Child brides vs Rape

[Kandahar]

I mean an over/under limitation like they have in most states, with a year lag on either side.

Ex.

15/15 = okay

16/16 = okay

17/17 = okay

17/18 = okay

17/19 = okay

17/20 = okay

16/19 = okay

16/20 = not okay

15/19 = not okay

That doesn't make sense. The issue with age of consent laws should be whether or not the minor is capable of consent, not whether or not you consider a relationship of a large age difference to be moral or immoral.

If a 15 year old is legally capable of consent with another 15-year-old, they are also capable of consent with a 22-year-old. Any other standard would be no different than making sex between a 25/40 illegal, as it is just your personal judgment on the morality of such relationships.

 

[RightinNYC]

That doesn't make sense. The issue with age of consent laws should be whether or not the minor is capable of consent, not whether or not you consider a relationship of a large age difference to be moral or immoral.

If a 15 year old is legally capable of consent with another 15-year-old, they are also capable of consent with a 22-year-old. Any other standard would be no different than making sex between a 25/40 illegal, as it is just your personal judgment on the morality of such relationships.

Well, yea, that's my personal judgement, along with the vast majority of the states in the union. The whole point is that if it's two people of similar age, the odds of someone being taken advantage of are greatly decreased.

So what's your take on it? Is a 13 year old capable of consenting with a 13 year old, if they're both out of puberty? So in that case, a 13 year old iscapable of consenting with a 55 year old, right?

And the reason why your whole 25/40 argument is a straw man is because both of those people are legal adults, legally able to enter into consentual relationships. People under 18 are not able to legally enter into consentual relationships. The reason why 15/15 is okay is because neither one of them is an adult, or can consent legally. The reason why 15/22 is not okay is because one of them IS an adult, and the other cannot consent.

 

[RightinNYC]

Hey whats wrong if I wanted to have sex with a MILF? I was 17 and she was 25. Is that wrong?

Nope. 17 is legal for anything over/under.

In NY at least.

www.ageofconsent.com is your best friend.

 

[RightinNYC]

Much better. I knew that was a strange thing for you to say.

Yea, I'm not looking to throw my ass into jail either...:lol:

 

[mistermain]

Because if you'd ever known any adolescent who dated an older person (and were not taken advantage of), you'd know that they tend to have fond memories, just like anyone else would of their first love. I did some graduate work in psychology; it's almost unheard of for someone to grow up with fond memories and then suddenly "realize" that it's all wrong and retroactively be traumatized, as you seem to be implying. Obviously you have not "seen it a million times," or you'd have some clue what you were talking about.

Your view is extremely ethnocentric and closed-minded. The idea that it's disgusting and morally wrong for anyone 17 or under to have sex with anyone 18 or older, regardless of the circumstances, is very much a 21st century American view. Nowhere else in the world (except maybe Canada) would you encounter this kind of taboo even today.

My wife was actually in a relationship like this, so I know it very well, and she is not the only person I have known like this.

I never said it's disgusting for a 17 year old to have sex with an 18 year old. It is disgusting for a 22 year old to have sex with a 14 year old. That is the topic we are discussing. You may have done some graduate work in psychology but you failed to learn how to read and comprehend while in college.

 

[SKILMATIC]

My wife was actually in a relationship like this, so I know it very well, and she is not the only person I have known like this.

I never said it's disgusting for a 17 year old to have sex with an 18 year old. It is disgusting for a 22 year old to have sex with a 14 year old. That is the topic we are discussing. You may have done some graduate work in psychology but you failed to learn how to read and comprehend while in college.

AS most people fail to learn. Dont worry he isnt the only one who cant do that.

 

[shuamort]

Nice example wackjob.

Mod Note

This thread is clipping along, but let's keep the personal attacks at the posters out of it. Many thanks!


/Mod Note

 

[mixedmedia]

Isn't the age of consent for marriage variable in all 50 states? Meaning that the legal age is 18, unless there is the consent of one or both parents or a court order. Or if the bride is pregnant. I believe this is so, although the age of consent link didn't work for me.

And if this is so, doesn't it also mean the age of sexual consent is obviously variable and predicated on circumstances as well?

That's not to say that I think 14 year olds should be running off to get married willy nilly. If I had my druthers, the age of consent for marriage would be 30, lol. I just think that this dithering around in the lives of a married couple with a baby isn't a very constructive use of law enforcement time.

