• 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!

US Hawaii: Lesbian pair held after kissing win damages

Deuce said:
I have a simple question of my own:

Does it make a difference whether it was private property?
Click to expand...

Yes, it does. The private property owner has much more discretion in this matter.
 
Paleocon said:
A store is a public place.



You don't have a right to engage in or permit lewd conduct on a part of your property that is open to the public.



The witness said it was lewd conduct.

Your understanding of lewd conduct law is non-existent. There's no lewd conduct statute that differentiates between public property and private. Only between public places and private.
Click to expand...

I'm afraid kissing is not lewd conduct.
 
Lord Tammerlain said:
So if a police officer orders you to lick his balls will you obey it? Without question?

I doubt it

Only if the order is reasonable and justified should a person obey it. Police authority is not absolute
Click to expand...

Why in the hell would a police order me to kick him in the balls?

Of course some orders should be disobeyed, but as children we learn that our elders are powerless against the protection of our parents and disregard.

There's a nice society where elders spank other's children. If someone asks you not to spank their child then then you can press charges if they do. One's right to spank children can be taken away by the Court and when this happens children who learn of it kick, bite, spit on and otherwise torment you. This is a much more advanced society, you people could never handle this.
 
And people wonder why countries are warning LGBT people about going to the US....
 
joG said:
I have never seen any reason, why they don't do it in the streets. And clothing can be optional for all I care. As long as I can have my privacy? Why should I care?
Click to expand...

joG said:
If people don't want their kids to see people screwing in the streets and getting drunk on park benches, they can move to gated communities.
Click to expand...

TheGoverness said:
Or they can just shield their eyes. Or just look away and ignore it.

It's what I do all the time.
Click to expand...

"Why don't we d-do it in the road!" (Beatles)
 
Fearandloathing said:
Absolute NOT!

You are legally bound to meet the "reasonable request" of a law enforcement officer. If he orders you to give him oral sex......

What is "reasonable" is often established in procedures and training. This was not a reasonable order .
Click to expand...

Ooo, wow, where can I get that?

Certainly it was. The officer's proximity means that they were probably doing this with his energy. If they had stopped they would have learned that this is what they go around doing and they didn't want to learn this so; learn it the hard way.

Stupid Courts!

Why I'm almost ready for Conservative Supreme Court Justices!
 
Exquisitor said:
Ooo, wow, where can I get that?

Certainly it was. The officer's proximity means that they were probably doing this with his energy. If they had stopped they would have learned that this is what they go around doing and they didn't want to learn this so; learn it the hard way.

Stupid Courts!

Why I'm almost ready for Conservative Supreme Court Justices!
Click to expand...



Making sense would be a start.

The officer's proximity means that they were probably doing this with his energy." has absolutely no meaning nor relevance
 
Exquisitor said:
If a police officer gives you an order you're supposed to obey it.
Click to expand...

Not if it is an illegal or unConstitutional order, you aren't.
 
buck said:
Only thing I ever indicated, was what the eye witness indicated:
Click to expand...

Witnesses are horrible.

Why Science Tells Us Not to Rely on Eyewitness Accounts - Scientific American

How reliable is eyewitness testimony?

Just yesterday while golfing I lost sight of my drive. One in my group said it hooked and went left and the other two said that it sliced going wide right. The first guy was correct. It hooked some and went left. The other two were positive at what they had seen and were shocked at being wrong.

A TV show showed how wrong witnesses can be. They staged scenes and called in the witnesses. Something like 1 out of 10 can actually remember correctly what they saw. My eldest daughter and I are in that group. My younger daughter and others we were watching got it all wrong. On top of that you can have bias. Gently touching a bottom area might be called grabbing bottoms by some prude.
 
DA60 said:
I hope you are not in the teaching profession.

Imo, there are no dumb questions.
Click to expand...

I am and yes there are... they get asked a lot.
 
Paleocon said:
They should never have dropped the charges in the first place.
Click to expand...

Right... and you also think that people who give oral sex should be given the death penalty so that about sums up how much I care about your opinion.
 
apdst said:
You can't get physical with a cop. That's a crime.
Click to expand...

The comment that I responded to had LITERALLY NOTHING TO DO with being physical with a cop...
 
JANFU said:
Nope- wrong again- I did read other articles- reason I was familiar with the incident.
Click to expand...

Why would you ask if the guy is up for promotion, if you already knew he was already retired?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom