• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons 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!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Michael Jackson!

Arch Enemy

Familiaist
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 27, 2005
Messages
7,470
Reaction score
2,085
Location
North Carolina
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
He didn't really seem happy, there's no way you can deny the fact his appearance and physical condition has changed for the worse.

Now it's a matter of time for the next flurry of charges against the former King of Pop.
 

Courtneyx3

Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2005
Messages
131
Reaction score
0
Location
Texas!!! =]
Arch Enemy said:
He didn't really seem happy, there's no way you can deny the fact his appearance and physical condition has changed for the worse.

Now it's a matter of time for the next flurry of charges against the former King of Pop.

I didnt say he wasnt sick.. Whats that have to do with anything?

No. I dont think so, but I think if it does then those parents are just to irresponsible to let their boys stay alone with MJ!
 

Courtneyx3

Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2005
Messages
131
Reaction score
0
Location
Texas!!! =]
Soviet_Guy said:
Wow, I was surprised he was found not guilty on supplying alcohol for under aged.

How do you know that its true? The family lied on EVERYTHING, so how do you know if ANY of that trial was real? The family was messed up! I am not surprised at all!
 

Libertarian

Banned
Joined
Jun 14, 2005
Messages
220
Reaction score
0
Professional grifters they all were.....As to Michael jackson being talented, the only two songs he ever did that were good were Ben and Beat It.
 

flip2

Active member
Joined
May 24, 2005
Messages
338
Reaction score
0
Location
Texan by Choice
Libertarian said:
Professional grifters they all were.....As to Michael jackson being talented, the only two songs he ever did that were good were Ben and Beat It.
Was that a child molesting reference, Libertarian, "Ben" and "Beat It"? I mean, sure, Ben was a rat he was singing about, but he sang about it as if it was more than just a best friend, if you know what I mean?
 

Courtneyx3

Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2005
Messages
131
Reaction score
0
Location
Texas!!! =]
Libertarian said:
Professional grifters they all were.....As to Michael jackson being talented, the only two songs he ever did that were good were Ben and Beat It.

Rigghhttt, that is why he was the #1 selling Artist. Those werent the best, all of his songs were and we is known world-wide for all of them! :doh
 

edb19

Member
Joined
May 31, 2005
Messages
122
Reaction score
0
Location
Sylvania, Ohio
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
Courtneyx3 said:
Michael Jackson is KING! AHHH I am SO happy! NOT quilty on ALL 10 COUNTS! :mrgreen:
But would you let your child spend the night at his house? (Don't get me started on the parents of the children - they deserve as much blame as MJ.)

Just a reminder - not guilty is not the same thing as innocent. The man is a pedophile - even some of the jurors acknowledged the truth of that statement. Unfortunately, the prosecution had an inadequate case.
 

edb19

Member
Joined
May 31, 2005
Messages
122
Reaction score
0
Location
Sylvania, Ohio
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
Libertarian said:
Hell, for a 20 million dollar settlement, I would let him molest me!
My point exactly when I said "not guilty" isn't the same thing as "innocent." Innocent people make payouts like that all the time (sarcasm).

Reminds me of something that happened in this area a few years back. A well known public figure was accused of exposing himself in a public park. He denied it adamantly, wasn't there - wasn't even in town, people were out to get him because of his popularity (you get the picture). When it was finally time for the case to go to court, he took a plea bargain to a lesser charge - trespassing.

Now, if you're out of town, how exactly can you be guilty of trespassing in town?
 

Courtneyx3

Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2005
Messages
131
Reaction score
0
Location
Texas!!! =]
edb19 said:
But would you let your child spend the night at his house? (Don't get me started on the parents of the children - they deserve as much blame as MJ.)

Just a reminder - not guilty is not the same thing as innocent. The man is a pedophile - even some of the jurors acknowledged the truth of that statement. Unfortunately, the prosecution had an inadequate case.
No, I would not. LOL I like him but it would be IRRESPONSIBLE of a parent (esp those parents) to let their kids stay with him when they knew about the case from 1993. I like MJ but I would NOT let my kids stay with him! LOL I prob. feel the same way as you about the parents! LOL

Well untill you can prove that he is a pedophile, I will still like him. :) Again I think he might have done stuff, but that doesnt make me change my mind at him or his music. LOL He was not quilty and I understand that it was because prosecution didnt have anything to work with- they were scamming MJ for money. Yes, he might have done something with those kids but most of it was lies. But I have read that he is not letting kids into his room and I hope he doesn't, and if something ever comes up again, they need to question the parents. If the parents KNOW about MJ then why let your kids go around him? I think the parents should be at fault too! LOL
 

Libertarian

Banned
Joined
Jun 14, 2005
Messages
220
Reaction score
0
If Michael Jackson is a homosexual pedophile, that just makes him like a disproprotionate number of Catholic priests and male homosexuals....
 

RightinNYC

Girthless
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2005
Messages
25,894
Reaction score
12,484
Location
New York, NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Courtneyx3 said:
No, I would not. LOL I like him but it would be IRRESPONSIBLE of a parent (esp those parents) to let their kids stay with him when they knew about the case from 1993. I like MJ but I would NOT let my kids stay with him! LOL I prob. feel the same way as you about the parents! LOL

Well untill you can prove that he is a pedophile, I will still like him. :) Again I think he might have done stuff, but that doesnt make me change my mind at him or his music. LOL He was not quilty and I understand that it was because prosecution didnt have anything to work with- they were scamming MJ for money. Yes, he might have done something with those kids but most of it was lies. But I have read that he is not letting kids into his room and I hope he doesn't, and if something ever comes up again, they need to question the parents. If the parents KNOW about MJ then why let your kids go around him? I think the parents should be at fault too! LOL
I hope that if you have kids who get molested, you remember that it's mostly your fault for leaving them with someone else, and that the molestors shouldn't be punished because they did something good at some point in their life.

Stupidest argument ever.

Yea, the parents are at fault, but it doesn't exempt him. If I let my kids walk around Washington Heights and they get shot, is it 100% my fault for letting them be there, or does the asshole who shot them bear the responsibility?
 

Courtneyx3

Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2005
Messages
131
Reaction score
0
Location
Texas!!! =]
RightatNYU said:
I hope that if you have kids who get molested, you remember that it's mostly your fault for leaving them with someone else, and that the molestors shouldn't be punished because they did something good at some point in their life.

Stupidest argument ever.

Yea, the parents are at fault, but it doesn't exempt him. If I let my kids walk around Washington Heights and they get shot, is it 100% my fault for letting them be there, or does the asshole who shot them bear the responsibility?

No but when the parents already KNEW MJ's history, why leave your kids with him. You obviously dont read, because I didnt not say that it was the parents fault. I said they should ALSO be at fault, because they already KNEW about MJ.

I never said the parents were at 100% fault. :doh
 
Top Bottom