 

[RightinNYC]

Isn't the age of consent for marriage variable in all 50 states? Meaning that the legal age is 18, unless there is the consent of one or both parents or a court order. Or if the bride is pregnant. I believe this is so, although the age of consent link didn't work for me.

And if this is so, doesn't it also mean the age of sexual consent is obviously variable and predicated on circumstances as well?

That's not to say that I think 14 year olds should be running off to get married willy nilly. If I had my druthers, the age of consent for marriage would be 30, lol. I just think that this dithering around in the lives of a married couple with a baby isn't a very constructive use of law enforcement time.

The reason this is a court case is because in the state they both reside in, they broke the law. They crossed state lines to get married in Kansas, where it was legal marriage. Back home, its rape.

 

[Elektra]

14 year olds shouldn't be allowed to marry.Then this problem wouldn't even arise.It's ridiculous to allow marriage but if you "perform" marriage your husband gets charged.

 

[mixedmedia]

The reason this is a court case is because in the state they both reside in, they broke the law. They crossed state lines to get married in Kansas, where it was legal marriage. Back home, its rape.

It is statutory rape.
I understand why it is a court case but law enforcement turns a blind eye to victimless crimes all the time. This smacks of a showcase arrest.

 

[RightinNYC]

It is statutory rape.
I understand why it is a court case but law enforcement turns a blind eye to victimless crimes all the time. This smacks of a showcase arrest.

While law enforcement might turn a blind eye to most victimless crimes, I don't think a 21 year old sleeping with a 13 year old is victimless, or should be tolerated. Maybe that's just me.

And I thank god it's a showcase arrest, because of the publicity, the Gov of kansas is scrambling to change their law so that this never happens again.

 

[steen]

Right now, Kansas is working on changing their laws to 18, to be more in line with other states.

And why wasn't it to begin with? As I said, child brides and creationism, Kansas itself is a wackjob.

 

[mixedmedia]

So I suppose in this case an abortion or an unwed teenage mother are preferable to marriage, parenthood and commitment. At least they tried to do the right thing. They didn't have to get married. Even though sexual activity at 14 is not something I endorse personally, it is a choice that 14 year old girls are making every day. Why kid ourselves? I would say that this particular girl is lucky that the man stuck around and wanted to make something out of a difficult situation. He is only 22 years old after all! 22 years of age isn't necessarily a qualifier of maturity in a young man, in case no one has noticed. Nevertheless, I am sure that once the state is done with him, they will pick up right where they left off. C'est la vie.

 

[RightinNYC]

So I suppose in this case an abortion or an unwed teenage mother are preferable to marriage, parenthood and commitment. At least they tried to do the right thing. They didn't have to get married. Even though sexual activity at 14 is not something I endorse personally, it is a choice that 14 year old girls are making every day. Why kid ourselves? I would say that this particular girl is lucky that the man stuck around and wanted to make something out of a difficult situation. He is only 22 years old after all! 22 years of age isn't necessarily a qualifier of maturity in a young man, in case no one has noticed. Nevertheless, I am sure that once the state is done with him, they will pick up right where they left off. C'est la vie.

And I'm sure that lots of people break the law to try to do the right thing. I mean, if I were the sole provide for my family, and I needed to pay for my families health care, and I robbed a bank, that'd be okay right? And even if I didn't succeed, they shouldn't try me for attempted robbery because all that would do is hurt my family, right?

 

[gdalton]

And I'm sure that lots of people break the law to try to do the right thing. I mean, if I were the sole provide for my family, and I needed to pay for my families health care, and I robbed a bank, that'd be okay right? And even if I didn't succeed, they shouldn't try me for attempted robbery because all that would do is hurt my family, right?

Now you’re just being silly, right?

The couple has a child. So who is more important in this situation?

Should they make a case? Sure.
Should they throw the father in jail? I would say not, he is willing to take responsibility for his child so he should be given a chance to do so.
So what punishment should he get? I don't know, I agree punishment should be given just not jail time.

The law was broken and beyond moral beliefs there are still laws prohibiting sex between minors and adults, so action should be taken to uphold that law, it should rest on the judge as to how the punishment will be handled and if I had a say jail time would not be the sentence. But that is just me.

What I don’t understand is if these two were legally able to wed then how is it illegal for them to have sex?

 

[Kandahar]

And I'm sure that lots of people break the law to try to do the right thing. I mean, if I were the sole provide for my family, and I needed to pay for my families health care, and I robbed a bank, that'd be okay right? And even if I didn't succeed, they shouldn't try me for attempted robbery because all that would do is hurt my family, right?

