Skip to comments.
Local Dad Shocked By Sex Charges Against Him
(gave daughter condoms)
clickondetroit.com ^
Posted on 02/19/2004 8:40:09 AM PST by chance33_98
Local Dad Shocked By Sex Charges Against Him
Man Must Register As Sex Offender
POSTED: 6:45 pm EST February 18, 2004 UPDATED: 8:38 pm EST February 18, 2004
A man who police say provided condoms for his daughter to have sex appeared in court for a preliminary hearing Wednesday, Local 4 reported.
Mike Schrake (pictured, left) told Local 4 he was only trying to protect his 15-year-old daughter when he contacted police after discovering the man his daughter was having sex with lied about his age.
"The father believed that the suspect was only 18 years old having sex with his 15-year-old daughter. He then found out that the suspect was actually 20 years old," said Lt. Dan Kolke of the Fraser Police Department.
The teen's father went to Fraser police to file a complaint against Ronald Gossage (pictured, below), but police were apparently just as concerned with the fact that he was letting his teenage daughter have sex at all.
"You feel like you're doing the right thing. They seem more interested in jailing me than the other guy," said Schrake.
Police say Schrake allowed Gossage to sleep in the same bed as his daughter and also provided them with condoms.
But Schrake denied those allegations. He said he let Gossage stay at his house in the fall of 2003, but never consented to him having sex with his daughter.
"I gave my daughter condoms back in the summer before she even knew this guy, when I found out she was no longer a virgin since age of 14," said Schrake.
Schrake pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor, but was reportedly still having difficulty dealing with the situation because he is not permitted to see his three children.
Police say as a part of the plea agreement, Schrake must register as a sex offender. He must also continue to go through the court system so he can move back in with his family, the station reported.
Gossage, who faces three counts of criminal sexual conduct in the third degree, is expected to appear in circuit court in March.
Local 4 learned that in the state of Michigan, sex is a crime if both consenting parties aren't at least 17 years old.
TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; US: Michigan
KEYWORDS: sexoffenders
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-94 next last
To: stuartcr
I don't know. Truly? Objectively?
If you want to maintain your agnosticism regarding objective truth, then you'd have to respond, "I don't know that either," and so on to infinity. But an infinite regress can never be actually completed, so in effect, no statement is ever completed and, therefore, no statement is actually made.
The only way to "refute" (actually, to avoid) the idea of objective truth is to remain silent (as Aristotle said).
You can't escape truth because God is Truth, eternal Truth.
61
posted on
02/20/2004 8:29:30 AM PST
by
Aquinasfan
(Isaiah 22:22, Rev 3:7, Mat 16:19)
To: Aquinasfan
No, I really don't have to respond the way you say.
62
posted on
02/20/2004 9:08:15 AM PST
by
stuartcr
To: stuartcr
No, I really don't have to respond the way you say. Explain why.
The reason why most people object to the idea of objective truth is because they recognize that they would have to recognize an objective moral law, a law which conflicts with certain behaviors, usually sexual sins.
63
posted on
02/20/2004 10:15:39 AM PST
by
Aquinasfan
(Isaiah 22:22, Rev 3:7, Mat 16:19)
To: zook
Let's not forget that she could probably get all the contraceptive help she needed free and confidentially at school without her parents ever knowing. Her parents would have to approve in writing if they wanted her to have access to tylenol. But contraception? That's private. If it were done confidentially at school, people would applaud the girl's responsibility. Which is just another way of freeing our teens from the pesky problem of parental interference influence. Nanny state wins either way. (But dad should think carefully about the 18 yr old boyfriend at her age.)
To: Aquinasfan
If you will explain what you mean by God is the eternal truth, I will try to answer better.
65
posted on
02/20/2004 10:51:14 AM PST
by
stuartcr
To: chance33_98
......but never consented to him having sex with his daughter.
Hey Numbnut dad...the condoms ARE the consent....idiot.
66
posted on
02/20/2004 10:54:14 AM PST
by
Ann Archy
(Abortion: The Human Sacrifice to the god of Convenience.)
To: zook
Pills are consent also...what kind of parents get their daughters birth control pills?? LOUSY ONES.
67
posted on
02/20/2004 10:55:32 AM PST
by
Ann Archy
(Abortion: The Human Sacrifice to the god of Convenience.)
To: highnoon
bttt
To: Ann Archy
For some parents, allowing a daughter access to birth control may be the only realistic way to prevent pregnancy; for example, in cases where they find out that their, oh, let's say 16 year old daughter is already sexually active.
69
posted on
02/20/2004 11:08:32 AM PST
by
zook
To: zook
They haven't given her a good foundation...a religious foundation and probably haven't set a good example.....probably talked about sexual escapades in front of their kids. Also probably haven't prayed either.
