Posted on 08/21/2012 4:35:16 AM PDT by Kaslin
A former Texas high school teacher was convicted of multiple felonies after having sex with five 18-year-old students at her home. The conviction was a victory for the prosecution but it was a setback for the feminist movement. It was also a setback for the homosexual uncivil rights movement, which seeks unlimited authority to redefine relationships among consenting adults.
Brittni Nicole Colleps, 28, of Arlington, was found guilty of 16 counts of having an inappropriate relationship between a student and teacher. In Texas, this second-degree felony is punishable by two to 20 years in prison per count. Because none of her students sodomized her, the relationships have not yet been enshrined in the U.S. Constitution.
What makes this case difficult for some to fathom is that Colleps is Mrs. Colleps, not Miss Colleps. She is married and has multiple children. She also likes to have sex with multiple school kids at the same time. In fact, she had to turn herself in after one of the student athletes she was having sex with video recorded the encounter using a cellphone. That’s one of the disadvantages of taking on several athletes at once. It’s tough for a girl to know what all the boys in the room are doing at any given time. And it’s tough to keep track of all the electronic devices.
Police Detective Jason Houston testified at trial saying that charges were filed because, whether they are 18 or not, it's a crime for a teacher to have sex with her students. This has some feminists upset because they think it should only be a crime for a teacher to have sex with his students. They think that a woman having sexing with high school students is empowering while a man having sex with high school students is oppressive. As usual, the feminists want to do away with laws that are gender neutral. In their view, it’s the only way to end gender discrimination. It isn’t logical but it doesn’t have to be. It’s feminism so it just has to sound angry.
Feminism has a long way to go to achieve equality but at least it has accomplished one thing: it has more women pursuing careers and acting like hyper-sexualized frat boys. Some women are able to do both at once. (Insert inappropriate multi-tasking joke here).
While Brittni Colleps was at home serving a substantial portion of the boys’ track and field team, her husband was serving in the military overseas. Christopher Colleps said that he is mad at his wife, but stands by her "because `til death do us part means `til death do us part." In other words, Mr. Colleps takes marriage seriously.
Christopher Colleps testified in court that he and his wife had engaged in group sex before – also during the course of their marriage. He also testified that he was “hurt” by what his wife did with multiple high school student athletes. The moral distinction between the group sex in which he participated and the group sex in which he did not participate brings us right to the heart of the marriage debate in 21st Century America.
According to Christopher Colleps, and to homosexual rights activists, marriage is not an agreement between two people and God. It is an agreement between two or more people. The group sex Mrs. Colleps engaged in was not wrong because it violated the laws of God. It was wrong because it violated his rules. Mr. Colleps had to know of the act, approve of the act, and hopefully participate in the act for it to be okay. As long as all the adults offered full knowledge and consent, everything was okay. That is the new view of marriage. It is just whatever the humans want it to be.
The videotaped evidence at trial demonstrated that none of the participants was using a condom. The acts also occurred in a house where three young children were being raised. But remember that if Mr. Colleps had only known and approved – and gotten in on the action! -then everything would have been okay.
The defense attorney for Brittni Colleps said that Texas should not have convicted his client, adding that Texas is too conservative for its own good. He looks forward to the day that the Texas Supreme Court gets the government out of people’s bedrooms and allows consenting adults to do whatever they wish to do in their own homes.
That day has not yet come in Texas. That is good news for Texans who care about their children.
Rapist and murderers don't even get this kind of jail time. At the max she should be stripped of her teachers licenses, with no jail time!
Texas you REALLY suck on this one!
One more thing.
You stay away from other peoples kids, since we have you on record as thinking its not that bad to f*** them even if they are in your professional care.
I am not joking.
You ARE (as opposed to merely having) a problem.
This woman’s husband’s picture ought to be next to the definition of moral relativism. “What don’t you understand about ‘til death do us part’ he asks. What does he not understand about “forsake all others.” Moral relativism leads to decline and decadence. These folks are no doubt good Democrats.
18 year old boys?
not children...these ‘kids’ could just as well been fighting for you and I in the sand box.
and if the teacher was hot....these boys claimed her as a trophy to their buds.
we are turning boys into women in PC America.
The good Senator was not even thinking of THIS kind of stuff, but he was at least in the ballpark when Daniel Patrick “Moan-ahan” warned against the DUMBING DOWN of America.
P.S. It was commie lib ‘rats of his own party who ridiculed his name.
Leno said it’s another example of classroom overcrowding.
If you think the *only* thing immoral about this was the breach of the student-teacher relationship, then Mike Adams has proved his point about the rapid devolution of norms down to the level of "I wanna."
How soon until our 'betters' - the liberal elites are telling us we're 'phobes' because we won't accept 'marriage' between teachers and five or six of their students?
Where did you read that she was convicted to 20 years per student? She got 5 years in prison, total.
Which is the point. ALL teaches in Texas have a stipulation in their contract concerning a very old-fashioned concept called 'moral turpitude'.
Are you saying someone shouldn't be held to the terms of their contract? That's not very conservative of you.
------
but to give her 20 years per student is just ridiculous and outrageously over punishing!
It says TWO to 20, not automatically 20. It's very doubtful she will get that much time.
Personally, I hope she gets at least 8 to 10. A teacher having sexual relations with any student is a violation of the delegated trust of the People of Texas.
-----
Texas you REALLY suck on this one!
Your screen name implies you search for truth.
The question is, can you handle it?
LOL! Thanks for pointing that out. I was initially under the impression it was a new case.
"Loving husband" or "Number 64!"?
*barf*
but to give her 20 years per student is just ridiculous and outrageously over punishing!
She got five years, probably won’t serve one. She should have received the max
As opposed to... 
us Texans' normal suck?
Well, then... 
what about these New Hampshire Laws:
You may not tap your feet, nod your head, or in any way keep time to the music in a tavern, restaurant, or cafe.
You cannot sell the clothes you are wearing to pay off a gambling debt.
It is considered an offense to check into a hotel under an assumed name.
It is illegal to pick seaweed up off of the beach.
Any cattle that crosses state roads must be fitted with a device to gather its feces.
You may not run machinery on Sundays.
In cemeteries it is illegal to: get drunk, picnic, enter at night, and enter by one’s self if that person is younger than 10.
If a person is caught raking the beaches, picking up litter, hauling away trash, building a bench for the park, or many other kind things without a permit, he/she may be fined $150 for ”maintaining the national forest without a permit”.
On Sundays citizens may not relieve themselves while looking up.
Well, sirchtruth, it is not Sunday, but go ahead and fine me as I am looking up at you... 
while relieving myself all over your shoes--
Is not 18 a consenting adult in your world? I'm not saying I AGREE with what she did, I'm saying the LAW does not jive with the sentence. We are a nations of LAWS.
Right, that's outrageous for what happened! These were consenting adults, breach of the professional relationship should only be disciplinary in regards to her profession.
Make the max sentence revocation of her teaching license and never allow her to teach again!
It is a moral issue since the consenting age is 18 by law. Law is law for a reason because we aren't a dictatorship in this country who tries to dictate morality like they did in Britain. Ever heard of the DOC? Personally, do I think what she did was morally wrong, OF COURSE! However, the law is what matters in this case and in all cases. If we don't have LAWS to abide by and think morality trumps law for sentencing we are not America, and the idea ceases to exist.
I misspoke. the point is 2-20 for this “crime” even being a guideline for sentencing is just ridiculous!
They seem like the definition of Libertarians to me.
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.