[madison10]

No expression of dismay or outrage or concern for the young innocents who may have been molested, but the Whip is wishing the perp abuser the best! Get OUT!

I wouldn't call 16-year-olds "young innocents." They may have been led astray, but doubt that they didn't know what was going on. Also, you're assuming physical contact, there may not have been any...it may have all been "cyber sex."

[Torie]

Foley's own Bill made cybersex a crime. The whole "affair" has a certain Shakespearian quality about it.

[vox_freedom]

>>I wouldn't call 16-year-olds "young innocents."

You are right, some young ones have already been corrupted by this world and the evils that lurk in it.

That said, I'm sure you wouldn't condone (sexual) communication for immoral purposes with a minor (e.g. a 16 YO) now would you? And NO I'm not assuming anything (physical contact) about this case except the moral corruption that is obvious. The law doesn't distinguish whether it happens on the phone, in person or via cyberspace. The real issue is whether it is believed to be wrong. It is, and evil, and despicable.