Hmm, I see that another post is called for too.
Well? Go on. You’ve proven you know how to research, copy, and paste. Cite some of that proof as to the nature of my character. Prove that the insults you uttered against me are based in facts, as you claim.
Here ya go…
From this site.
The cite you gave says exactly what I said, that your husband could have gone to jail for 15 months.
Anyway, I’m not going to spend an hour trawling through your long-winded posts to put up quotes that you’ll then claim I took out of context. It’s sufficient to note that
BTW, why are you so anxious that everyone read your posts on other topics? I have read all of your posts on this topic. I don’t care to go rummaging through the archives to find out your opinions on basket-weaving and ancient Peruvian culture.
Little girls.
Well, it shouldn’t be surprising that you’re not a woman yet, you pretentious, showy, venomous child.
Yes, you can post wherever you want(until mods notice you under your bridge and ban your pathetic ass).
You remind me of Cameron Diaz as the psycho Bride in Very Bad Things.
Your focus in your list of important things for your impending wedding(and if he is smart, he’ll either run or get you to sign a watertight pre-nup) is so filled with greed and dollar signs that I am sure after you make sweet love to all the gifts and money you recieve, your husband will go ignored as you spoon with a cuisinart.
Your taste is neither original nor is it noteworthy. Much like your bluster toward Zabali, you are obvious, predictable, and terribly bland.
Maybe when you develop a personality, you’ll acquire taste and class. Until then, you’re just another Barbie doll looking for her dreamhouse with a plastic man sans genitals.
I have stated that I’m frustrated with the bride continuing with a course of action that EVERYONE else standing at the “altar” is uncomfortable with including the groom!
Hey! Ancient Peruvian culture was pretty cool, they were excellent artiists.
He didn’t commit a crime, because she CUT HIM OFF before they broke up, when he was still 15. Is that crystal clear to you now?
Mockingbird, why do you assume that he’s the one who needs a prenup? Grooms don’t pay for the wedding, and I’ve already said that my parents are involved in planning it.
I don’t care what you think of my taste. It’s not your wedding.
Why would the mods ban me? I have followed the rules, there are no lawnchairs in any of my posts 
His age doesn’t matter. He would have gone to jail for 15 months if she had chosen to go to the police. Why don’t you read the link you posted?
Ok, to make certain I’m crystal clear to all. The MOH (my husband’s ex) was 14 when they first had sex, he was 15. The relationship began to rot, and she refused to have sex with him anymore, he was still 15. They broke up after he turned 16.
More than a year went by, and he met me. He turned 18, and began to court me.
When I realized I was falling for him, I sat him down and we had a serious heart to heart, and I made sure he knew what he was in for.
Now, have I left anything open to be misconstrued further?
Actually, the fact that they were both under the age of legal consent means that either:
Guess which way the law enforcement officials choose to interpret the law? I’ll be glad when the ACLU gets this law taken off the books though, it’s anti-gay/lesbian.
Ok, he had sex with someone who was between 14 and 16. He was a “youthful miscreant” as your own cite says. It says that the “the provision limits the penalty for teen sex to 15 months in jail.” So, since he was under 18, and within 4 years of her age, he could have been sentenced to up to 15 months in jail. You told me repeatedly to learn to read, why don’t you learn to parse?
Obviously, you must care what we think as you attempted to dazzle us all with your “impeccable taste.”
snicker
So, your parents are paying for it?
Wow. You are quite the modern woman. Modern for say… 1960.
Sublet a clue and a life, Wenchina, please
Hello? Knock knock It says PERSON in that law, and that’s the exact interpretation that law enforcement uses. The law does not make the male more responsible. Also, it does not say it’s illegal for 2 people under the age of 16 to have sex. It says it’s illegal for someone over 16 to have sex with someone under 16. It also limits the age of a person who is aged 16 to sex partners who are under 18.
Mockingbird, someone asked me to explain what I meant when I said that I’m going to have a perfect wedding, so I did, without any intent to “dazzle”. Again, I don’t care what you think of my taste, it’s not your wedding.
