This is what they do when they're not jailing Christians:
And the (Democrat) audience applauds.
But think about it: if, consequent to a rape allegation, there's a 10% chance the guy committed rape, then there's a 90% chance the girl is lying.
If you expel him, you have nine times more reason to expel her.
Lord help us.
At a congressional hearing on campus sexual assault, Colorado Rep. Jared Polis suggested that expelling students based solely on the idea that they might have committed a crime is an acceptable standard. And the hearing audience applauded him.
Polis, a Democrat, was discussing due process and standards of evidence as they apply to colleges and universities adjudicating sexual assault. Currently, colleges must be only 50.01 percent sure that an accusation is valid before punishing an accused student (more on that later). Polis began advocating for allowing colleges to use a lower standard than that.
"I mean, if there's 10 people that have been accused and under a reasonable likelihood standard maybe one or two did it, seems better to get rid of all 10 people," Polis said. "We're not talking about depriving them of life or liberty, we're talking about their transfer to another university."
For this, the audience applauded.Democrat congressman says it's ok to expel a student for rape, even if there's only a 10% chance he did it.
And the (Democrat) audience applauds.
But think about it: if, consequent to a rape allegation, there's a 10% chance the guy committed rape, then there's a 90% chance the girl is lying.
If you expel him, you have nine times more reason to expel her.
Lord help us.
Steve12 from Neurologica here. How are you Michael? Had to stop by to check out the blog.
ReplyDelete"Opinions and musings on religion, philosophy, science, politics, and life from a conservative Catholic neurosurgeon."
Why don't you change it to :
"Opinions and musings on politics from a conservative Catholic neurosurgeon."
Where do you post about that other stuff? I can't find one post about anything other than right wing political opinion. Not one!
This is why I was saying that most religions are in fact political power consolidation schemes (PPCSs) w/ little or no genuine ecclesiastical or spiritual content. It's all for the politics, and you are clearly the best example of that. What's a better scam than giving YOUR political ideology the leg-up of saying God himself agrees with you? A time-tested political strategy that always gets results.
Seriously - where are the posts imploring private donation to needy kids? The exortations to rejoice in the Good News? A non political spiritual discussion? Anything non-right wing politics? I can't find anything. Nada.
This God schtick is good stuff - but can you at least put up some kind of facade?
Anywhoo - say hi to your favorite White Nationalist Teddy Beale for me!
Yours In Christ,
Steve12
Steve,
DeleteEgnor doesn't have opinions or musings. He just recycles them from other sources. Perhaps he's run out of sources to plagiarise. Oops - recycle.
Steve 12 again. I said above that i am "from Neurologica". I just want to clarify that I am a COMMENTER at Neurologica, not Steve Novella the blog's author. I'm a different Steve altogether....
ReplyDeleteThat is all.
Steve,
DeleteIt wouldn't be necessary to have to explain to a reasonable person that you're not Steven Novella. But then again, Egnor isn't a reasonable person.
He distorts everything if he thinks that it might lead to a rhetorical advantage. As he did recently when he noted that painful stimuli don't regularly cause activation of the postcentral gyrus as part of a rambling defence of his opposition to elective abortions at all stages, even early ones, around 10 weeks gestation.
The postcentral gyrus is concerned with touch not pain. Painful stimuli activate the insular cortex not the postcentral gyrus.
Hey Bachfiend
ReplyDeleteI actually added that because someone confused a comment I made outside of Neurologica as having been made by Steve Novella, and I was sort of heading that notion off at the pass. I think Michael probably remembers me:
http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/the-myths-of-vandana-shiva/
I'm actually a cognitive neuroscientist, and have found some of Michael's pronouncement about the brain puzzling considering he's neurosurgeon:
http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/neurosurgeon-thinks-the-brain-doesnt-store-memories/
That said, a mechanical stimulus that also causes pain will also cause activation of the PC gyrus simply by virtue of haptic sensation - i.e, not because it's painful. Not sure what the larger context of the conversation was.
Steven,
ReplyDeleteIt arose with regard as to when a foetus was capable of 'feeling' pain. Egnor argued that it was before 10 weeks gestation, when the thalamus had developed, so that there functioning spinothalamic pain fibres. Which ignores the question as to whether a 10 week gestation foetus has a mind, is conscious, capable of feeling pain, in the absence of a functioning cortex.
Of course, Egnor doesn't care about neuroscience. He just picks whatever he thinks supports his basic position. That abortion is wrong at all times, even shortly after conception. He'd be happy if there wasn't any contraception either.