Skip to comments.
Kansas Law on Gay Sex by Teenagers Is Overturned
The New York Times ^
| 10/22/2005
| Adam Liptak
Posted on 10/21/2005 11:04:48 PM PDT by NapkinUser
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-97 next last
To: NapkinUser
""He's spent an extra four years and five months in jail only because he's gay,"
Waaahhhh comes to mind. That and the need for Americans to file suit against the ACLU.
2
posted on
10/21/2005 11:12:59 PM PDT
by
sageb1
(This is the Final Crusade. There are only 2 sides. Pick one.)
To: sageb1
file suit for what? Sorry I'm so dense but maybe you can explain. I like the idea so far.
3
posted on
10/21/2005 11:16:21 PM PDT
by
Khepera
(Do not remove by penalty of law!)
To: NapkinUser
"a boy just shy of 15 "
1. That's another way to say an adult had sex with a 14 year old. That deserves a long sentence.
2. The law should be blind to gender - child molestation is child molestation.
3. #2 does not apply to marriage which is a special case - the government has no business encouraging gay marriage... or encouraging gay anything.
4
posted on
10/21/2005 11:16:39 PM PDT
by
gondramB
To: NapkinUser
17 years? Sorry, at the risk of attracting the mirth of everyone and sounding like a bleeding liberal.... that sounds harsh - even taliban like.
You wouldn't get 17 years for rape with violence or murder over here (you should but thats not the issue).
Flame away! /[Firepants on]
5
posted on
10/21/2005 11:17:30 PM PDT
by
Brit_Guy
To: sageb1
So instead of putting a heterosexual away longer for child molestation, we just lessen charges to someone that is gay?
No wonder our kids are continuously in danger from pedophiles let out of jail. I remember being 18 and I knew that if I did anything with a 14 y.o. then I was Fk'd to say the least.
6
posted on
10/21/2005 11:17:46 PM PDT
by
md2576
(Don't be such a Shehan Hugger!)
To: Brit_Guy
I detest homosexuality, but I have to agree with you on this one.
7
posted on
10/21/2005 11:20:44 PM PDT
by
calrighty
( Terrorists are like cockroaches . Kill em all soon!!)
To: NapkinUser
Democrats Gone Wild
8
posted on
10/21/2005 11:23:14 PM PDT
by
Jeff Chandler
(Peace Begins in the Womb)
To: NapkinUser
If the judge wants everything equal than the 18 year old should be tried for rape of a minor.
9
posted on
10/21/2005 11:25:57 PM PDT
by
taxesareforever
(Government is running amuck)
To: Brit_Guy
You like in England (I'm guessing from your screen name,) and England is weak on crime.
10
posted on
10/21/2005 11:27:49 PM PDT
by
NapkinUser
("It is a damn poor mind indeed which can think of only one way to spell a word." -Andrew Jackson)
To: NapkinUser
Sounds like they need to UP the penalty for those convicted of Heterosexual child abuse to 17 years to make it fair.
11
posted on
10/21/2005 11:29:28 PM PDT
by
msnimje
(The "Soft Bigotry of Low Expectations" makes its way to Supreme Court nominations.)
To: taxesareforever
That's exactly right. This guy should be in jail for statutory rape.
12
posted on
10/21/2005 11:30:03 PM PDT
by
NapkinUser
("It is a damn poor mind indeed which can think of only one way to spell a word." -Andrew Jackson)
To: NapkinUser
"He's spent an extra four years and five months in jail only because he's gay," And he's complaining?
13
posted on
10/21/2005 11:30:28 PM PDT
by
Redcloak
(We'll raise up our glasses against evil forces singin' "whiskey for my men and beer for my horses!")
To: NapkinUser
Matthew R. Limon had just turned 18 when he had consensual oral sex with a boy just shy of 15 at a Kansas school in 2000 This just makes it worse..
14
posted on
10/21/2005 11:32:54 PM PDT
by
N3WBI3
(If SCO wants to go fishing they should buy a permit and find a lake like the rest of us..)
To: md2576
I like your point.
In this case, given the adult vs. minor issues, it is ok to require *equal* punishment whether you are gay or heterosexual. But, the punishment should be the highest common neumerator, and not the least common denominator.
To: NapkinUser
Yesterday, the Kansas Supreme Court ruled that the starkly different penalties violated the federal Constitution's equal protection clause. It said the state's "Romeo and Juliet" statute, which limits the punishment that can be imposed on older teenagers who have sex with younger ones, but only if they are of the opposite sex, must also apply to teenagers who engage in homosexual sex. The court is entirely right in this ruling. Of course those with an agenda will say the court was activist, must be impeached, the ACLU is to blame, special rights, homosexual agenda, blah, blah.
Equal protection under law either means something or it means nothing. Now, where are the hypocrites here who scream about "hate crime" statutes and yet would support this law targeting homosexuals?
16
posted on
10/22/2005 12:26:10 AM PDT
by
newzjunkey
(CA: Stop union theft for political agendas with YES on Prop 75! Prolife? YES on Prop 73!)
To: msnimje
Sounds like they need to UP the penalty for those convicted of Heterosexual child abuse to 17 years to make it fair. Hey, that works too. It won't have any support, however. Unfortunately, folks have blinders on as soon as they see "homosexual" and who think "lucky kid" in a nation where many people can't see female teachers preying on male students as molestation or rape. Check one of those stories on FR sometime and you'll see all manner of lewd-minded "attaboy" remarks.
17
posted on
10/22/2005 12:31:49 AM PDT
by
newzjunkey
(CA: Stop union theft for political agendas with YES on Prop 75! Prolife? YES on Prop 73!)
To: gondramB
You might think it deserves a long sentence, I might think that too, but the fact of the matter is Kansas law does not see it that way in these circumstances. How you feel doesn't matter. Don't like the Romeo-Juliet provision? Change the law.
The law should be gender blind. Shouldn't matter if a teacher is female and her victim is a male student, or they're both the same gender. The court recognizes this, imho, and that's why the provision was struck.
The third point has no relevance.
The core issue is should the same "consensual" activity, excluding GENDERS, be worth both 15 months and 204 months in prison? No, of course not. Those sentences aren't even close to being comparable.
Heterosexuals get a 93% discount on the homosexual's sentence for the same activity, same ages, same question of consent.
The Kansas Supreme Court is entirely correct in recognizing unequal treatment under law.
18
posted on
10/22/2005 12:42:01 AM PDT
by
newzjunkey
(CA: Stop union theft for political agendas with YES on Prop 75! Prolife? YES on Prop 73!)
To: newzjunkey
A narrow point. In New York [No Mordor, unfortunately], a 14 year old can't "consent" by reason of age, so unless Kansas' age of consent is lower, the sexual act could not be consentual. And since vaginal intercourse wasn't the conduct, it would be sodomy, not "rape", since some have used the term. Same degree, same penalties. And yes, the penalties should be increased [almost said 'stiffer', don't go there]regardless of the genders of the participants. It was a non-consensual act, at least in my state.
19
posted on
10/22/2005 12:56:31 AM PDT
by
PzLdr
("The Emperor is not as forgiving as I am" - Darth Vader)
To: newzjunkey
"The court is entirely right in this ruling. Of course those with an agenda will say the court was activist, must be impeached, the ACLU is to blame, special rights, homosexual agenda, blah, blah."You are the first intelligent shining light on this thread that I have read. I am adamantly opposed to the gay lifestyle, however, this situation is gay/straight neutral, or should be legally. If 18/14 straight sex is 15 mo., 18/14 homo sex should be 15 mo.
20
posted on
10/22/2005 12:59:25 AM PDT
by
de Buillion
(Perspective: 1880 dead Heroes in 3 yr vs. 3589 abortions EVERY DAY , 1999, USA.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-97 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