What do you think will harm this guy's wife and child more:

A) For him to be thrown in jail against the will of everyone involved in this relationship, preventing him from earning any money and leaving a 14-year-old girl to raise a child on her own.

B) For him to have sex with his own wife, on the INCREDIBLY slim (nonexistent, if you ask me) possibility that she may suddenly "realize" one day that she was "exploited" and be retroactively traumatized.

 

[mixedmedia]

And I'm sure that lots of people break the law to try to do the right thing. I mean, if I were the sole provide for my family, and I needed to pay for my families health care, and I robbed a bank, that'd be okay right? And even if I didn't succeed, they shouldn't try me for attempted robbery because all that would do is hurt my family, right?

Here we are, compassionate conservatism on display. And your analogy is really lame. The only reason they got married was to do the right thing. They did not go out and steal something from another person or do any other wrong against another person. They could just as easily have simply lived together without rousing undue suspicion. She could have had an abortion. He could have dumped her and left town. Perhaps it was important to them to be married and have this child. Maybe they truly love each other and their child. Maybe, just maybe they were even happy.

Again, I will say that I don't think 14 year olds getting pregnant and married is a good idea, but I certainly find their way of handling this situation to be a hell of a lot more responsible and dignified than it could have been.

I understand that a law has been broken. I've also been on the planet long enough to know that it's very likely these two are far from the first who have skirted this particular law in this same fashion. I don't understand why you must be so hard-hearted and dismissive.

 

[mistermain]

What do you think will harm this guy's wife and child more:

A) For him to be thrown in jail against the will of everyone involved in this relationship, preventing him from earning any money and leaving a 14-year-old girl to raise a child on her own.

B) For him to have sex with his own wife, on the INCREDIBLY slim (nonexistent, if you ask me) possibility that she may suddenly "realize" one day that she was "exploited" and be retroactively traumatized.

She wasn't "exploited." She was molested, big difference. Even if Kansas doesn't think so, the state they live in does.

 

[RightinNYC]

Now you’re just being silly, right?

The couple has a child. So who is more important in this situation?

Should they make a case? Sure.
Should they throw the father in jail? I would say not, he is willing to take responsibility for his child so he should be given a chance to do so.
So what punishment should he get? I don't know, I agree punishment should be given just not jail time.

The law was broken and beyond moral beliefs there are still laws prohibiting sex between minors and adults, so action should be taken to uphold that law, it should rest on the judge as to how the punishment will be handled and if I had a say jail time would not be the sentence. But that is just me.

What I don’t understand is if these two were legally able to wed then how is it illegal for them to have sex?

Here's how it happened.

They live in Nebraska, where he committed statutory rape. She got pregnant. They went to Kansas, where you can marry as young as 12 with parental consent. They got married, and came back to Nebraska.

I'm not saying they should necessarily throw the father in jail either, but do you honestly think that simply because she got pregnant, that he should get off scot free? What if she didn't get pregnant? I don't think anyone here would be opposed to throwing him in jail then, so why let him off simply because they were too stupid to use protection?

If I were the Judge in this case, I'd probably fine him, give him probation for a number of years, and a suspended jail sentence predicated on their marriage remaining intact. Just like people shouldn't be able to use marriage as a tool to get citzenship, it shouldn't be a get out of jail free card either.

 

[RightinNYC]

What do you think will harm this guy's wife and child more:

A) For him to be thrown in jail against the will of everyone involved in this relationship, preventing him from earning any money and leaving a 14-year-old girl to raise a child on her own.

B) For him to have sex with his own wife, on the INCREDIBLY slim (nonexistent, if you ask me) possibility that she may suddenly "realize" one day that she was "exploited" and be retroactively traumatized.

You know what harmed her most? Having a 21 year old sleep with her when she was 13 (or 12). So, are you proposing that simply because he married her (crossing state boundaries to do so because their own state declared it illegal) that he should be freed of all charges? Do you realize what precedent that will set?

Sure, it's okay to molest 12 year olds, as long as you make sure to not use a condom so they get pregnant, and make their parents decide that having her marry you would ruin her life less than having a child on her own at 14.

 

[RightinNYC]

Here we are, compassionate conservatism on display. And your analogy is really lame. The only reason they got married was to do the right thing. They did not go out and steal something from another person or do any other wrong against another person. They could just as easily have simply lived together without rousing undue suspicion. She could have had an abortion. He could have dumped her and left town. Perhaps it was important to them to be married and have this child. Maybe they truly love each other and their child. Maybe, just maybe they were even happy.

