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

Skip to comments.

Sex at Brookline High? Ho-hum!
Boston Globe ^ | October 23, 2005 | Jeff Jacoby

Posted on 10/23/2005 9:37:44 PM PDT by lexfreedom

''BROOKLINE HIGH teens face charges of statutory rape," read the headline in Wednesday's Boston Globe. The story below reported that two 17-year-old boys at Brookline High School -- a celebrated institution whose graduates include former Governor Michael Dukakis, Red Sox general manager Theo Epstein, and CBS newsman Mike Wallace -- have been charged with statutory rape for having sex with a 15-year-old girl, a classmate who said the sex was consensual. This is the third time since February that students at the school have been accused of having sex with a minor.

The Globe story ran about 1,000 words -- roughly the length of the Page 1 report the same day on former Defense Secretary Melvin Laird's call for a gradual troop pullout from Iraq. But unlike the Vietnam-era Pentagon chief, who is almost never in the news, sex scandals involving students erupt so often they could almost justify a beat of their own.

''Scandals" is probably not the right word for them. Are you actually scandalized by news of high school kids having sex? Is anybody? Last month the National Center for Health Statistics reported that more than half of American teenagers 15 and older engage in oral sex; the story got a ton of coverage, but no one seemed terribly dismayed by the information. ''At 50 percent, we're talking about a major social norm," Claire Brindis, a professor of pediatrics at the University of California, told The Washington Post. ''It's part of kids' lives."

(Excerpt) Read more at boston.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; US: Massachusetts
KEYWORDS: davidparker; homosexualagenda; homosexuality; parentalrights
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-25 next last
But isn't all sexual behavior ''inappropriate" when you're a kid in high school? Isn't that what students really need to learn?
[Brookline Principal] Weintraub demurred. ''Well, you're talking about a specific code of morality," he said.
There is something awfully sad about a culture in which teenage sex is condoned so long as it is ''safe," while teenage smoking is denounced as categorically wrong. Sex is now a matter of health and the law, while morality is reserved for tobacco.

This is the craziness that rules in Massachusetts, and when reasonable parents like David Parker stand up to the bullying school administrators, they get arrested !

Support David Parker ! Visit:

www.davidparkerfund.org

1 posted on 10/23/2005 9:37:44 PM PDT by lexfreedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: lexfreedom

I'm surprised they're even bothering with charges. The girl's parents must have connections.


2 posted on 10/23/2005 9:47:04 PM PDT by nj26
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lexfreedom
Do they have a cafeteria?


3 posted on 10/23/2005 10:23:08 PM PDT by ApplegateRanch (Mohamophages of the world, unite!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ApplegateRanch
Sigh! Try again.

Do they have a cafeteria?

If so, some of this may help.


4 posted on 10/23/2005 10:28:58 PM PDT by ApplegateRanch (Mohamophages of the world, unite!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

pingout tomorrow.


5 posted on 10/23/2005 10:52:00 PM PDT by little jeremiah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lexfreedom

What's the news here? Sex ed is being taught in school all the way from kindergarten and parents expect something different from their children? Parents need to wake up and get proactive in their children's schools. Their hands off the school sex ed policies is now turning into hands on for their children.


6 posted on 10/23/2005 11:59:43 PM PDT by taxesareforever (Government is running amuck)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lexfreedom

Wow, anybody in Boston remember Michael Kennedy? He was having sex with the 14 year old baby sitter. As I recall he was NOT indicted for anything.


7 posted on 10/24/2005 12:44:40 AM PDT by Hootin Aggie (Obviously not a Kennedy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lexfreedom

This is not rape in my opinion.


8 posted on 10/24/2005 12:47:04 AM PDT by Pro-Bush (Where are those FEMA prison camps when you need them?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pro-Bush

The Definition of Rape has become so muddled by the FemNags and the FemHags that it has almost become meaningless. Is is Rape when a Woman consents to have sexual relations and then changes her mind out of embarrassment? Yes apparently according to the Nags. If she was drinking or smoking Pot? Again Yes it was. Is it rape if she is persuaded or cajoled into going too far? Yes if she did not really want to have sexual relations according to the Nags it is Rape. Men according to the Nags can never be sexually abused. As Men "The Patriarchy" can never be victims. Thus all personal accountability is removed from Women's actions.

A Woman agreed to a group sex encounter with 3 young Men. She even consented to having it filmed. Later when she was embarrassed she charged Rape to the 3 Men. Too bad she was videotaped urging them on to do her real hard. The charges were dropped. Then there is the infamous Kobe Bryant incident. Kate Farber had relations with multiple partners after Kobe. The DA had to drop charges as she refused to cooperate. Oops Slutting around does not bode well for a conviction. Especially when you brag at a party about doing a Celebrity and anatomically describe your conquest!!


