Kandahar said:
This will be my final post in this thread, since Kelzie and RightatNYU seem incapable of acknowledging that honest people can disagree about the role government and society should play in the sex lives of individuals. No, anyone who disagrees with them must be at best an enabler and at worst a child molestor. Therefore, I'll reiterate the main points one more time and then will not be posting here again:
Ta ta! Don't let the door hit ya on the way out.
I'm sure "honest" people can disagree with the role that the government has in the sex life of adults. However, when it comes to the sex life of children, if you think that an 8 year-old should be able to consent to sex, you support child molestation. That's all there is to it. I never said you were one. But if you support it, stand up for it. Stop crying that we are calling you names, especially when you identify with it.
Kandahar said:
1. NO ONE INVOLVED WANTS HIM PROSECUTED. Not the girl, not her family. While they may or may not be making an error in judgment, I certainly respect their wishes more than I do your rigid moral code and "uphold the law at any cost" mentality. Yes, there will certainly be cases where people should be prosecuted but are not because the alleged victims will not testify against them. This is unfortunate, but certainly much better than the government throwing its weight around and regulating every aspect of human life.
As thrilled as I am to find out that you think there is nothing wrong if a parent sells their five year-old into sex and doesn't want to prosecute the people that pay, thankfully our government takes a more realistic approach to the situation. The government prosecutes even when the parties are unwilling because it is necessary to uphold law and order.
Kandahar said:
2. THEY HAVE A CHILD. Should people who commit a crime be excused in every case just because they're depended on? Of course not. Should people who commit a crime against the person who depends on them, and who doesn't want them prosecuted, be excused? In most cases such as this, yes.
Again with the child. He raped a child, made her pregnant, and you say he shouldn't go to jail because he now has a child to support. Suppose you must say that about all rapists.
Kandahar said:
3. THEY ARE MARRIED. This point alone should end the debate, as the marriage is perfectly legal.
A lot of things have been legal that aren't right. Slavery come to mind.
Kandahar said:
4. NOWHERE ELSE IN THE WORLD IS THIS CONSIDERED TABOO. I suppose you can believe that American/Canadian morality is 100% right and everywhere else is 100% wrong if you want to, but you won't find this attitude of revulsion toward this concept anywhere else. In Western Europe, this is generally frowned upon but there wouldn't be this kind of outrage. In Eastern Europe, this may be viewed with curiosity but is generally accepted. In Japan, Latin America, India, and probably many other places, it is the norm for young adolescents to have sex with older people. You can discuss the morality of this all you like (I choose not to do so), but stop pretending that your morality is so obviously and self-evidently right for every human being on the planet that anyone who acts against it is a horrible human being who needs to be locked in prison.
I really don't believe this at all. In fact, if you could provide an opinion poll from the various world regions on this subject, I would appreciate it. Otherwise, stop acting like the world is your personal best friend, and you know what everyone is going to say on the subject.
Other countries practice FGM, don't allow women to vote, and have problems with selling children into slavery. You'll forgive me if I don't follow their morals.
Kandahar said:
That's all I have to say on this subject. Hopefully you two (RightatNYU and Kelzie) will overcome your self-righteousness one of these days.
"Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."
A bible quote isn't going to convince me that you're right. Especially when it's taken way out of context.