Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Publius

Age of consent for Columbia is irrelevent.

You cannot just go to other countries as an American and diddle little girls because they say it’s ok.

That is sexual tourism, and that is illegal.


18 posted on 04/16/2012 3:11:31 PM PDT by chris37 (Heartless.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]


To: chris37; Publius

I think Chris (Hansen) 37 just asked you if you would like to take a seat. Right over there.

LOL!!!


20 posted on 04/16/2012 3:16:48 PM PDT by allmendream (Tea Party did not send GOP to DC to negotiate the terms of our surrender to socialism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]

To: chris37
Age of consent for Columbia is irrelevent. You cannot just go to other countries as an American and diddle little girls because they say it’s ok. That is sexual tourism, and that is illegal.

Please explain. I understand that morally no adult should be having sex with kids and that no person in a position of power should be having sex with their underlings. I also know that no person should be having sex against their free will. That's easy.

Where I break from your thought is this: You are bound by the rules of whatever country you are in. If boinking camels is legal in East Crapistan, you can certainly go find yourself a date the next time you're in town. You might be ridiculed and ostracized for it, and in fact you SHOULD be, but you should not be able to be arrested. If it's legal where you do it, it's legal. Period. To have it any other way leads to disaster. We don't know the ages of these girls, it could be 6 it could be 16, or even 20. Underage is a legal term and by definition, local. Ridicule, scorn, disgust, shame, but not jail.

Sexual tourism generally refers to people travelling to foreign countries to have sex with minors that are not legally able to give consent. That would be illegal and subjuct to arrest. There could even be a law with intent factored in where it is illegal to travel to a country specifically to have sex for hire (or boink camels). In that case they should be arrested if guilty. But if a guy travelled to see the sights of some foreign land and while on vacation happened to find himself doing a drug, shooting a wild animal, boinking a camel or hiring a prostitute where it was perfectly legal to do so, there should be no legal recourse.

Gotta be careful not to fall for the "sounds good" laws. Politicians everywhere use them to stifle freedom. I think there was a case recently in California where a game warden killed an animal on an out-of-state hunt that would have been illegal if killed in California. Should CA be able to arrest and charge him? Some liberals seem to think so.

29 posted on 04/16/2012 4:08:32 PM PDT by BlueMondaySkipper (Involuntarily subsidizing the parasite class since 1981)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]

To: chris37

“That is sexual tourism, and that is illegal.”

What makes you think it is illegal ? Legality is defined by the laws of the country being visited, so if prostitution is legal for persons of that age, then there is no illegality. Visiting locales where prostitution is legal is immoral but not illegal.

In Columbia, the age of consent is 14, and it doesn’t matter what the age of consent is in the visitor’s home country, it is just the 14 that matters legally in Columbia. Otherwise visitors from Camaroon couldn’t have sex with anyone under 21, and Iranians or Kuwaitis couldn’t engage is sex at any age unless married.

It’s immoral, but it isn’t illegal.


39 posted on 04/16/2012 4:47:14 PM PDT by Kellis91789 (The ultimate result of shielding men from the effects of folly is to fill the world with fools.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]

To: chris37

“That is sexual tourism, and that is illegal.”

Right on!

America does have the right to impose its laws on all, everywhere they go, whatever they do.

Other national laws are meaningless.

Conclusion: When an AgencyPerson makes work for lawyers and assorted govt. trough feeders, beware of their “We’re protectin’ those chilrun”. justification

I suspect them more of wanting control, and an ongoing place at the feeding trough, more than an honest desire to protect children who will be sex workers whether an American or someone else hires their services.


50 posted on 04/16/2012 8:02:36 PM PDT by GladesGuru (In a society predicated upon freedom, it is necessary to examine principles."...the public interest)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson