• Please keep all posts on the Rittenhouse verdict here: Rittenhouse Verdict. Note the moderator warnings in the thread. The thread will be heavily moderated with a zero tolerance policy for any baiting, flaming, trolling or other rule breaks. Stick to the topic and not the other posters. Thank you.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Hawaii Moves to Strip "Rapists" Parental Rights

calamity

Privileged
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Feb 12, 2013
Messages
160,489
Reaction score
57,517
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
Unlike the law in most states, which strips parental rights only of convicted rapists, Hawaii is moving to strip parental rights of those accused of rape if court finds the evidence is "clear and convincing."

Hawaii law aims to deprive rapists of parental rights

I like it.
 

Harry Guerrilla

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
28,951
Reaction score
12,422
Location
Not affiliated with other libertarians.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian

TheGoverness

Little Miss Sunshine
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 29, 2016
Messages
35,063
Reaction score
37,701
Location
Houston Area, TX
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal

calamity

Privileged
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Feb 12, 2013
Messages
160,489
Reaction score
57,517
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
That's not a good thing at all.

Depends on if you became impregnated by rape and can't prove it beyond a reasonable doubt in court but can show clear and convincing evidence. It's a great law.
 

calamity

Privileged
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Feb 12, 2013
Messages
160,489
Reaction score
57,517
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
Wait wut?

Stripping someone of rights without a conviction is a good thing?
Hello bizzaro world.

Very hard to prove rape beyond a reasonable doubt. No so hard to show clear and convincing evidence that you were raped. Good law.
 

Gaius46

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 15, 2012
Messages
15,466
Reaction score
8,700
Location
New York
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Unlike the law in most states, which strips parental rights only of convicted rapists, Hawaii is moving to strip parental rights of those accused of rape if court finds the evidence is "clear and convincing."

Hawaii law aims to deprive rapists of parental rights

I like it.

If you don't get a conviction maybe, just maybe, it's because the guy ain't guilty.

Terrible idea. And possibly unconstitutional.
 

Howler63

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
1,899
Reaction score
553
Location
Just this side of senility.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Unlike the law in most states, which strips parental rights only of convicted rapists, Hawaii is moving to strip parental rights of those accused of rape if court finds the evidence is "clear and convincing."

Hawaii law aims to deprive rapists of parental rights

I like it.



Jesus H. Christ.

Stripping away rights WITHOUT a conviction? What other rights will we strip away without PROOF a crime has been committed?
 

Howler63

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
1,899
Reaction score
553
Location
Just this side of senility.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Depends on if you became impregnated by rape and can't prove it beyond a reasonable doubt in court but can show clear and convincing evidence. It's a great law.

So let's say your girlfriend doesn't want you around your child. All she need do is CLAIM you raped her, and you can't see your kid any more?

And you claim that's a 'good' law?
 

Josie

No Day But Today
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 25, 2010
Messages
42,785
Reaction score
22,532
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right

Harry Guerrilla

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
28,951
Reaction score
12,422
Location
Not affiliated with other libertarians.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Very hard to prove rape beyond a reasonable doubt. No so hard to show clear and convincing evidence that you were raped. Good law.

If something is "clear and convincing," wouldn't that be beyond a reasonable doubt.
It's an utterly idiotic law the undermines the foundation of our legal system.
 

roughdraft274

ThunderCougarFalconBird
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 3, 2010
Messages
16,007
Reaction score
9,886
Location
Louisiana
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Depends on if you became impregnated by rape and can't prove it beyond a reasonable doubt in court but can show clear and convincing evidence. It's a great law.

I can't come up with a scenario where someone can provide clear and convincing evidence but they wouldn't be able to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.
 

calamity

Privileged
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Feb 12, 2013
Messages
160,489
Reaction score
57,517
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
I can't come up with a scenario where someone can provide clear and convincing evidence but they wouldn't be able to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.

One name: Brock Turner
 

roughdraft274

ThunderCougarFalconBird
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 3, 2010
Messages
16,007
Reaction score
9,886
Location
Louisiana
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
So let's say your girlfriend doesn't want you around your child. All she need do is CLAIM you raped her, and you can't see your kid any more?

