Judge: No credible evidence underage sex always harmful

Witchita Eagle ^ | 2/9/6 | ROXANA HEGEMAN

[Politicalmom]

When people's life expectancy was about 40 or a little more, early marriage was necessary. My 12 year old son still plays with Legos.

[wouldntbprudent]

I stand corrected, having read the article too quickly.

You are both right. Thanks for the nudge.

[annelizly]

Boy...if we believed this law then my grandparents were criminals and my mother shouldn't have even been made!
(my grandmother was 13 and married to my grandfather)

[mlc9852]

Very excellent point!

[unlearner]

I think the judge is right about age of consent, but wrong about his right to veto laws based on subjective opinion. The legislature can act on its opinion whether it is substantiated by research or not. They are elected to represent the people. The judge's job is to make sure the law is enforced.

Modern age of consent laws came about when Christians were duped into going along with feminists who pushed for them (in the late eighteen hundreds). They claimed that there was an epidemic of young girls being taken advantage of by older men, and that the laws were necessary to stop this.

There is no age at which it is morally acceptable to consent to sex outside of marriage. And there is nothing morally wrong with someone under eighteen getting married with parental consent.

[doc30]

it is a crime for minors under 16 to have sex

This is the stupidest law I've ever heard. If that is indeed the case, then easily half of the teenagers in Kansas are felons and, quite likely, the lawmakers who voted for this bill! Minors with an adult is one thing, but two kids making out is a criminal offense? I don't agree with underage sex, but it happens and it isn't going to stop no matter how many laws you pass.

[ThisLittleLightofMine]

I would be more worried about the 30 known STD's. Parents need to educate their children about the real dangers of sex outside of marriage.

[Wurlitzer]

""If you tell me because it is illegal - I reject that." I think this is a definitive quote from an activist judge. I couldn't be more clear. This jurist is not interested in applying the law, but in creating or ignoring it. "

You've got that right TChris. What on earth has created millions of people with views such as this? I don't think the Founding Fathers had this in mind when they created the wall of protection around judges. Judges like this MUST be removed from the bench.

[SoFloFreeper]

CLINTON APPOINTEE

Marten, John Thomas

Born 1951 in Topeka, KS

Federal Judicial Service:
U. S. District Court, District of Kansas
Nominated by William J. Clinton on October 18, 1995, to a seat vacated by Patrick F. Kelly; Confirmed by the Senate on January 2, 1996, and received commission on January 4, 1996.

Education:
Washburn University, B.A., 1973

Washburn University School of Law, J.D., 1976

Professional Career:
Law clerk, Justice Tom Clark, Supreme Court of the United States, 1976-1977
Private practice, Omaha, Nebraska, 1977-1980
Private practice, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 1980-1981
Private practice, McPherson, Kansas, 1981-1996

Race or Ethnicity: White

Gender: Male

>Marten, John Thomas

Born 1951 in Topeka, KS

Federal Judicial Service:
U. S. District Court, District of Kansas
Nominated by William J. Clinton on October 18, 1995, to a seat vacated by Patrick F. Kelly; Confirmed by the Senate on January 2, 1996, and received commission on January 4, 1996.

Education:
Washburn University, B.A., 1973

Washburn University School of Law, J.D., 1976

Professional Career:
Law clerk, Justice Tom Clark, Supreme Court of the United States, 1976-1977
Private practice, Omaha, Nebraska, 1977-1980
Private practice, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 1980-1981
Private practice, McPherson, Kansas, 1981-1996

Race or Ethnicity: White

Gender: Male

[Mr. Blonde]

I was thinking the same thing. If groping a girl could get you sent to jail a lot of teenage boys would become suicidal thinking they have nothing to live for.

[redgolum]

Was listening to a radio show on the way home last night. They had a doc on that was talking about the chemcial and phycological effects of love and sex. Basically, the hormones produced do to sex have a "bonding" effect. But the more partners you have the less powerful it is. Your brain becomes desensitized to it.

Makes a good case for waiting till marriage.

[rzeznikj at stout]

Yes and no. Yes, there should be some discretion between teachers and teens--after all, there is discretion at every juncture of the criminal justice system--including the public. And this is assuming the nature of the relationship in question is consensual.

However, if we're looking at kids, and I'm not referring to high-school age people, or in cases of harassment, then clearly there exists a moral and legal obligation to report those cases.

[GrandEagle]

I would be more worried about the 30 known STD's.
Absolutely! If memory serves me correct, the last statistic I read was that 3 out of 5 college students now has or has had an STD.
My 10 year old is very aware of the dangers. She and I talk about it all the time and I let her read the statistics and about what these diseases can do.
Cordially,
GE

[rzeznikj at stout]

This was the problem that Massachusetts faced in Eisenstadt v. Baird. The Court ended up chucking a statute requiring drugs to be issued only by licensed professionals when it struck down the ban on issuing contraceptives to single individuals.

[MineralMan]

"I was thinking the same thing. If groping a girl could get you sent to jail "

Or being groped by a girl. It works both ways. Remembering my teenage years, I seem to remember a lot of groping, all consensual.

[Owen]

Dood, you're the only one that mentioned abortion. The scenario painted is simply that sex the day before an 18th birthday rose to the notice of someone only, because a girl asked for a pregnancy test -- several months later.

If it makes you more comfortable, maybe it rose to the notice of someone because she asked that someone if it was okay for her to pray for her lover and mentioned the date they became lovers.

This has nothing to do with her wanting or not wanting an abortion. This is very strictly and narrowly a question of whether or not someone is granted discretion not to prosecute two 17 yr olds who had sex the day before their 18th birthdays.

[rzeznikj at stout]

That's a chilling statistic that not a lot of my peers still don't realize.

I'm currently a college student. And sex pervades campus like you wouldn't believe.

<>My 10 year old is very aware of the dangers. She and I talk about it all the time and I let her read the statistics and about what these diseases can do.

Excellent to hear!

[MineralMan]

"This was the problem that Massachusetts faced in Eisenstadt v. Baird. The Court ended up chucking a statute requiring drugs to be issued only by licensed professionals when it struck down the ban on issuing contraceptives to single individuals."

---

Yup. I'm old enough to remember when all condom packages were marked, "For prevention of disease only." That was in California in the early 1960s. It was a holdover from the old anti-contraception days.

As a teenager, I couldn't buy them at all until I was 21 in California. If you needed condoms, you had to find a friend over 21 to buy them for you.

Did that stop the kids in my high school from having sex? It did not. We had a number of pregnancies in my class of 106 kids. How many, I can't be sure. Some went to "stay with their aunt." Others had abortions from the doctor in town everyone knew would take care of "late periods." Others got married while still in high school. Only a couple actually had babies while single.

[D-Chivas]

I get the impression that a number of people didn't read this article. The judge is correct.

[Psycho_Bunny]

Yes...and if you read the article, that's what the judge was saying.