Of course not. I want to put the onus on the prosecutor to prove that harm was being done.
I was trying to pick an age under which is was inconceivable that informed concent could be given and thus the relationship was unambiguously exploitative. Perhaps “puberty” would have been a better choice then giving a specific age.
:rolleyes: That implies that I think that it’s generally acceptable to “dong” 12 year-olds. I do not. I merely think it’s possible for some hypothetical 12 year old to give consent in a particular set of circumstances.
Say what, homes? Most of the time the young adult will not consider him or herself harmed, so obviously will not want to prove harm. We even have first hand testimony in this thread from both genders that they were not harmed.
Now, of course, if there is coercion involved, there’s this little thing call FORCIBLE RAPE LAWS we have on the books to deal with situations like this…you should look them up sometime. :wally
I’d agree that age gap is too large. I would probably have 14 as an age below which R&J laws do not apply - though again I am not sure in every case the criminal law is the best way of dealing with all situations where, for example, a 14 year old is sleeping with a 13 year old. But that is where we have to rely on the discretion of DA’s, which is something I am uncomfortable with for many reasons, not least because I have seen too many Bible-thumping DA’s pushing for re-election by not exercising discretion in the right cases.
And critical to this is the equalization of the situation for men and women, and for gays and straights. Some states do not criminalize statutory rape of boys in the same way as they do girls. Far more have R&J laws for heterosexuals, but not homosexuals. And that has to change, expecially when we see DAs charging gays for offenses they would ignore in straights.
Som people will always get a raw deal when age cut offs are concerned. Someone does not become magically capable of driving the day they turn 16. But we need a cut off. And the answer is to be careful when you think you might even be close to that level. So you find her attractive and want to have sex. Maybe you might be better served waiting until you know better. Because, believe me, that night’s fun is not worth 4 to 8 in the state pen, followed by a lifetime of registering as a child sex offender every time you move.
Sorry, meant to cover this in my previous post, but forgot…
One of the reasons we have statutory rape laws is that "forcible’ rape laws don’t cover many of the situations we think should be criminal. They are woefully inadequate. A headmaster in Wyoming (I think, can check if anyone wants a cite) can tell students that unless they have sex with him, they will not graduate, and he has not raped anyone, according to the laws of that state (and probably 47 others). A Pennsylvanian retired man can demand sex from the 15 year old he is the guardian for, telling her he will have her sent back to juvie if she refuses, and he has not raped her. Rape laws that require an element of force are inadequate to deal with the coercion that goes on in the world. I think I am correct in saying that all 50 states require force to be present. New Jersey, however,has defined the act of sexual penetration itself to be sufficiently forceful so as to satisfy that element of the offense.
Don’t worry, it’s quite obvious you’re more than capable of speaking for yourself, so there’s no reason why I should attempt to put words in your mouth.
I don’t know, I’ve just heard it mentioned and discussed.
Interesting, but considering some of the scandals that went on at one university where I attended, with the Administration fabricating “approving votes” from the student body, I’m inclined to be suspicious.
Good for them (no, seriously, I mean that, if that’s what they want, then more power to them).
Agreed.
Agreed and if you’re doing it right, then they won’t be waiting for you to ask.
Dio, you dumb fuck you. I’ve seen you lose your mind when Brutus, Bricker, etc. make these drive by retardations and you go and do the exact same thing.
Yes, every single one of us is saying that there is nothing wrong with the raping of little girls. Hell, we love it. We all are laughing at you and thinking to ourselves that you must be jealous because you missed out on that sweet teen poontang. :mad:
Do you maybe think that we are saying that there may be a bit more to this than the black & white shit that you are trying to peddle off on us. Maybe you just feel caught on the wrong side of the dogpile this time and feel some sick need to defend your post to your dying breath.
Just knock off the third grade debate shit that I quoted. We know that you can do better than that.
