and psychologists are some examples of people that are required to report any known abuse. The laws are in place to prevent children from being abused and to end any possible abuse or neglect at the earliest possible stage.
Historically, American law has protected a clergy-penitent privilege for a religious confessional that is similar to attorney-client privilege. In other words, clergy are not required to tell anyone about any abuse or rape they know about. Only seven states have laws requiring priests to report this information.
Catholic priests are not the only people who hear people's confession in religious contexts. Scientology uses a process known as auditing which allegedly helps people "rid themselves of their spiritual disabilities." Like priests they are exempt from having to report any abuse they've learned about in a confession or similar process, and do not have to provide testimony in a court of law.
A lot of people have come forward to report their experience of sexual abuse within all kinds of religious institutions. Many times people in the church know what is going on, but do nothing to stop it. A bill that started making its way through the California legislature last year would have made CA the first since 1999 to require priests to choose between violating the law or violating the seal of the confessional.
As predicted, virtually every religious institution fought back and the law was withdrawn. One bishop argued, "If any legislature can force believers to reveal their innermost thoughts and feelings shared with God in confession, then truly there is no area of human life that is free or safe from government. Another added, "Surely murder, theft, spousal abuse, child neglect and rape are terrible crimes. Would the state determine that priests are obligated to report these offenses to the authorities, should they hear of them in the confessional?"
Um... sure, why not?
The argument is that forcing individuals to choose between the most sacrosanct part of their religious beliefs and imprisonment is what the Bill of Rights was entirely meant to avoid. Do you agree, and if so do you agree to the point where that applies to clergy and confessionals from ALL religious denominations? For instance, if I said I shouldn't have to report child molestation that I know is occurring because of my devout Pastafarianism and belief in the Flying Spaghetti Monster, would that be acceptable? And if you don't agree, explain why you think the 1st amendment does not apply to rape or child abuse.
(Posting in the Religion forum to see if perspectives differ from the Politics forum.)
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
A mandated reporter is a person who is legally required to report any suspicion of child abuse or neglect to the relevant authorities. Teachers and psychologists are some examples of people that are required to report any known abuse. The laws are in place to prevent children from being abused and to end any possible abuse or neglect at the earliest possible stage.
Historically, American law has protected a clergy-penitent privilege for a religious confessional that is similar to attorney-client privilege. In other words, clergy are not required to tell anyone about any abuse or rape they know about. Only seven states have laws requiring priests to report this information.
Catholic priests are not the only people who hear people's confession in religious contexts. Scientology uses a process known as auditing which allegedly helps people "rid themselves of their spiritual disabilities." Like priests they are exempt from having to report any abuse they've learned about in a confession or similar process, and do not have to provide testimony in a court of law.
A lot of people have come forward to report their experience of sexual abuse within all kinds of religious institutions. Many times people in the church know what is going on, but do nothing to stop it. A bill that started making its way through the California legislature last year would have made CA the first since 1999 to require priests to choose between violating the law or violating the seal of the confessional.
As predicted, virtually every religious institution fought back and the law was withdrawn. One bishop argued, "If any legislature can force believers to reveal their innermost thoughts and feelings shared with God in confession, then truly there is no area of human life that is free or safe from government. Another added, "Surely murder, theft, spousal abuse, child neglect and rape are terrible crimes. Would the state determine that priests are obligated to report these offenses to the authorities, should they hear of them in the confessional?"
Um... sure, why not?
The argument is that forcing individuals to choose between the most sacrosanct part of their religious beliefs and imprisonment is what the Bill of Rights was entirely meant to avoid. Do you agree, and if so do you agree to the point where that applies to clergy and confessionals from ALL religious denominations? For instance, if I said I shouldn't have to report child molestation that I know is occurring because of my devout Pastafarianism and belief in the Flying Spaghetti Monster, would that be acceptable? And if you don't agree, explain why you think the 1st amendment does not apply to rape or child abuse.
(Man I wish I could pose this question to Q-Anon.)
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics
I have seen first-hand with bsh1 that what is said in Mafia games can get you punished. This is actually correct.
I was told by Ragnar that it's okay for a user I'll happily name in this OP but can't so that it's not a callout thread, that they'd tase my genitals IRL as a passing joke in a mafia game to highlight that I 'owed them' some information and they'd torture me for it if this was IRL (they genuinely said this). Because the user is Ragnar's favourite, it's been oushed away as a passing joke.
I will be sure to show many others this comment if ever they compliment this fucktard teacher's pet user and I promise that this comment will not be forgiven until this user admits what they said was a threat, was wrong and that it in no shape or form deserves leniency.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
DebateArt.com
As President, Trump is in charge of Law enforcement for the country. He is the direct head of the Justice department.
So what is all the palava about Trump talking to Barr? Where is the problem?
These complainers are people who don't even know how their own country's government is structured.
Now if we could only get rid of all these activist judges, we'd be making some progress!
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Politics