Yes, my parents are paying for it. They’re allowed to give me gifts, and this is a major gift that I’m grateful to them for. I certainly don’t expect them, or my husband to support me for the rest of my life.
I’m beginning to understand what “calling someone out” means. It apparently means everyone gets to criticize her and she has to stay awake late to defend herself.
Daffy dear, you brought this on yourself by making assumptions, and then statements without full comprehension of what was posted. Not to mention accusing someone’s spouse of a criminal offense.
It is a felony to have sex with someone who is under 16, the penalties are just lighter if the felon also under 18 and is within 4 years of the victim’s age. Read the law, at least be courteous enough to re-read the paragraph that you posted. The statute does appear to be gender-neutral, but we haven’t really looked at how case law approaches it, nor have we looked at the lengthy definitions that no doubt preface the entire section the law is in. I would bet that case law shows a clear precedent for only charging the young man if both partners can be charged, and stare decisis.
Zabali, dear, your husband did commit that crime.
Jeez! Agree to disagree! You both have valid points. The MOH sounds like a loon and Daff is right, it might be best to avoid the whole deal. Oh and Zabali is right, sometimes you have to be nice to people you don’t respect for your spouses sake.
But do you two want to be “virtual” enemies over this?
Move on girls you both have valid points and will never agree.
And now for some links supporting the thought that the two related threads are unusual for me. Daffy claimed that the insults she threw at me were based in fact. I’m still waiting for her proof though.
Stood up for what I believed in here
I think this was the first thread I posted in here on the SDMB
As I write this, you have been a member for about 6 weeks judging from your reg date. In the two threads under discussion, this one and the one that spawned it, you posted 23 times and 16 times respectively. Ergo, those two threads represent 39 out of your 195 posts. This is exactly 20% of your total posting contributions, which is substantive and would be fresh in most people’s minds.
BTW, I think it’s been very clearly proven that anyone having sex with someone aged 14 to 16 faces some criminal penalties under the applicable law, so just concede that he did something illegal and quit squabbling ok?
I’m still waiting for you to read all of my posts. I provided a list of why the insults were based in fact, it’s upthread a bit.
Why don’t you re-read my posts, and that damaging post of your own, and confront that fact that the moh that you hate so much could have had your husband put in jail. She might still be able to, I’m not going to look up Kansas statutes of limitations for you, I think finding KS ST § 21-3503 was sufficient. I just want you to think, every time you look at her, how grateful you should be that she didn’t have the man you love locked up. Use that information to put anything that she says about him in context.
I’m going to sleep now. I might respond to any of your posts on this topic in the morning. And no, once again, I don’t care to read your old off-topic posts. You’re not as interesting as you think you are.
I’ll quit “quibbling” once she either proves that the insults she made and grandly claimed were “based in fact” are, or backs down. I don’t expect her to have the class to apologize for it. She claimed to be able to see my whole character, yet admitted she had not read any of my other posts.
I’m not the only one that has a problem with this.
Daffy dear, if the MOH tried to jail my husband, she’d find herself jailed for the same crime. (You do know the ACLU is in the process of getting that statute removed from the books, don’t you?) I also don’t think the MOH would want the details of their first sexual encounter to reach her mother, who thinks she’s still a virgin. All this is assuming that there are any charges that could be pressed,there aren’t any that would hold. I bet the case would be thrown out on appeal if not, though. From what I’ve seen, it’s interpreted to mean that a person cannot have sex with a person between the ages of 14 and 16 if they are over age 16, if they are under 18/less than 4 years older it’s a lesser crime, if they are over 18 a bigger one. This is how I’ve seen the law enforced.
Where are the FACTS that you claim exist? You make allegations based on opinions you’ve malformed.
I see you are still not paying attention too. I stated that the bride is ignoring the groom’s requests to have 2 bride’s maids, and 2 best men more than once. Do you see the statement now? It isn’t the “happy couple” that is arranging things this way, the bride is insisting on having her way, contrary to everyone else’s comfort. I also stated that I was frustrated at her incomprehension of diplomacy on more than one count, and I stated this more than once too.