Posted on 08/02/2010 7:13:54 AM PDT by laotzu
San Antonio police Saturday night arrested a 38 year old teacher in the Northside ISD and charged her with engaging in sexual activity with a 12 year old boy.
An arrest warrant obtained by 1200 WOAI news claims that Lucinda Caldwell, 38, is a fifth grade teacher at Cable Elementary School on Pinn Road.
The affidavit claims Caldwell picked up the boy at his far west side home Friday night and drove to a hotel, where the sexual contact allegedly took place.
But when she tried to return the youngster to his home early Saturday, his dad was waiting, so she drove off and drove into Medina County, where police there arrested her and rescued the boy.
It is not known whether the boy is a student of Caldwell's, or whether he attends Cable Elementary School. Caldwell is charged with aggravated sexual assault of a child. A spokesman at the Bexar County Jail said he didn't have information on whether bond had been set.
Officials didn't say how the contact between the boy and the teacher was made, because school is not in session, or whether the two had some sort of ongoing relationship.
good, good answer
Why are so many GenX female teachers attracted to juveniles?
In my observation, those below the age of 25.”
Interestingly, in the Old testament world, females married not too many years after sexually maturity. In contrast, males married around 30.
Your observations track well with “a Higher Authority”.
If you will read my posted question, I did not inquire as to the legal issue, I asked about hard data.
Just in case this escaped your notice, many laws do not reflect reality, and all too many contradict reality.
Are you aware you are assuming I should share your conflating law with science?
I’m afraid what I’m saying may be the opposite of what I’ve conveyed to you.
It is common in biblical times for younger women to be married to somewhat older men. What I suggest is the harm done in that situation.
And it goes both ways, just for the record. To engage in sexual relations with someone who is departed from your own age by significance (In my arbitration.. say... 2 years (Until age 25)) will result in the same harm as what law dictates below the age of 18.
Basically, what I’m saying is that 18 is even far too young to be considered of sound mind for an adult post-25 to consider. When I was 32 I dated (and had relations with) someone who was 18 (19 2 weeks into it). An adult ? Yes. On my same level ? No. I stopped upon realizing it, and now I advocate a stricter line that shouldn’t be crossed.
I wasn’t breaking laws, but the harm was very sublime. In our modern world, people should have moments and gain an intimate relationship with those of their same age - or approximate. At age 25 (And even that is iffy) does one begin to develop sensabilities that are on par with advanced adults.
In a biblical time period, life was VERY different. Maturing had likely ended at a young age - with a youngster learning all there was to know at a younger age. There are too many choices available to us all now - and those choices should be independently evaluated not by the hand of an interested party (Such as an older lover - even one with good intent) but by that person alone.
Furthermore, to a relationship with God, That person should have an appropriate and strong covenant with God - Not an older adult who thinks they know “What’s best”.
In conclusion, For a person of 30 years (or older) to consider a fair relationship with someone below the age of 25 is to take advantage of their limited time on earth, their limited understanding of the world around them, and their limited exposure to the covenant of God. To find God on their own terms, and establish their own lives. As an adult over the age of 30 - Your mere engagement undermines this process.
Agreed.
Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
Sex within marriage, between committed and faithful husband and wife - glue that helps cement the family together and produce children. The family is the foundation of human civilization. Meaningless sex solely for self-gratification, and even more so when adults use children which includes adolescents, is destructive to all individuals concerned, and when accepted and/or widespread, destroys civilization.
Sick.
Duras, I find your need to engare in snarky argumentum ad hominum somewhat offputting. However, giving you the benefit of the doubt, and assuming your reply to be more than it appears, I’ll attempt to reply to your post.
Your lines in quotes.
“I think that anyone that requires sourced data to determine if molesting children is harmful isn’t really looking for the “truth”. “
The request for sourced data is reasonable, except to those whom Eric Hoffer aptly dubbed “true believers”. Given that during most of human history, in most all cultures, females married earlier than men would tell any but a “true believer” something.
Should you be either a Christian or a Jew, your theologicl system should have given you a basis for a less ‘unbalanced’ if not downright simplistic/snarky reply.
“Were it a male adult molesting a male child would you ask this question?”
Desperation leads to straw dogs arguments. I said nothing of queers because I know them to be an infinitesimal part of the human race. Again, were you either from a Christian or Jewish background you would know that such people were seen as ‘abominations”.
Relative to my post, they are irrelevant, immaterial, and not germane.
“If it were a male adult and a female minor would you ask this question?”
Had you read my post with an even partly open mind, you would have discovered that I already covered this issue.
PS What was good enough for the Jews, Christians, and the people who founded America is sufficiently acceptable to me. May I suggest a bit of reading? Other than Libroid trash, that is.
Your problem may lie in your acceptance of the state usurping the role of the parent in deciding a child’s maturation. Do realize that until the rise of Libralism and the Agenda Uber Alles mentality of that set, the parents of a sexually maturing child (of either sex), not the state, determined (or profoundly influenced) when and whom their offspring married.
“For all intents and purposes, regardless of the sexes of the perpetrator and the victim, it is rape of a minor child.”