9 posted on 10/24/2005 4:42:24 AM PDT by Khankrumthebulgar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: lexfreedom
The same people who enforce ''zero-tolerance" strictures when it comes to guns and knives push a very different message when it comes to sex: Keep it ''safe" and legal, and you'll hear no complaints from us.

Exposing this muddled mindset is the point of the piece, and it's a point well worth making. Sadly, the Massachusetts Mindset is not confined to the Blue States.

10 posted on 10/24/2005 5:54:18 AM PDT by madprof98
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pro-Bush

You said: This is not rape in my opinion.
***

At first blush I tend to agree with you, but I am troubled. The theory behind statutory rape is that a minor is not competent to consent to sexual activity. This is the same reason why minors cannot be held to contracts they purportedly enter into. If the male were 35 years old, most of us would have much less problem with a charge of statutory rape, but since these are classmates, there is some reluctance. Of course, if a girl can't give consent due to her being a minor, can a male minor form the requisite intent to "rape"? Who's to say who had sex with whom? In this day I hear very much about the females initiating the action. So...

...I remain conflicted on this issue. In the interest of full disclosure, I have boy/girl twins, 13 years old. I don't think either of them is now, or will be in 3 years, competent to consent to sexual activity, in that they cannot appreciate the full ramifications of their acts. Am I naive? Maybe, but I still believe morality and virtue have a place in society.

There should remain some level of infraction for this activity, and certainly so if we would punish these same teens for smoking (I am a non-smoker, for the record).


11 posted on 10/24/2005 6:05:12 AM PDT by NCLaw441
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: lexfreedom; EdReform; backhoe; Yehuda; Clint N. Suhks; saradippity; stage left; Yakboy; ...
Homosexual Agenda Ping.

Notice anything strange here?

The Press reporting an article about youth sex and using terms like "statutory rape"

If this was an article about "homosexual teens" like this one the wording here would be a little different like this..

''BROOKLINE HIGH Gay teens face (unconstitutional) statutory rape charges," read the headline in Wednesday's Boston Globe. The story reported that two gay teens who just turned 17 years-old had 'consentual sex' with a gay teen just shy of 16..
emphasis mine.

If you want on/off the ping list let me and little jeremiah know.

TEXANS - VOTE NOV 8TH FOR PROPOSITION 2 - THE MARRIAGE PROTECTION AMENDMENT Free Republic homosexual agenda keyword search

12 posted on 10/24/2005 8:09:51 AM PDT by DirtyHarryY2K (http://soapboxharry.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NCLaw441

Well said!


13 posted on 10/24/2005 8:19:40 AM PDT by DirtyHarryY2K (http://soapboxharry.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Pro-Bush

A 15 year-old cannot give consent.


14 posted on 10/24/2005 8:21:51 AM PDT by AppyPappy (If you aren't part of the solution, there is good money to be made prolonging the problem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: lexfreedom

If the boys are 17 and the girl is 15....how is this statutory rape?


15 posted on 10/24/2005 9:33:34 AM PDT by trubluolyguy (How about them Seahawks!??!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AppyPappy

Do you think a 17 year old who has sex with a 15 year old should be labelled a sex offender for the rest of his life? We are talking about a two year age difference.


16 posted on 10/24/2005 9:36:56 AM PDT by LWalk18
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: LWalk18
Do you think a 17 year old who has sex with a 15 year old should be labelled a sex offender for the rest of his life?

That depends on whether he had sex with them or not. The rules have to remain the same regardless of age. Otherwise, it is discriminatory. 15 should be off-limits.

17 posted on 10/24/2005 10:02:08 AM PDT by AppyPappy (If you aren't part of the solution, there is good money to be made prolonging the problem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: LWalk18

Do you think a 17 year old who has sex with a 15 year old should be labelled a sex offender for the rest of his life? We are talking about a two year age difference.




This is stupid. It's like "TEENS HAVING SEX!!???" OMG! NNNNNnnnnoooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!

What's next, indoor plumbing?


18 posted on 10/24/2005 10:31:05 AM PDT by trubluolyguy (How about them Seahawks!??!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: lexfreedom

I thought someone had to be eighteen or older in order for it to be statutory rape. So the kids had sex, she consented to it, okay, so what. The parents should ground the daughter, and the two boys should be sent off to military school, but there shouldn't be a statutory rape charge against either of them for doing what kids do all the time.


19 posted on 10/24/2005 10:56:42 AM PDT by benjibrowder (Join the dark side. We have cookies!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: trubluolyguy
If the boys are 17 and the girl is 15....how is this statutory rape?

It is if the girl's father can't imagine that his little angel would ever do such a thing willingly...so there has to be a rapist involved. ;)

That's usually the way these charges get filed - some overwrought liberal yelling at the DA.

20 posted on 10/24/2005 10:59:33 AM PDT by Mr. Jeeves (Speaking several languages is an asset; keeping your mouth shut in one is priceless.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-25 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.

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