Posted on 12/05/2004 8:29:34 AM PST by aculeus
The same people who argue that abortion is not and will not lead to infanticide. This kind of thinking presents a cogent argument for defining Thoughtcrimes.
NAMBLA wet dreams are up 32%!
Teachers to Tell Them What Their Itching Ears Want to Hear Alert!
"Paul, PAUL! Your great learning has driven you mad!"
Children under 16 are incapable of giving informed consent PERIOD.
There just is a lack of will to prosecute for statutory rape anymore. We've even got exemptions for adults who are "near" the age of their minor partners (heterosexual AND homosexual now, so much for the lie that the erradication of sodomy laws only affected consenting ADULTS).
Another soon-to-be tenured professor.
By the same reasoning one could say the use of nuclear bombs isn't that damaging by counting only the survivors.
Rather he were tethered.
As a male survivor, I can say that those victims that say it had a neutral or positive effect are saying that only as a coping mechanism
It took 40 years for me to seek help and to even start beginning to understand the depths which sexual abuse distorts your thinking. Pedophiles should be thrown into prison and NEVER see the light of day again. Pedophilia destoys the life of the victim. The manipulation, shame, and guilt of the abuse stays with you forever.
I may never overcome what it has done to me, but I can warn others.
THIS KIND OF PERVERSION MUST BE FOUGHT TO THE DEPTHS OF OUR BEINGS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The article misses the point completely.
For example, the fact that some individuals may be capable of giving informed consent prior to sixteen is probably TRUE. Likewise, there are probably a great percentage of people who are unable to give informed consent at age 17, 20, or even 35.
The laws concerning consent are not intended to reflect the age at which the typical person reaches maturity. They are intended to make possible the prosecution of sexual predators. There is no justification for introducing uncertainty into the prosecution of these criminals. Just as we arbitrarily decide how many dollars constitute "grand theft" versus "petty theft", we must likewise clearly define the crime of statutory rape.
Establishing the age of consent based upon when the typical person reaches such maturity will assure that half of such people are unprepared to make such decisions. That seems plenty loose enough to me.
If the "research" was demonstrating that 99% of twelve year olds were mature enough to make this decision, then a change in law might be justified. Instead the article doesn't even suggest that ten percent of sixteen-year-olds can make such decisions.
But when did facts ever get in the way of a liberal agenda?
Anyone who lives near Mr. Dick Yuill would be well advised to keep their children away from him lest he attempt to bring to them a "positive" experience.
Touch one of my kids and he will find himself in the middle of an experiment that proves the usefullness of the second ammendment.
The right people aren't dying.
Science, eh?
I wish I could remember the handles of all the Freepers who pooh-poohed the idea that same sex marriage would lead to the breakdown of laws agaist other practices, cause I sure would ping them to rub their noses in this.
The slide continues....
A child's life is like a piece of paper on which every passerby leaves a mark.
-Chinese proverb
Heck, I'm still trying
to get the Freepers who thought
letting women vote
wouldn't wreck the world!
Name one good thing that's happened
since 1919?!
ping
And note post #12.
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.