Again, I will say that I don't think 14 year olds getting pregnant and married is a good idea, but I certainly find their way of handling this situation to be a hell of a lot more responsible and dignified than it could have been.

I understand that a law has been broken. I've also been on the planet long enough to know that it's very likely these two are far from the first who have skirted this particular law in this same fashion. I don't understand why you must be so hard-hearted and dismissive.

Really? Any more examples of something this drastic you want to share?

You call me hard hearted?

Let's pretend that she didn't get pregnant, and as a result, they didn't get married.

So if a 21 year old was sleeping with a 13 year old, you'd have no problem with that? You'd support him being prosecuted and going to jail, right?

So simply because he got her knocked up, and as a result, her parents decided to let her get married, he should be free of all charges?

Fine, I guess that makes me hard hearted. The way I see it, it makes you irrational.

 

[mixedmedia]

Really? Any more examples of something this drastic you want to share?

You call me hard hearted?

Let's pretend that she didn't get pregnant, and as a result, they didn't get married.

So if a 21 year old was sleeping with a 13 year old, you'd have no problem with that? You'd support him being prosecuted and going to jail, right?

So simply because he got her knocked up, and as a result, her parents decided to let her get married, he should be free of all charges?

Fine, I guess that makes me hard hearted. The way I see it, it makes you irrational.

Yes, I call you hard-hearted. You use your "values" as an iron fist without the capacity for individual consideration of the foibles and shortcomings of your fellow man. It's a trait you see a lot these days.

I have admitted that I don't approve of a 14 year old girl getting married. I have admitted that her husband violated the law. The exception I am taking is at your outright condemnation of someone based solely on the little bit of information that has been shared on this thread. Regardless of anyone's opinion contributing to this thread or these people that you don't even know, you have the moral authority and insight to say exactly what should happen in this situation because your "values" are absolute.

My take from the beginning of this thread has been that in the scheme of things, what has happened here is not something for people to get so bent out of shape about. Conservative Americans need to calm the hell down and stop looking for things in the lives of ordinary people to fuel their need for outrage. Not so long ago, not long ago at all, a relationship such as this one would have been acceptable. Maybe viewed as curious, but not as a crime. Thus we have two states, side by side, with widely varying laws on its acceptability. We don't even have absolute views on it from state to state.

Fine, he has broken the law. Fine him, give him probation, whatever, but stop using the sorry circumstances of someone else's life to sell your narrow moral values. I know I'm not buying.

 

[RightinNYC]

I have admitted that I don't approve of a 14 year old girl getting married. I have admitted that her husband violated the law.

So what are we disagreeing about? He broke the law, he should be punished. Period.

Fine, he has broken the law. Fine him, give him probation, whatever, but stop using the sorry circumstances of someone else's life to sell your narrow moral values. I know I'm not buying.

I really, truly, couldn't care less if you "buy my morals." I'm curious, what morals might those be exactly? All I've said on this thread is that I find the actions of this child molester reprehensive, and that he should be punished for it. Somehow, from that, you've deduced my greater moral stance on all the issues? Sounds like you took a prepacked argument and are dishing it out undiscerningly...

(I'll ignore your tired rhetoric about how conservatives are trying to force their morals on the country, or whatever other crap you rambled about.)

 

[Kandahar]

You know what harmed her most? Having a 21 year old sleep with her when she was 13 (or 12).

Perhaps you can explain exactly HOW that is inherently harmful, as I'm sure it would come as a surprise to the billions of people throughout history (and the world today) who have done exactly that and weren't traumatized. And remember to put aside the fact that she got pregnant, since the age of the man is irrelevant to that.

So, are you proposing that simply because he married her (crossing state boundaries to do so because their own state declared it illegal) that he should be freed of all charges?

Um, yes.

Do you realize what precedent that will set?

Do you realize what precedent it sets when you allow the government to micromanage the sex lives of its citizens...of a MARRIED COUPLE no less?

Sure, it's okay to molest 12 year olds, as long as you make sure to not use a condom so they get pregnant, and make their parents decide that having her marry you would ruin her life less than having a child on her own at 14.

Since you seem to know all the details, right down to how exactly it happened and why they got married, I can only conclude that you are the man in this story. Either that or you're a self-righteous blowhard.