Posted on 10/23/2005 9:37:44 PM PDT by lexfreedom
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:
I'm surprised they're even bothering with charges. The girl's parents must have connections.
Do they have a cafeteria?
If so, some of this may help.
pingout tomorrow.
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.
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.
This is not rape in my opinion.
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!!
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.
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).
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
Well said!
A 15 year-old cannot give consent.
If the boys are 17 and the girl is 15....how is this statutory rape?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.