70
posted on
02/20/2004 11:12:39 AM PST
by
Ann Archy
(Abortion: The Human Sacrifice to the god of Convenience.)
To: stuartcr
If you will explain what you mean by God is the eternal truth, I will try to answer better. God is Being, Good, True, Beautiful and One. These are the five transcendentals, convertible terms which mean the same thing (God). They are simply different ways in which aspects of His nature are apprehended by us.
I thought you were objecting to my criticism of your universal skepticism, specifically, the problem of an infinite regress of skeptical statements. I'd like to know how you think this problem can be overcome.
71
posted on
02/20/2004 11:15:41 AM PST
by
Aquinasfan
(Isaiah 22:22, Rev 3:7, Mat 16:19)
To: chance33_98
This whole discussion is just sad. We've lost our way as a culture.
First of all, fathers should protect their daughters. That includes doing all in their power to encourage their virginity. Believe me, as a young girl, I looked long and far for those in my circle to give me a reason to remain a virgin. It seemed like everyone, including the older generation, considered me backward if I was pure after the age of 15. Girls need to know they're still normal if they remain virgins. This starts with the father's clearly stated expectations.
Second, there is never a "proper age" for anyone to screw your own 15 year old daughter.
Third, the schools shouldn't be giving out condoms. Although this is being done, we all know it's wrong. Using that as an excuse for parents to give their kids birth control is also wrong.
Fourth, young people should never have sex in church graveyards. Leave the poor old dead people alone.
72
posted on
02/20/2004 11:15:46 AM PST
by
keats5
(And don't you dare correct my spelling!)
To: Aquinasfan
How do you know that God is all the things you mention?
In which thread did I say I objected to anything you said?
73
posted on
02/20/2004 11:34:06 AM PST
by
stuartcr
To: stuartcr
Personally, I believe, as are most if not all moral viewpoints, that they are morally relative...not objective moral evils. Translation: "I can't even demonstrate self-judgement".
74
posted on
02/20/2004 11:46:05 AM PST
by
Ignatz
(Helping people be more like me since 1960....)
To: Ignatz
To be more accurate, you really should say...My translation
75
posted on
02/20/2004 11:59:34 AM PST
by
stuartcr
To: Aquinasfan
Clarification is needed...You say that since no statement is ever completed, no statement is ever made....please explain what my words were? The statement was made, and the knowledge that I do not know, exists...please show that it doesn't.
76
posted on
02/20/2004 12:10:06 PM PST
by
stuartcr
To: stuartcr
How do you know that God is all the things you mention? Being does not belong essentially to any compound substance, like man. At the most fundamental level, man is a composition of essence (what he is) and existence (whether he exists). All existing things participate in being, but being does not properly belong to any of them. Being itself transcends all categories. This Being that transcends all categories is God. Only in God are essence (what a thing is) and existence one.
Being is a unity. Truth, Goodness and Beauty transcend all categories and are therefore different manifestations of Being.
In which thread did I say I objected to anything you said?
Here:
No, I really don't have to respond the way you say.
You can look up the context if you feel like it.
77
posted on
02/20/2004 12:32:02 PM PST
by
Aquinasfan
(Isaiah 22:22, Rev 3:7, Mat 16:19)
To: stuartcr
Clarification is needed...You say that since no statement is ever completed, no statement is ever made....please explain what my words were? The statement was made, and the knowledge that I do not know, exists...please show that it doesn't. You: "I do not know whether truth exists."
Me: "Is that statement objectively true? In reality, do you know or not?"
If you answer that in reality (i.e. objective truth) you do not know whether truth exists, you're making a truth claim, and you've contradicted yourself.
(That in fact is what you do: "and the knowledge that I do not know, exists.")
If you answer: "I don't know" again, then I ask again, ""Is that statement objectively true? In reality, do you know or not?," etc., ad infinitum.
In this case no statement would be finished so no statement would be made.
78
posted on
02/20/2004 12:48:06 PM PST
by
Aquinasfan
(Isaiah 22:22, Rev 3:7, Mat 16:19)
To: Aquinasfan
What you say sounds very nice, but please prove it. The website proves nothing.
That was not an objection to what you said, it was a refusal to give you the answer the way I believe you wanted it.
I don't believe that logic, as we know it, can be applied to these kinds of topics. You cannot logically prove there is a God, you cannot logically define Him, neither can I...yet we both believe in God. It just comes down to faith. You happen to have accepted things that have been written over the years, and you accept them as truth...I don't, because they were written by men like you and me..men with no proof. You can put all sorts of words and quotes in your threads, but it just comes down to a belief that can't be proven or disproven.
I have to stick with my original..."I don't know'
79
posted on
02/20/2004 12:48:08 PM PST
by
stuartcr
To: Aquinasfan
Why then do you continue to ask?
80
posted on
02/20/2004 12:49:35 PM PST
by
stuartcr
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-94 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson