Current Events > imagine being accused of doing something 40 years ago

(+) Yeah! (+)

nicklebro posted...

Again, you're just not understanding what "fully allowed" means. Its literally identical to saying "nothing wrong with".

Saying something is fully allowed is not synonymous with saying there's nothing wrong with it.

nicklebro posted...

You're fully allowed to believe someone did something wrong or even committed a crime even if it hasn't been proven. Acting as if your beliefs and opinions need to follow the same rules as a court of law is preposterous, otherwise you'd never be allowed to believe someone is lying or telling the truth in your personal life unless you could prove it.

You neglect to mention the flip-side of the coin.

Since you're referring to courts, here's an example: If I said I didn't believe in someone's guilt even though they were found guilty and sentenced in a court of law.... that is fully allowed of course but a wrong sentiment socially speaking. You said "acting as if your beliefs and opinions need to follow the same rules as a court of law is preposterous" and in this simple hypothetical I'm rejecting the court of law's rules.

It's a two-way street. It's fully allowed that one believes the accused did something wrong when there's no guilty verdict and in turn it's fully allowed that one believes someone is innocent even when they're handed a guilty verdict. Yet both of these stances are similarly wrong. They are societal faux pas'.
---