POLITICS & DONALD Annoying Orange MEGATHREAD

[Darryl McKoy]

Because he only admitted to drugging the women. He said nothing about "yes, I raped them afterwards". In fact, he maintains the love was consensual.

Can you consent after being given Quaaludes?

[Ad Bot]

[Tactical Nuke]

read the edits I made

[Darryl McKoy]

Doesn't change my question

[SeventhSandwich]

Didn't we try this with the RAISE thing and people blew their stuff all over the walls in response?

Because it's literally handicapped. 99% of valuable American immigrants would fail the stringent point system imposed by the law.

EDIT: Now that I think of it, he didn't even admit to "drugging women". He admitted to giving women drugs. Not the same.

It's all straw-grasping. That's the involuntary drugging-equivalent of saying that you slipped on the shampoo bottle in the shower.

[e-maxx]

Because he only admitted to drugging the women. He said nothing about "yes, I raped them afterwards". In fact, he maintains the love was consensual.

If you bought a gun and were charged with buying a gun that you used to murder your family, you aren't guilty of murdering your family if you admit that you bought a gun.

EDIT: Now that I think of it, he didn't even admit to "drugging women". He admitted to giving women drugs. Not the same.

[Red Spy]

According to studies, the majority of wartime casualties in the United States are 20 year olds. Imagine how bad an all-20 year old unit must be

Time to ban 20 year olds from enlisting. The logic behind this decision is flawless, for I have statistics to back it up! Take that 20 year old sjws, no more ruining the army with your mediocre survival rate

you can train 20 years olds to be good soldiers but you can't train women to be the same as men

[Tactical Nuke]

Doesn't change my question

First off, I did some looking into Quaaludes, and for what it's worth, they are not date rape drugs. They aren't drugs that knock you out and then somebody's loving you behind a dumpster when you wake up. It's a sedative that gets you high. At the time these women allege Cosby raped them, and during the time Cosby had admitted to giving women these drugs, they were really easy to get and they were known to be taken to make love better. It was like smoking weed and then having love, but easier to set up.

Knowing that, if your definition for consent excludes being high, then you'd also have to concede that you are not consenting if you're drunk, which would make one-night stands involuntary rape, which is a ridiculous phrase in and of itself. Is there a certain BAC that consent drops out at, and likewise, is there a certain level of highness that consent drops out at? Is it even possible to quantify highness?

In short, yes, you can consent. Does it mean people can't take advantage of others and get them drunk/high to forget them? Of course not, but to suggest that all high or drunk love is rape is dangerous.

It's all straw-grasping. That's the involuntary drugging-equivalent of saying that you slipped on the shampoo bottle in the shower.

Not really. "Drugging women" implies strictly that he was taking advantage of them. "Giving women drugs" could mean either that they asked for drugs and he provided them, that they took drugs together that Cosby owned or that he is actually repugnant and took advantage of them.

[HellHound]

I might have slipped something into her drink, but she was really into it when we had love

[Red Spy]

i was really into her if you catch my drift

[Darryl McKoy]

Knowing that, if your definition for consent excludes being high, then you'd also have to concede that you are not consenting if you're drunk, which would make one-night stands involuntary rape, which is a ridiculous phrase in and of itself. Is there a certain BAC that consent drops out at, and likewise, is there a certain level of highness that consent drops out at? Is it even possible to quantify highness?

I only ask because being drunk/high can invalidate consent in Australia. There's no specific BAC cut-off, it would be up to a judge to decide.

[Frankie²]

i feel like Annoying Orange could come out and say that he colluded with russia and there would still be people (some people in this thread) that would deny he did

[otto-san]

Knowing that, if your definition for consent excludes being high, then you'd also have to concede that you are not consenting if you're drunk, which would make one-night stands involuntary rape, which is a ridiculous phrase in and of itself. Is there a certain BAC that consent drops out at, and likewise, is there a certain level of highness that consent drops out at? Is it even possible to quantify highness?

if you knowingly have love with someone knowing they aren't psychologically/physically able to resist or consent then it's not consensual. if neither party is capable then i figure it depends on the context of the event

[TristanLuigi]

i feel like Annoying Orange could come out and say that he colluded with russia and there would still be people (some people in this thread) that would deny he did

Annoying Orange has admitted to loveual harassment and some of his supporters seem to think that's fine

political discussions with a large segment of the population are practically impossible; if Annoying Orange decided to wear a swastika armband for the rest of his presidency, people would still defend him (maybe something along the lines of "well it's his right to free speech!" or maybe they would just decide that it's fake news and ignore it)

[Red Spy]

Annoying Orange has admitted to loveual harassment and some of his supporters seem to think that's fine

you mean him talking about groupies on a bus lol

[TristanLuigi]

you mean him talking about groupies on a bus lol

saying you can grab stranger's genitalia is not really acceptable no matter who you're referring to