Oooh! I can handle this!
THE DUTCH deserve to rot in jail cells and eat rats! I have no feelings of sympath for THE DUTCH. THE DUTCH is a horrible, evil, twisted person who deserves to be whipped with a bundle of coat hangers until he dies! Fucking THE DUTCH.
It’s absolutist mad libs!
I think those 12 years in The Netherlands goes with some conditions. There are some rules like that in Denmark. Two people can have sex if they’re both under fifteen. Perhaps it’s legal for two persons to have sex in The Netherlands if both are under sixteen?
You don’t think I took the girls’ word for it, do you?
I’m glad that at least one person got the joke. I’m a little too dry for my own good sometimes.
See, it’s that deliberate disingenuousness that makes you so lovable. Statutory tape isn’t a political issue, obviously, but your stance on every political issue is pronounced, loony and left. You serve as useful balance to yutzes like Razorsharp, so your assholery on nonpolitical issues can tolerated as the cost of keeping things level around here.
Still waiting for a reply, Dio.
BTW, FinnAgain I should add that AoC @ 12 in Holland is only valid if the other part is not more than four years older.
Fine. Maybe my experience as a girl colored my opinion, too. I’ll spare you the details–but as a result of the experience, I’m 23 now, and I don’t remember the last time I’ve gotten aroused.
Dio has a perfect right to be a “dick”, presumably because he’s a father and he works with children who’ve been through hell and back. Many, many kids who haven’t been out of Mommy’s and Daddy’s home are ill-equipped to deal with predatory men. The statutory rape laws exist to protect these kids, not these prositots who’ve been getting pregnant since the age of 11. So what, you can’t bang with a guy who’s 40, you can’t smoke until 18 either. Tough cookies. The whole point of not giving rights to minors is to make sure that a reasonable segment of population is at the age to understand the consequences of doing certain risky activities and to act accordingly. No, there isn’t a black and white cut-off limit where everyone magically becomes an adult. That doesn’t mean jack–the law is the law, and any adult who claims to have a spark of conscience will NOT faternize sexually with an underage child.
No and no.
What makes you think I approve of the Dutch age of consent?
:rolleyes:
Now that got me laughing this AM. Funny shit, that.
Sam
Is this a fucking Easter Egg Hunt?
Maybe if you’d started right off the bat trying to convince us that the law here is correct, rather than focusing on legalism and jumping up and down screaming “It’s against the law! They’re evil cumbag pervs! It doesn’t matter what the guy was thinking! It’s against the law! Evil pervs! RAAAAAAWWRRRRR!”, it might have helped your case.
Let me turn that around on you.
What makes it so that you do not aprove the Dutch age of consent?
Personally, I’d rather revserve judgement until I saw that the level of mental illness in teens due to sex wasn’t going up, and that teen pregnancy wasn’t up, etc…
But if it works in Holland, isn’t it possible that your objections are, well, just wrong?
Seriously, no hostility.
How’s about this?
If I hit someone, there’s a prima facie case for assault against me, and I’ll get charged.
I may, however, offer self-defense as a legal defense, in which case I have to prove that my punching the other person was okay.
Apply a similar principle to these cases.
If I have sex with a fifteen-year-old, there’s a prima facie case for statutory rape against me, and I’ll get charged.
I may, however, offer as a legal defense the fact that nobody was harmed by my actions. If, for example, the teen in question is willing to submit to a psychiatric evaluation, and if the psychiatrist finds that the teen is suffering no ill effects. then that constitutes a defense against the charge.
What problem might there be with such a system?
Daniel
Nothing.
Considering your replies in this thread I wouldn’t expect you to, either.
It’s just that there must be some reasons as to why the legislators of Netherlands and the US come to such different results. After all, since there in fact are laws regarding this in both countries, the frame of mind of the legislators have, I presume, been the safety of children and teens.
You are the one going on about where the cutoff should be, urging people to pick a stance, using buzz words like predator, perv and the like. None of which is addressing the real problem, mainly protecting the young.
But there are no natural laws saying that a person under 18 or 16 is not fit to have sexual relations. There is no natural law either that says that if the age difference is too big (whatever that is), then it’s ‘un-natural’. There is only society, moral and a lot of other stuff we have invented.
Now, try to pry yourself away from your role as a father (since I think it’s clouding your way of debating here) and convince me that the US way is better than the Dutch way. You see, I’m not all that convinced it’s so.
And for reference, AoC is 15 in Sweden, with some exceptions (if the minor is a dependant or in a vulnerable position, as with a teacher, employer ASF).
GASP! You must want to molest adolescents! Dutch freak!
This is similar to what I suggested earlier, only you suggest that the defence prove no harm occurred and I said the prosecutor should have to prove that harm occurred. The biggest problem with either system would be defining what “harm” is, and making sure that trials didn’t turn into a battle of dueling psychiatrists (given no time there’d likely be experts willing to testify, for a price, that the adolescent surely wasn’t harmed). I think making the “harm” criteria sufficiently easy to meet would help…
Sorry, but this is ignorant bullshit.
I just looked at my 1950s dictionary, and it starts out with, “a thin layer of impurities,” etc. Maybe “scum” was at some time and place a slang term for “cum” (something I’ve never heard of), but if the idea is that it was originally a slang term, that’s just wrong.
Not that it’s your fault, mind.
Basic human decency.
What do you mean when you say it “works?” Doesn’t Amsterdam specialize in teen prostitution? I wouldn’t call that “working.”
And with this comment Diogenes encapsulates the reasoning behind his simplistic black and white view of sexual relationships.
It’s sexism. And a degree of self-louthing.
loathing
So it’s OK for Diogenes to legislate on “basic human decency” but it’s not OK for fundies to legislate on “natural law”? :dubious: Both strike me as a way of expressing the same underlying rational.
(Bolding mine.)
Oh god. Your friend sounds like a wonderful father.
Jerk.