And you claim that's a 'good' law?

"clear and convincing" evidence is not the same as "claiming". That's a very large distinction. Seriously. I'm worried about the law also, but that doesn't mean you get to lie about it.
 

calamity

Privileged
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Feb 12, 2013
Messages
160,489
Reaction score
57,517
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
If something is "clear and convincing," wouldn't that be beyond a reasonable doubt.


No. OJ was found not guilty but there was clear and convincing evidence that he was guilty as sin....for example.

It's an utterly idiotic law the undermines the foundation of our legal system.
Not IMO.
 

roughdraft274

ThunderCougarFalconBird
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 3, 2010
Messages
16,007
Reaction score
9,886
Location
Louisiana
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
One name: Brock Turner

Brock turner was convicted of three felony counts. The problem is the judge gave him a light sentence, not that they couldn't prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.
 

Harry Guerrilla

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
28,951
Reaction score
12,422
Location
Not affiliated with other libertarians.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
No. OJ was found not guilty but there was clear and convincing evidence that he was guilty as sin....for example.

It's sucks that sometimes guilty people get away with crimes.
At the same time, this type of system exists to reduce the amount of innocent people, who get convicted of crimes.


Then, imo, you're opinion is incredibly foolish and shortsighted.
Can you not see how such a thing could be weaponized?
 

calamity

Privileged
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Feb 12, 2013
Messages
160,489
Reaction score
57,517
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
Well, here ya go, feminists. Just accuse him of rape and he's completely out of your and your children's lives.

Still have to convince a judge. "Clear and convincing evidence" is a bit more than a simple accusation, but a little less than "beyond a reasonable doubt," which is a pretty high hurdle.
 

Gaius46

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 15, 2012
Messages
15,466
Reaction score
8,700
Location
New York
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
If something is "clear and convincing," wouldn't that be beyond a reasonable doubt.
It's an utterly idiotic law the undermines the foundation of our legal system.

No. "clear and convincing" is a lower standard than "beyond a reasonable doubt." What it basically means is that the guy deciding the case has to believe it highly likely that the rape occurred. Beyond a reasonable doubt is a higher standard that basically means a reasonable person has to be convinced that they guy is guilty.

Permanently terminating someone's parental rights is an extreme sanction right up there with throwing someone in jail. It should require the same level of proof.

Want to get a temporary restraining order to keep the guy away - clear and convincing is fine. But for a permanent step? No.
 
Last edited:

calamity

Privileged
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Feb 12, 2013
Messages
160,489
Reaction score
57,517
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
It's sucks that sometimes guilty people get away with crimes.
At the same time, this type of system exists to reduce the amount of innocent people, who get convicted of crimes.
They won't be convicted of crimes. They will just not be allowed to pester the mother and influence the child. Good law.



Then, imo, you're opinion is incredibly foolish and shortsighted.
Can you not see how such a thing could be weaponized?
Why? I can sue someone to high heaven and win on a lot less than "Clear and Convincing" evidence. All I need do to ruin someone's life completely is present enough to have the "preponderance of the evidence" on my side.

It's a civil matter. Mom who claims she was raped says, "Get raping scumbag out of my life." Civil matter.
 

Harry Guerrilla

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
28,951
Reaction score
12,422
Location
Not affiliated with other libertarians.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
No. "clear and convincing" is a lower standard than "beyond a reasonable doubt." What it basically means is that the guy deciding the case has to believe it highly likely that the rape occurred. Beyond a reasonable doubt is a higher standard that basically means a reasonable person has to be convinced that they guy is guilty.

So it's solely up to the discretion of the judge (maybe jury).
Again, I don't think this is right in any way.
 

calamity

Privileged
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Feb 12, 2013
Messages
160,489
Reaction score
57,517
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
Brock turner was convicted of three felony counts. The problem is the judge gave him a light sentence, not that they couldn't prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.

They dropped the rape charge due to lack of evidence needed for a conviction.
 
Top Bottom