MJresearcher
Proud Member
I started this for a specific debate that's been happening but I think it would be good if we could have people posting their debates as well, I believe we could all help each other debate with the public much better if we works together on our techniques, plus we can share the evidence we use which will help in MJ's defense. Everyone is welcome to post the MJ debates they've had whatever the debate was about, I'll be focusing mainly on the allegations against him but debates you've had with people about anything MJ are welcome.
Allegations info here:
http://www.mjjcommunity.com/forum/th...=1#post4024423
I was made aware of a debate that was going on in a facebook atheist group yesterday by one of our lovely members here. It all started after a fan posted about Xscape asking for opinions. Someone always has to be an arse and say something nasty so a debate started. One of the men (has anyone else noticed there seem to be more men than women who think MJ was guilty?) made a new post on the group asking what other people thought.
I'm not sure why he wanted other people's opinions on a separate post, but there were plenty of comments in defense of MJ on the other post which has lead me to suspect that maybe this man felt outnumbered and wanted to find people who agreed with his opinion. The main problem I have with this man is that he doesn't want to discuss the evidence, just opinions. I find this odd because he tries to use the settlement and sleepovers as proof, so why would he wouldn't he want to know about other facts of the case? That's where people get their opinions from in the first place. His very first post above is already presenting a problem, he's trying to state his opinion as though it's a fact. It only gets worse as it goes on, here's some of his confusing comments:
He asserts that MJ must have got off because he was rich. Should we assume that anybody who has a lot of money is always guilty when accused of something simply because they have money that could be used to get them out of trouble? After that he says he's talking about opinion, not proof or court. So basically, lets just ignore all the facts then? The very things that you can't possibly make a valid conclusion without? Wow, what a great idea! :doh:
He then mentions that guilty people get off. Yes, that does happen, but if you think MJ was guilty you need to explain why. Then, you need to provide evidence, the thing you want to avoid, to prove it. You can't say that guilty people get off sometimes therefore MJ was guilty. This is a terrible premise!
Almost every time I see a debate about this subject the burden of proof is the wrong way around, the fans are expected to prove MJ's innocence. When someone claims that MJ was a molester they're making a positive claim; they're saying he is something, therefore the burden of proof is on them. People always point to the settlement and the sleepovers as proof and I understand that these things can seem convincing to people, but that's only if their knowledge of these things is shallow.
Civil settlements do not stop the person from testifying in criminal court, they can do this and keep the money from the settlement, so calling this hush money is inaccurate. Sharing a bed with someone does not have to mean sexual activity must be occurring, one does not automatically equate to the other. I understand people's suspicions and I wouldn't say to them that it's unreasonable but that's where investigation and evidence comes into it. it can't be accurately claimed that molestation took place because a bed was shared, the only thing proved there is that two people slept in the same bed, it doesn't prove anything beyond that.
People seem to think that claims being made + bed sharing = sexual abuse. This is a bad premise because it assumes that claim equals proof without evidence. People really don't get that there's much more to this and the evidence doesn't point the way they initially think it does. It can be very difficult for people to accept this and some never will, but what usually happens in the process is that the person claiming MJ to be a molester ends up looking ignorant and proves their bias by ignoring evidence or making excuses. When this happens it can shred their credibility, so even if you don't change their mind you can at least prove that they aren't reasonable and made conclusions when they shouldn't have. After seeing this, people will be less likely to trust their opinion on it, and people who have been reading may change their mind, it's not always about the person you're speaking directly to.
I didn't want to out myself as a fan because the sad truth is that a lot of people stop listening when they find this out, so I've taken up the role of "devil's advocate" and have turned things around and started asking them questions. I don't expect that they'll know much. Here's my comment to them:
Pete has not answered my questions but liked a comment underneath mine that just said "peido." Can't even spell the abbreviation right.
I guess my challenge was too much for the original poster.
On a different debate on the Smoking gun page, one hater tried to call me an idiot. I believe I've sat him back on his butt.
Allegations info here:
http://www.mjjcommunity.com/forum/th...=1#post4024423
I was made aware of a debate that was going on in a facebook atheist group yesterday by one of our lovely members here. It all started after a fan posted about Xscape asking for opinions. Someone always has to be an arse and say something nasty so a debate started. One of the men (has anyone else noticed there seem to be more men than women who think MJ was guilty?) made a new post on the group asking what other people thought.
I'm not sure why he wanted other people's opinions on a separate post, but there were plenty of comments in defense of MJ on the other post which has lead me to suspect that maybe this man felt outnumbered and wanted to find people who agreed with his opinion. The main problem I have with this man is that he doesn't want to discuss the evidence, just opinions. I find this odd because he tries to use the settlement and sleepovers as proof, so why would he wouldn't he want to know about other facts of the case? That's where people get their opinions from in the first place. His very first post above is already presenting a problem, he's trying to state his opinion as though it's a fact. It only gets worse as it goes on, here's some of his confusing comments:
He asserts that MJ must have got off because he was rich. Should we assume that anybody who has a lot of money is always guilty when accused of something simply because they have money that could be used to get them out of trouble? After that he says he's talking about opinion, not proof or court. So basically, lets just ignore all the facts then? The very things that you can't possibly make a valid conclusion without? Wow, what a great idea! :doh:
He then mentions that guilty people get off. Yes, that does happen, but if you think MJ was guilty you need to explain why. Then, you need to provide evidence, the thing you want to avoid, to prove it. You can't say that guilty people get off sometimes therefore MJ was guilty. This is a terrible premise!
Almost every time I see a debate about this subject the burden of proof is the wrong way around, the fans are expected to prove MJ's innocence. When someone claims that MJ was a molester they're making a positive claim; they're saying he is something, therefore the burden of proof is on them. People always point to the settlement and the sleepovers as proof and I understand that these things can seem convincing to people, but that's only if their knowledge of these things is shallow.
Civil settlements do not stop the person from testifying in criminal court, they can do this and keep the money from the settlement, so calling this hush money is inaccurate. Sharing a bed with someone does not have to mean sexual activity must be occurring, one does not automatically equate to the other. I understand people's suspicions and I wouldn't say to them that it's unreasonable but that's where investigation and evidence comes into it. it can't be accurately claimed that molestation took place because a bed was shared, the only thing proved there is that two people slept in the same bed, it doesn't prove anything beyond that.
People seem to think that claims being made + bed sharing = sexual abuse. This is a bad premise because it assumes that claim equals proof without evidence. People really don't get that there's much more to this and the evidence doesn't point the way they initially think it does. It can be very difficult for people to accept this and some never will, but what usually happens in the process is that the person claiming MJ to be a molester ends up looking ignorant and proves their bias by ignoring evidence or making excuses. When this happens it can shred their credibility, so even if you don't change their mind you can at least prove that they aren't reasonable and made conclusions when they shouldn't have. After seeing this, people will be less likely to trust their opinion on it, and people who have been reading may change their mind, it's not always about the person you're speaking directly to.
I didn't want to out myself as a fan because the sad truth is that a lot of people stop listening when they find this out, so I've taken up the role of "devil's advocate" and have turned things around and started asking them questions. I don't expect that they'll know much. Here's my comment to them:
Pete has not answered my questions but liked a comment underneath mine that just said "peido." Can't even spell the abbreviation right.
I guess my challenge was too much for the original poster.
On a different debate on the Smoking gun page, one hater tried to call me an idiot. I believe I've sat him back on his butt.
Last edited:
