see no evil
Fri Aug 21 18:46:59 CDT 1998
Terry West writes:
> My posts make it clear that my reference to Jones as a nude model
> was a part of a deliberate credibility attack based on her
> presentation of credibility (thrown out in court) by aligning herself
> with the Christian Coalition, which finances her case. It is relevant
> to the way she chose to present her "argument."
1. You are still conflating what a judge said about the technical
definition of employment harassmant with the act of sexual oppression.
2. You are still denying her claims based on her lack of credibility. You
called her a nude model. Now you say that being such doesn't reduce
credibility, rather being a "hypocrite" does. And she is a hypocrite
because she isn't an innocent christian. Had she never posed nude than she
wouldn't be a hypocrite and her claims would be credible. You're just
adding more layers to your argument that the alligations of a nude model
can't be trusted. I wonder what you think of homosexuals who are
catholics, or even worse, what about those log cabin republicans? They're
all hypocrites under your amibigous usage.
3. Paula Jones *WAS* a nude model. I guess under your standard, once a
nude model, forever unable to be a christian or a victim.
4. At this point, this whole issue is getting tiresome. You continue to
defend your assertions by refering to me as unethical and a moron. I guess
you will live in your world, and I'll live in mine. By the way, Bob seems
to also agree with me, so I'll let him continue the thread.
George Mason U.
"Inject your soul with liberty, it's free, it' free!"
More information about the Mailman