Believe Rape Victim Claims By Default?

The premise is because so few claims of rape are false, it's better to consider all claims of rape as true as a means of protecting victims, even though the falsely accused will go through a season of hardship.

I copy and pasted what I thought summarized her argument.

No matter what Jackie said, we should generally believe rape claims - The Washington Post

I totally understand this from a woman's perspective, but still disagree.

It's really hard finding which priority to give more weight. Do we give more weight to women so their charges are taken seriously at the expense of giving potentially innocent men a season of hardship?

In the case of Cosby things are different. We have to consider he is a celebrity and wealthy. This isn't the first time a celebrity has been accused of rape. And in an age of greed people will say anything to get rich.

Innocent until proven guilty. The media prefers guilty until proven... to no longer be the most interesting story they have... then the story gets swept under the rug, even if they're proven innocent.
The media have hated Cosby for the past 10-15 years, since he began speaking out against pop-black culture. He says that our comedians and musicians cause racism by making illegal activities seem normal and cool for us to do, and that it's okay to be a jerk to authority figures (as long as they are white). I think he was right, but the media loves those comedians and musicians, and has villainized Cosby ever since. They like the race war, as it brings in more viewers.
It would be foolish for us to not call for an investigation, but also evil of us to believe the accusations before any proof has been offered. People hop on bandwagons all the time, especially when there could be money involved, and at least 5 minutes of fame.
Human depravity runs deep, so I would not be shocked if the allegations are true, but depravity runs in both directions, so I also wouldn't be shocked if all the allegations are false.

What ever happened to innocent until proven guilty? It seems that accusations are all that's necessary these days to ruin lives.

It is a sin to bear false witness against another person. We can put an innocent man in prison, and the world might say, "Job well done!" but what will we say to the Lord on judgment day? Certainly we will pay a high price if we reward the liars and punish the innocent.

There's no easy answer to these situations. Under normal circumstances (not involving celebrities) the victim doesn't benefit from accusing her attacker, while the accused attacker has much benefit from denying the charges. It has to be terribly humiliating and difficult to come forward to accuse a rapist, which would seriously lower the odds of any woman choosing to do it under false pretense. (Many women choose not to come forward anyway, in order to save themselves the hardship of publicity, court, red tape, and anxiety.)

This, in my opinion, is why people tend to believe the victim. It's not ideal, but probably is the safest "bet" of the two in most cases where there isn't something to gain by the victim from the accusation.

I totally believe that people should be considered innocent until proven guilty.....anything is possible, maybe they all conspired against him and maybe he is guilty...truth is, we really do not know. Or perhaps its a bit of truth mixed with fiction - ie. perhaps they consented to whatever weird stuff went on and NOW decided to muddy his name or they feel guilty after the fact. If there is no proof, there is no proof, tough luck, but we can't just go around putting innocent people in jail. Should they open an investigation? Absolutely, then they can find out!

People should always be considered innocent until proven guilty.
We should not take things at face value by just what somebody says. Which is why there was once a hear say rule in the system, that still applies but has been thrown out the window and overridden. The hear say rule says that if one person says one thing, and the other says the opposite but no physical evidence is found then it should be thrown out of court. But in a lot of cases any more it is not.
The other thing that is going to far is how loosely the word rape is used in the system. In going and ministering in the system and talking to inmates and even to knowing and talking to some victims. If you go to a bar and the two of you get drunk go home and have sex, then the next day one of them claims rape. In the eye of the court system this is rape, for they don't consider sex during drunkenness to be mutual sex.
The bible even states that in the end times people will get more deceptive, and lie more often, care about themselves over the welfare of others, and so on....so we should not take every accusation as being true until evidence proves other wise.

The Bible requires two or three witnesses for anything to be established, not nececcarily men witnesses, but something to bear witness.
So yes it must be investigated first and a proof should be found to bear witness and establish the victim's testimony.
This is the law of God and I'd stick to it. Men are not very good lawgivers.

I think that we should obey the law of the land. Which in the US, English Canada, Australia and other countries who inherited the British code of justice, means innocent until proven guilty.

As much as I deplore the thought of a rapist getting off free, even more do I destest the thought of a man who is innocent going to jail, for a crime he did not commit.

In Canada, there was a man accused of raping and killing two women. His name was Steven Truscott, and he was 14 years old. He was sentenced to death after being convicted on very flimsy evidence, in order to get a fast conviction. Although the death sentence was reversed and he was given parole, it wasn't until 2007 that his conviction was overturned. Too late, of course to find the real killer.

That is a real miscarriage of justice! If we turn around the legal code for one crime, we run the risk of having to turn it around for every crime.

Steven Truscott | Murderpedia, the encyclopedia of murderers

I find it hard to swallow a man can rape 20+ women since the 70s and nothing was said til now. Did he do it? Idk. Maybe so, but it's funny that some of these women claim Hugh Hefner abused them as well and no one is going after him.

Over the years I've had a couple of friends get accused falsely of rape...
cases where the women ACTUALLY ADMITTED later they'd fabricated the charges.

They were both cases where the guy was in a sexual relationship with a girl,
then various things happened, and the girl wanted to retaliate.

It's not like these guys were saints, they were both idiots,
but nonetheless the rape charges were fabricated.
Both of these guys came very close to seeing the inside of a prison...
until the girls admitted what they'd done.

I think people should be innocent until proven guilty.
That's how we've been doing things for a long time,
and it's how we should continue.

Of course nobody wants to see a girl raped,
or see a rapist go free.

Elizabeth, you only have to look at what happened in UK, Jimmy Saville a high profile celebrity with his own show on TV, he spent decades sexually abusing kids and raping women, not to mention the odd corpse in the morgue. It all came out after his death, people were too scared to come forward, many tried but were not beleived or threatened, being told that no one would believe them. investigations have since found he was not the only one at it.

It was only a matter of time before US celebrities would be exposed, no doubt the victims saw how succesfull British victims were in securing convictions of celebrities for the abuse they got away with.

It is a sticky wicket. Women with legitimate complaints don't come forward because they're treated like the wrongdoers, yet scores are damaged for life by false accusers who do come forward. If only humanity could learn to be HONEST with each other and God we'd be ok!

Agree. ^^

Who sins, men or women?
Both.
Who lies, men or women?
Both.

We can have laws, and trials, but we can't really fix that root problem.