Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Does anyone dispute the fact that the 'false allegations of rape are common' myth is dangerous? [View all]rrneck
(17,671 posts)129. The same people that made your post possible.
Age of Enlightenment
The Age of Enlightenment (or simply the Enlightenment or Age of Reason) was a cultural movement of intellectuals beginning in the late 17th- and 18th-century Europe emphasizing reason and individualism rather than tradition.[1] Its purpose was to reform society using reason, challenge ideas grounded in tradition and faith, and advance knowledge through the scientific method. It promoted scientific thought, skepticism, and intellectual interchange.[2] It opposed superstition and intolerance, with the Catholic Church as a favorite target. Some Enlightenment philosophes collaborated with Enlightened despots, who were absolute rulers who tried out some of the new governmental ideas in practice. The ideas of the Enlightenment have had a long-term major impact on the culture, politics, and governments of the Western world.
The Age of Enlightenment (or simply the Enlightenment or Age of Reason) was a cultural movement of intellectuals beginning in the late 17th- and 18th-century Europe emphasizing reason and individualism rather than tradition.[1] Its purpose was to reform society using reason, challenge ideas grounded in tradition and faith, and advance knowledge through the scientific method. It promoted scientific thought, skepticism, and intellectual interchange.[2] It opposed superstition and intolerance, with the Catholic Church as a favorite target. Some Enlightenment philosophes collaborated with Enlightened despots, who were absolute rulers who tried out some of the new governmental ideas in practice. The ideas of the Enlightenment have had a long-term major impact on the culture, politics, and governments of the Western world.
Magna Carta
The American Constitution is the supreme law of the land, recalling the manner in which Magna Carta had come to be regarded as fundamental law. This heritage is quite apparent. In comparing Magna Carta with the Bill of Rights: the Fifth Amendment guarantees: "No person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law." In addition, the United States Constitution included a similar writ in the Suspension Clause, article 1, section 9: "The privilege of the writ habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion, the public safety may require it." Each of these proclaim no person may be imprisoned or detained without proof that he or she did wrong. The Ninth Amendment to the United States Constitution states that, "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." The framers of the United States Constitution wished to ensure that rights they already held, such as those provided by Magna Carta, were not lost unless explicitly curtailed in the new United States Constitution.[83][84]
The American Constitution is the supreme law of the land, recalling the manner in which Magna Carta had come to be regarded as fundamental law. This heritage is quite apparent. In comparing Magna Carta with the Bill of Rights: the Fifth Amendment guarantees: "No person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law." In addition, the United States Constitution included a similar writ in the Suspension Clause, article 1, section 9: "The privilege of the writ habeas corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion, the public safety may require it." Each of these proclaim no person may be imprisoned or detained without proof that he or she did wrong. The Ninth Amendment to the United States Constitution states that, "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." The framers of the United States Constitution wished to ensure that rights they already held, such as those provided by Magna Carta, were not lost unless explicitly curtailed in the new United States Constitution.[83][84]
Rules of Evidence
The rules of evidence were developed over several centuries and are based upon the rules from Anglo-American common law brought to the New World by early settlers. Their purpose is to be fair to both parties, disallowing the raising of allegations without a basis in provable fact. They are sometimes criticized as a legal technicality, but are an important part of the system for achieving a just result.
Perhaps the most important of the rules of evidence is that, in general, hearsay testimony is inadmissible (although there are many exceptions to this rule). [In the United Kingdom the Civil Evidence Act 1995 sec 1 specifically allows for admission of 'hearsay' evidence, legislation also allows for 'hearsay' evidence to be used in criminal proceedings]. This makes it impossible for the accuser to induce friends or family to give false evidence in support of their accusations because, normally, this evidence would be rejected by the presiding authority or judge. There are several examples where presiding authorities are not bound by the rules of evidence. These include the military tribunals established by the United States of America and tribunals used in Australia to try health professionals.
The rules of evidence were developed over several centuries and are based upon the rules from Anglo-American common law brought to the New World by early settlers. Their purpose is to be fair to both parties, disallowing the raising of allegations without a basis in provable fact. They are sometimes criticized as a legal technicality, but are an important part of the system for achieving a just result.
Perhaps the most important of the rules of evidence is that, in general, hearsay testimony is inadmissible (although there are many exceptions to this rule). [In the United Kingdom the Civil Evidence Act 1995 sec 1 specifically allows for admission of 'hearsay' evidence, legislation also allows for 'hearsay' evidence to be used in criminal proceedings]. This makes it impossible for the accuser to induce friends or family to give false evidence in support of their accusations because, normally, this evidence would be rejected by the presiding authority or judge. There are several examples where presiding authorities are not bound by the rules of evidence. These include the military tribunals established by the United States of America and tribunals used in Australia to try health professionals.
So, to answer your question, men wrote them. You're welcome.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
282 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Does anyone dispute the fact that the 'false allegations of rape are common' myth is dangerous? [View all]
redqueen
Dec 2013
OP
"I think the solution to that is to require alerters to identify themselves. "
etherealtruth
Dec 2013
#252
And reading the book The New Jim Crow is a fantastic way to see how deeply embedded this problem
Cal Carpenter
Dec 2013
#65
Which would lead one to conclude that wrongful imprisonment isn't REALLY what is
Squinch
Dec 2013
#269
I think far too often people confuse reasonable doubt with false allegations
Bjorn Against
Dec 2013
#3
Well, that assumes a gender based conspiracy, which is a pretty sexist thing to say.
rrneck
Dec 2013
#98
DU is not court. Skinner said. That is why the jury system on DU runs like it does.
Tuesday Afternoon
Dec 2013
#103
Could have just said "men" and saved yourself the trouble. Thanks though. nt
xulamaude
Dec 2013
#145
possibly but, ya know ... a problem is still a problem wouldn't you agree?
Tuesday Afternoon
Dec 2013
#121
Oh I'm not disputing that there's a problem. The trick is to get the PTB to recognize there is one
Katashi_itto
Dec 2013
#126
I will go there with you for a bit ... but, I have to go to work where I am paid less on the dollar
Tuesday Afternoon
Dec 2013
#137
So you are saying that if a prosecution fails to get a conviction in a rape case
boston bean
Dec 2013
#234
and how many thousands of rape kits are sitting, untested, in evidence lockers all around the
niyad
Dec 2013
#268
The standard of proof in a criminal trial is "beyond a reasonable doubt"
Spider Jerusalem
Dec 2013
#51
I have been party to jury selection discussions on rape/sexual assault cases ...
1StrongBlackMan
Dec 2013
#102
You might as well be saying that threads which expose income inequality are part of a "class war".
redqueen
Dec 2013
#99
hmmm, I'll give you that you seem to be one of the ones that seem to post fairly.
Katashi_itto
Dec 2013
#100
Well I totally agree with that. Ok reread your post and it very reasonable.
Katashi_itto
Dec 2013
#113
A GUILTY or NOT GUILTY verdict has nothing to do with whether the allegation is true or false.
madinmaryland
Dec 2013
#221
Can anyone explain why? I will take a stab at trying to understand and answer -
Tuesday Afternoon
Dec 2013
#5
it is the most violent and demeaning and warlike. raping and pillaging of women, yes.
Tuesday Afternoon
Dec 2013
#26
i love seeing you bring your own experience into this discussion. totally love it.
seabeyond
Dec 2013
#158
Welcome back. Good that you can speak for yourself again, instead of relying on Omega Minimo. nt
Electric Monk
Dec 2013
#163
It's awesome how you got my reference, for someone who only registered here a month ago.
Electric Monk
Dec 2013
#206
it is against the rules to call out duers in this manner. i know. i did not and yet, just talking
seabeyond
Dec 2013
#210
i like to hear it all. to better understand. maybe that would be a difference.
seabeyond
Dec 2013
#182
Anyone who claims that false rape allegations are "common" is talking nonsense.
Nye Bevan
Dec 2013
#23
If you read the report from the UK, it's more often correlated with mental illness,
redqueen
Dec 2013
#24
If you think mentally ill people cannot have motives of hatred or vindictiveness,
msanthrope
Dec 2013
#59
"taking the position that the accused is guilty until proven innocent is where I will no longer bac"
redqueen
Dec 2013
#39
You ought to address your misinterpretation and possible distortion of statistics in your other
TheKentuckian
Dec 2013
#40
Your stats do not support your argument and to me it does, I see little other point in the assertion
TheKentuckian
Dec 2013
#47
Just as rightwingers would do in most threads here, if they could get a foothold. nt
redqueen
Dec 2013
#48
Already guilty in your books, no matter what I write, say, or do. Yes, we understand each other. nt
Electric Monk
Dec 2013
#73
You keep saying that... Why do you keep trying to intentionally misrepresent the OP?
Ohio Joe
Dec 2013
#78
it really is quite simple--the patriarchy maintains power by keeping women in fear, keeping them
niyad
Dec 2013
#53
I'm not desperate at all, and I actually responded to your thread in good faith.
Comrade Grumpy
Dec 2013
#86
Well, sometime we aren't treated nicely on DU, I can attest to that myself.
boston bean
Dec 2013
#200
yes. the statement to stay out of GD with a progressive issue. and said in different ways thru out
seabeyond
Dec 2013
#164
peruse the thread. there is a couple that say, consensus had, none on gd. firstly. and secondly,
seabeyond
Dec 2013
#219
i have never shied from disagreement. so i hardly see that is an issue for me. nt
seabeyond
Dec 2013
#247
Okay, I thought someone posted that you had to be a woman to be a HOF member.
Comrade Grumpy
Dec 2013
#223
stating i do not mind confrontations suggest to you i do not like confrontations? really? lol
seabeyond
Dec 2013
#253
I also was still in the closet to many people at that time and was afraid to come out.
hrmjustin
Dec 2013
#94
Unless some troll is posting completely inane comments that I haven't bothered to read...
Shandris
Dec 2013
#162
there is a thread about UK stating false claim at .6%. at least two men said this.
seabeyond
Dec 2013
#177
Does anyone dispute the fact that the 'false allegations of rape are common' myth is dangerous?
etherealtruth
Dec 2013
#204
I'm sure that being falsely accused really fucking sucks, too. How does one live that down? nt
Electric Monk
Dec 2013
#208
step further. i get more pissed at the few false claim than actual act cause it hurts ALL victims
seabeyond
Dec 2013
#226
Holy putting words in someone else's mouth, Batman. The irony here is incredible. nt
Electric Monk
Dec 2013
#227
maybe putting the few out there is actually reinforcing a myth instead of their being "legs" hence,
seabeyond
Dec 2013
#211
I don't think anyone can deny that there are false allegations of rape. The statistics I have seen,
madinmaryland
Dec 2013
#215
"For no other crime is there so much energy dedicated to focusing on false allegations"
davidn3600
Dec 2013
#240
And there it is. You just stepped in it. That's why this was a bad thread from the get-go.
Electric Monk
Dec 2013
#277
No, have no idea really, not if all these cries I hear about the first amendment having any due
Rex
Dec 2013
#241