Replies

You sure see racism everywhere.

Bull! And a number of FR members can vouch for me on that.

Messrs. jwalsh07, Southack, and Sabertooth, do I "sure see racism everywhere?" Be honest.

Race has nothing to do with this.

It has everything to do with your vitriol in this case. And this isn't the first time for you, either. You've said the same on other similar issues and you know it. I'm just man enough to pull your damned card on it.

Read your response and see how absurd it sounds.

Sure. Whatever.

My point is: leave children alone, let them have their childhood.

He's 18 and a senior. She's 15 and a freshman. Children? What the hell are they if they are not both children? You attempt to make him sound like he's middle-aged. They are high school students, and no matter how you cut it, they are children. The age of 18 does not confer adult status in maturity on anyone. It was just convenient for him to be this age in this case.

This goes for all races, ethnic groups, and religions.

Yeah. Sure.

I have absolutely no sympathy for the ACLU (white) who is fighting on behalf of NAMBLA.

Umm, so? Since this is not concerning neither the ACLU nor NAMBLA, I could care less for whom you have sympathy.

Same goes for the demented priests (white) who raped children, or the pedophiles (young or old) who are trying to lower the age of consent and present twisted rationalization on behalf of sex with children.

Again, so? This is not about priests.

"In a recent case before the state Supreme Court, lawyers for 18-year-old Marcus Dixon argued that a decade-long mandatory sentence for aggravated child molestation was cruel and unusual. The trial judge said during sentencing that his hands are tied by the Legislature insofar as the mandatory minimum."

Yes, the trial judge's hands are tied by the legislature, but that fact is irrelevant to the argument that the penalty for a high school student having consensual sex with a classmate is a "cruel" or unusual punishment.

You see, one of several problems with many judges of today is that they come from a background filled with non-thinking moral relativism backed by a legal education that emphasizes capricious case law over written statute. Filled with such mush in their heads, they can't even see that their own facts and opinions (such as highlighted above) aren't relevant to the arguments at hand.

In this case, the judge *thinks* that he/she is doing the right thing by following Georgia's written statute by enforcing stiff penalties against those who would dare have sex with a minor.

...And the judge would be right if the world existed in a vacuum, was Manichean, or was all wrapped up inside the binary rules of a computer's artificial reality.

But we humans don't live in such an environment. Real world variables actually matter. Circumstances matter. Motives matter.

Of course, if there was a rape, coercion, or manipulation then throw the book at him. There was a recent case where an 18 year old boy had gay sex with a 14 year old mental patient, and the abuser's attorneys argued that the punishment for that act was likewise "cruel," and they were likewise wrong, for instance.

But *if* the sex was consensual, then you can't just say that this 18 year old should get 10 years in jail while his 17.9 year old fellow classmate would have been legal to have the same sex with that same girl.