this post was submitted on 13 Sep 2025
366 points (79.6% liked)

Witches VS Patriarchy

1242 readers
1 users here now

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 3 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Wow so tuff, this guy absolutely pulverized that strawman

[–] Scubus@sh.itjust.works 4 points 5 months ago (1 children)

The point is that unjustly accused people have the right to violent uphold their rights against persecution. If you accept false accusations as an eventuality, you accept violent retribution as well.

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

Feel free to explain why correctly accused people wouldn't do the same thing.

Also feel free to explain how due process only applies to other people because you're allowed to be violent if the law even thinks of responding to an accusation, false or otherwise, like it would for any other crime.

[–] Scubus@sh.itjust.works 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

It applies differently because reasonable people presume innocence and will therefore support those accised without evidence.

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 0 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

LMAO

Love the casual implication that women can't possibly be asking for that evidence to taken and treated seriously.

[–] Scubus@sh.itjust.works -1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Not quite, in fact you just revealed your issue. I never stated that, youre making your own assumptions, and they are quite revealing. If they have any form of evidence, then they're not unjustly accusing. They're offered the same protections as a reasonable person, because they are. Unlike you.

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)
[–] Scubus@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 months ago

God I love self revealing assumptions. Keep em coming, id love to know more about you.