Calm your self, contemplate your inner adult, and consider the following:
1. When the state, with the best of intentions, attempts to arbitrarily set an age for sex or marriage, they have embarked upon a fool’s errand. Such detailed data is required for such decisions that only a family, aided by relatives and hopefully, assisted by coreligionists, can hope to wisely counsel a young person.
As you may have noted, history notes some remarkable females who married early and were very successful. My opinion is “Gooberment can’t raise children”
2.When goobers in gooberment agencies are given power to interfere with family decisions, including age of first intercourse, the results are not such that any but a proponent of expansive government could support.
Using Florida as an example, children removed from sexually abusive families are abused sexually more while in state custody. Nothing to support there.
“If you need scientific evidence to prove that raping a child is harmful not only are you asking the wrong question, you have serious issues.”
No, I have no “serious issues”, but that you have a need to project such on me speaks volumes about you.
The discussion is about appropriate age of consent, who grants that consent, and the role of the state in such consent.
Given your need to accuse me of “serious issues” it seems to this non-Liberal that you appear to be a Liberal, indulging in LiberalSpeak as you avoid the questions I raised to snidely imply that you think me to be a person with serious confusions regarding appropriate things sexual.
Beyond discussing this with your psychiatrist or psychologist, I can only suggest less projection and more attention to the issues I raised.
In closing, do you have any references to hard data sources that early sex is “damaging” to males? If so, how is “damage” defined, and what methodologies were used in the determination?
“There are too many choices available to us all now - and those choices should be independently evaluated not by the hand of an interested party (Such as an older lover - even one with good intent) but by that person alone.”
I would suggest that the decision to marry, or even to enter into an enduring sexual relationship would be something that the young person would do after consulting their parents and other responsible people in their life.
As out of control hormones are a noted source of bad decisions, I should like to suggest that the sexually inexperienced would benefit from whatever family and theological counsel they might have available and be willing to avail themselves of.
However, I must disagree with your assumption of appropriate partners be one or two years apart until after 25 years of age.
Given that females mature years ahead of males, and that we now have the hard date to say this with certainty, that females have chosen older males would seem to have had both societal and evolutionary advantage.
A passing glance at American history will give a plethora of examples of females who married well away from your suggested age bracket, yet were sexually, reproductively, financially, and societally successful.
Arguably, the Judeo-Christian reliance on parental influence on marriage was rather more successful that any policy yet devised by post-1930’s American government intervention in this area.
While American technical society is vastly different from the America of the Founders, human nature has not evolved in the merest blink of evolutionary time. I would thus suggest that history in this area has validated the staid conservative maxim: “If it is not necessary to change, it is necessary not to change.”
When we allowed gooberment into family and marriage with the beginning of the “New Deal” era, the introduction of change in this area of human life was unnecessary and the results of those changes were very negative.
Let me guess before even reading the thread. The *lucky boy* *guilty/not guilty* crowd is spamming the thread.
It’s disgusting beyond words.
Having already tried to respond to other posts, please forgive me if I only reply to one issue you so accurately raised.
“not being able to tell your wife that she was your first and last?”
Since the original issue was about the “damage” done to the boy, and since my request for quantifiable data regarding said damage seem to have irritated some with tender points on this subject, I must admit I didn’t address the male virginity at marriage” issue.
Alas, I am too little of an optimist to expect sufficient males to qualify for such a set to find it worth detailed discussion.
I agree that such should be the case, but harsh reality tells me that such males will be an exceeding small set.
Alas, males are ready and willing to fornicate long before their brain structure matures to the point where many of the issues you raise even become part of their ‘weltanschaung’.
Perhaps that is why society didn’t allow them to marry until they could support a wife?
Now, we live in a warped world where goobers in a swarm of gooberment offices are supporting a burgeoning population of sluts producing an ever increasing population of bastards, whose behavior turns out, not surprisingly to be “bastardly”.
All is progressing as Antonio Gramsci wanted.
To which I can only say “BAH! Humbuggery!
That and weep a bit for the Republic.s present state.
Females didn't use to be the ones making the decision about who to marry -- that was done by their parents. In contrast, the husband had to be able to financially support a wife.
Sex outside of marriage is damaging to everyone. It hardens the heart, encourages people to see others as mere machines for their gratification, reduces the ability to have lifelong faithful marriage, and more.
To have sex before one is of marriageable age is particularly harmful. And no, I’m not going to find statistics.
I do think the modern emphasis on putting off marriage is a bad thing. It is not easy for most young people to remain celibate or chaste througout their 20s. Easier for some and harder for others, everyone is different. Feminism has encouraged women to go to college for years, get a career, try out a whole bunch of men (or women) etc before even thinking of marriage. In fact, feminism has compared marriage to slavery, bondage and rape!
So feminism is greatly to blame for the mess of extra-marital sex that is breaking down society.
Apparently the fact that the perp in questions is not found to be “hot” and the boy in question was only 12, they seem to be pretty absent.
Elementary Teacher Charged with Sex With 12 Year Old Boy
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Regardless of the nearly daily headlines of this sort, there are conservatives who will INSIST that this isn’t happening at their child’s government school. Nope! Not a their child’s “blue ribbon” school. /s
I dated a man ( then in his mid-twenties) whose first sexual encounter was with his high school psychologist. He was about 14 at the time. He was deeply ashamed about the encounter and it was a very uncomfortable memory for him.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.