3 ms·
> To me, that sounds like a person simply updating their views in response to new evidence-new to them even if much older to many others. Labelling it as “back-
by seized 3y ago
> To me, that sounds like a person simply updating their views in response to new evidence-new to them even if much older to many others. Labelling it as “back-pedalling” seems to me to be needlessly uncharitable to him
> It might be hard to understand why it took him so long to realise this-but I think you have to understand he occupies a very different position in society from most people, with the result he is often ignorant of mainstream trends, or feels no motivation to care about them.
That's an absurd take on this. He's not updating his stance on over easy eggs, or beer preference (not as in free, but IPA vs porter), this is about children. And "different place in society" doesn't excuse it either, this isn't knowing the current memes or bands. This is simple fundamental logic, common sense, etc.
Before I had kids, it was still completely and utterly obvious that sex with kids is wrong. Yes, there's a grey area around age of consent + one year older or whatever, but that is entirely not applicable to his comments, Epstein, etc. Trying to justify Epstein is just wrong.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- prepend 3y agoSo if someone has a thought that is wrong, they can never reconsider and correct the thought. Is there no redemption? Obama once said that gay marriage is wrong [0]. I have always thought gay marriage is correct and a fundamental right. Does that mean that Obama can never be redeemed for his earlier incorrect thoughts and beliefs. Is he doomed to be judged forever based on his egregious historical beliefs? What do you think someone needs to do for redemption? [0] “Marriage is between a man and a woman,” on not supporting gay marriage but only civil unions https://time.com/3816952/obama-gay-lesbian-transgender-lgbt-rights/ https://time.com/3816952/obama-gay-lesbian-transgender-lgbt-...