Posted on 01/13/2009 3:59:22 PM PST by Sopater
But all the supreme court did in this case was decide that in the case of a willing 18 year old student, it's not criminal.
Those who don’t know would be amazed at the rules teachers had to adhere to in the old days—in many instances, they could be fired just for getting married—let alone for having extramarital sex, let alone with a student!
They often lived in the homes of their students' parents, and they'd better not be seen with an MAAAAAN!
/bingo
Exactly!
It was criminal (teacher student relations), it was not a case of statutory rape. The same would hold if she had been 16.
The way the law was written identified it as being with a “minor”. Age of consent being 16, the age of majority there is 16.
“18=adult” had nothing to do with the decision.
And the tradition continues, female gym teachers are never seen with a man.
So? Just becuase 18 is the age for some things doesn’t mean it should be for all things.
It’s the legal age of majority where they should by fully emancipated, not haphazardly.
HAHAHAHA! The most feminine woman in our high school is a PE teacher...but, otherwise, you’re right!
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.