Posted on 09/30/2013 5:37:50 AM PDT by expat1000
..In this ironic case, the 13-year-old unidentified girl, and the 12-year-old boy, are both on the sex offender list and are the victims in the case, because they had consensual sex with each other.
The two violated a Utah state law that criminalizes having sex with a person under 14 years of age. Although they were both children, Utah State officials found them guilty of sexual abuse of a child....
(Excerpt) Read more at yourjewishnews.com ...
No, they don't. Over the centuries, a consensus developed that it was wrong for adults to use children for sexual gratification, even if they persuaded the children to go along with it "voluntarily." Almost everyone agreed that sex with children was wrong, and that wanting sex with children was perverse.
Unfortunately, we appear to be falling back to the past ... or something even worse. The value to society of having children born and raised in marriage-based families used to be so obvious that it didn't have to be mentioned. Now, bringing this up is "hate speech."
They do it for murder except in cases where the kid is charged as an adult. I’m not one to excuse underage sex even between underage kids, but I’m reasonably assured in saying it is a far lesser crime than murder.
Sex laws are so ridiculous these days
Are you saying you agree that the purpose of the law is to “protect children from each other”?
If so, I will disagree with you no matter what court(s) uphold(s) this judge’s decision.
The purpose of the law is to protect children from ADULTS.
I don’t like your answer either. The fact is that humans have sex. I don’t understand kids this young having sex together. I have children that age and I really can’t understand how that occurred. I really can’t.
That being said what is done is done. How does putting the parents in jail mean anything? How is society served by putting parents in jail.
I think the law and order conservative has wrought enough heart ache on the world. Remember the law and order conservative created the war on drugs and prohibition. It also brought us Bill Clinton’s 100,000 new cops on the beat and all the busy work that it entails. Law and Order conservatives need to agree to punish crimes with victims harshly but stay out of stuff like this. Seat belt laws, cell phone laws, even the questionable DUI at .08 are questionable things.
MADD, another law and order conservative type whined and cried and got the .o8 passed. They created a whole industry of judges, cops, attorneys and prosecutors. What had happened previously was that drunk drivers were not held accountable even when they caused accidents. The solution from MADD was to create a whole industry around DUI. The better response would have been to throw out BAC levels until an accident occurs. Punish a drunk driver who causes an accident with permanent drivers license revocation huge fines and imprisonment for many many years. This approach requires a victim. That’s the point. A victim.
I have had quite enough of the Law and Order conservative.
In the old days it was “I’ll show you mine if you’ll show me yours.” Now they just get on TV and show it.
I think their PARENTS should be put in jail. Their baby should be given up for adoption. And the two of them need some intense counseling.
Wow, I sound ULTRA conservative, don’t I?
Why not shoot their parents, castrate the boy, give the girl a hysterectomy, and put the baby in an orphanage?
If you going to hide behind idiocy and call it conservatism you might as well go all the way....
Indeed, Zero Tolerance is this generation’s “Eye for an Eye” which leaves everyone stuck in a Gulag...
So instead of kleaving everyone half blind we are finding everyone fully guitly? Thanks a LOT zero tolerance.....
MADD, another law and order conservative type whined and cried and got the .o8 passed. They created a whole industry of judges, cops, attorneys and prosecutors. What had happened previously was that drunk drivers were not held accountable even when they caused accidents. The solution from MADD was to create a whole industry around DUI. The better response would have been to throw out BAC levels until an accident occurs. Punish a drunk driver who causes an accident with permanent drivers license revocation huge fines and imprisonment for many many years. This approach requires a victim. Thats the point. A victim.
I have had quite enough of the Law and Order conservative.
NAILED IT!!!
Laws should ONLY be Punitative and NEVER preventative, otherwise they punish the Law Abiding!
Same damned way with Seatbelt laws, which in my opinion should be immedately repealed...
Why not shoot their parents, castrate the boy, give the girl a hysterectomy, and put the baby in an orphanage?
Did House Leader Bonher sire a kid when he was 12 and get the above punishment, thos could explain a great many thing.... Like why he cries all the time...
I wonder why the parents were so CLUELESS. I taught the teenagers (13-17) and young adults (18-21) for 45 YEARS, the latter for 27 of those years.
Those parents knew her for all her life and the parents were "completely unaware." How much does that say for parents who were COMPLETELY UNAWARE of what their daughter was up to? Not much in my opinion.
LOL. The ONLY reason the girl didn't get away with it because parents ACCIDENTALLY got home early. Oh dear. What would have happened if said parents were their normal selves and left their daughter alone EVEN MORE?
Perhaps BOTH parents were working 60+ hours and too tired to deal. Happens.
They sure got THEIR wake up call, didn't they? 'Bout time.
The REAL loser is the girl whose parents have opted out of being involved in their daughter's life. MY upbringing was similar: both parents worked. Had to. We were poor. But I had to report to the neighbor across the street when I got home. When I was still in grammar school I had to GO OVER there and stay. My older sister took care of me a little later on.
See my answer in post #95.
I was like you when young. Cops, Judges, got the benefit of the doubt in my mind. I thought of Miranda as a useless trick used by trick attorneys to get bad guys off.
But times have changed. Ruby Ridge, Waco, Murrah Building really got me thinking about the responsibilities of the Government. Violence begets violence. Lawlessness by the government breeds violence of all kinds.
The people will almost always choose safety over liberty and the politicians know how to sell bigger budgets, more regulations etc using this.
So here we sit with NSA running roughshod over the Bill of Rights. It started with Law and Order conservatives demanding a “fix” from the government for just about any conceivable problem they could come up with.
Romeo and Juliet was written around 1591!! In those days "children" were married off. Americans invented the word TEENAGER.
"Children" of those days were married to cement ties and bonds with other families. There were dowries. Their lives were TOTALLY different than today's.
Families told the girls AND BOYS whom they would marry--NO choice whatsoever.
Today's "children" who are left alone day after day, week after week, month after month and/or are fatherless are at risk and you know it. With all the sexuality garbage shoved down their throats, it's no surprise that they "act out."
The "children" committed no crime. I agree with you. They are abandoned, neglected and forgotten. Keeping in touch with your kids via cell phone is worthless. Parents HAVE TO BE THERE.
The kids are getting screwed by their selfish parents who work their buns off for money, stuff, cars, house, rent, food, whatever, AT THE EXPENSE of their abandoned kids.
OFTEN, but not always: Absent parents = home-alone-kids-in-trouble.
By the way, animals and plants are RAISED; children are REARED. I laugh when I hear people say, "raising kids" because it makes me think of raising animals, baby goats, not REARING children. That is the CORRECT English. But, then, who cares about that? (Cynical remark on my part, not aimed at you.)
That’s correct. A simple distinction, yet somehow lost upon an educated man. The Judge cannot seem to see beyond his own nose.
That being said what is done is done. How does putting the parents in jail mean anything? How is society served by putting parents in jail.
Jail for a few days MAY wake them up. I would prefer hitting parents in their MOST TENDER spot: the pocket book. If they were fined...oooo would that hurt!
Society is served by letting parents know that they have a HUGE responsibility to take care of their "children," even if those "children" are 13-17.
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.