Again, Dio, you’re just spewing shit to aggravate those of us calling you to task. So far no one has advocated raping little girls or anything close to it. Many of us have asked that you wait for further information before castigating someone for doing something. Others, like me, have stated our opinion that sometimes people under the legal age of consent can give real world consent that could get some other person in trouble. Again, I consented (real world sense of the world) to sex with people who were thereby legally guilty of statuatory rape. More than once and in multiple circumstances. Those men did not deserve to go to jail or have their lives ruined, IMO/E.
In this case, **neuroman’s ** friend may be a heinous predator who should rot in jail for the rest of his natural life. Or he may be a guy who is caught up in something caused by his idoicy. Either way, **neuroman ** is trying to be a stand-up guy and good friend by being there for the guy until he knows that there is good reason to write him off. Good for you, neuroman.
And I’m out of here–I feel no need to continue discussing this issue with you, **Dio **, as my main point in joining this thread was to agree that you were being a prick in the original thread. You’ve apologized for that.
Plus, I have a puppy I’m housebreaking and it’s hard to keep up with threads. I think she’s peeing right now.
Sexual Harrasment laws? Not criminal, and meaningless if he is judgment proof. I think it a little odd that you would call a man who says he he will prevent 17 year olds from graduating high school unless they put out a sexual harrasser rather than a rapist.
Criminal Sexual Perverts and the folks who love them, make excuses for them, and some who probably are them. It’s a pitiful world filled with real “cum bags,” and it’s apparent to anyone with any sense, maturity, or moral compass that its not me or anyone else who isn’t a big fan of adults fucking young minors. :rolleyes:
Here’s the thing. It’s always going to be possible to find exceptions and specific situations which don’t necessarily involve exploitation…BUT…when it comes to legislation, you have to pick a line and stick with it. I think the legislation has to err on the side of protecting minors. You can’t have laws that say “It shall be illegal to dork any person under the age of 16 years UNLESS said person is really mature for her age.” You have to generalize, and you have to do it in such away that errs on the side of shielding those who are the most vulnerable.
I gues in a way you could compare it to driving drunk. Some people acn do it just fine. That doesn’t mean that it should be legal and it doesn’t mean it isn’t stupid and reckless.
As I’m sure you’re aware, more activities than just intercourse are covered by age of consent and sexual assault laws. Therefore, I’ve taken the precaution of informing my ex-boyfriend, a very nice, slightly older guy who was the recipient of my enthusiastic attentions when I was sixteen, that you think he’s a rapist and that he deserves to be eating rats in a cell right now.
He was very, very confused.
Now Qadgop, I DO hope you have no intention of going around and prosecuting anyone I dated before the age of eighteen…
Agreed. But aren’t law and morality different things?
Is it possible that a 16 year old could give consent, in the real-and-not-legal sense of the term?
If, for instance, a 20 year old man slept with a girl who was 16, would he be scum in your book? What if 16 was the age of consent for his state? What if the age was 17, but she was a week away from her 17th birthday? What if she went out of her way to lie and trick him, down to a fake ID?
N.B. I am not endorsing this or saying it is okay. And yes, the unfortunate nature of legislating absolutes is that people get fucked (no pun intended) by the cutoff.
But there is a difference between saying those under 18 aren’t legally able to vote, and those under 18 aren’t emotionally able to vote. The same goes for sex, or driving, or balancing a checkbook, etc…
Only driving drunk is (usually) a misdeamenor that most people can personally and financially “get over,” whereas a felony sex offense is, given the irrational attitude the American public seems to have on the topic, not something that one is likely to get over. It’s gonna follow the person around for life. I think destroying the life of someone who did no harm is wrong. Prove that the adolescent was actually harmed or coerced. In the clear-cut cases of wrong-doing (i.e., an authority figure, someone targetting under-age partners and abandoning them, etc.) this should be easy to prove.
Why debate the age of the girl when the issue is the assholery of you?
Keep it up, though. We need left-wing nutcases to help strike a balance with our right-wing nutcases.