RE: Laws against underage sex need to have more realistic exemptions.
May 19, 2013 at 10:51 am
(This post was last modified: May 19, 2013 at 11:29 am by Tiberius.)
(May 18, 2013 at 11:04 pm)cratehorus Wrote: there has too be a line somewhere....a 17 year old can't have sex with a 3 year old, and a 50 year old (as you mentioned) shouldn't have sex with a 15 year old so where is the line???Common sense should be the line, that was my point. It's clear that a 3 year old can't consent, so obviously having sex with a 3 year old should be a crime. It's also clear that a 15 year old can be quite mature and capable of making decisions about sex, especially if they are in a relationship with someone, and even more so if the person they are with is around their own age.
Quote:there's also the matter of this "criminal" being the "victim" of a false accusation, let's say they broke up at one point couldn't the 15 year old hold this 18 year old accountable for rape after they break up just as a matter of spite??? what would hold up in court? the testimony of the 15 year old perhaps.........are love notes now considered evidence? if so then there are plenty of teens in relationships with middle aged men (and women) who have such love notes and wouldn't be considered rapists????One would hope that justice is carried out properly in these situations, and it isn't just based on an accusation. I mean, anyone can make a rape claim against an ex, but we don't stop having sex with people just because one day they may turn around and claim it was a rape. No, we rely on the justice system to get it right and not take an accusation as proof.
(May 18, 2013 at 11:18 pm)Minimalist Wrote: Whew....be careful what you wish for, Divi Tiberio.I never said they could, but judgement is not always in the hands of a judge.
http://www.democraticdiva.com/2012/09/08...xceptions/
Quote:Coconino County Superior Court Judge Jacqueline Hatch became a viral internet sensation the other day when the news got out that she told the victim of a drunk groper that she shared part of the blame for the attack perpetrated against her. And apparently the judge thinks bars and pretty much all other public spaces should be total sausage fests after 10 pm.
That robe ( or wig on your side of the pond ) does not mean they can be trusted.
(May 19, 2013 at 7:16 am)ideologue08 Wrote: What a malicious, vicious sexual predator, and to think that she could have got away with it because of her sexuality.How on earth is she a sexual predator? You have no evidence of that.
