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

To: ZGuy
In the context of the article, the judge is correct.
12 posted on 02/10/2006 7:01:35 AM PST by Psycho_Bunny (Women were put on Earth to look hot. Men are here to be stupid about it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Psycho_Bunny

Yep. I agree. Teachers and health care workers deserve some right to confidentiality in their relationships with teens. And while I agree that underage teens ought to refrain from sex, I do not wish to make them criminals. On the other hand, I believe have a moral duty to report cases involving abuse and coercion.


33 posted on 02/10/2006 7:24:17 AM PST by zook
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: Psycho_Bunny
Yes and no. Yes, there should be some discretion between teachers and teens--after all, there is discretion at every juncture of the criminal justice system--including the public. And this is assuming the nature of the relationship in question is consensual.

However, if we're looking at kids, and I'm not referring to high-school age people, or in cases of harassment, then clearly there exists a moral and legal obligation to report those cases.

52 posted on 02/10/2006 7:40:07 AM PST by rzeznikj at stout (This is a darkroom. Keep the door closed or you'll let all the dark out...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

To: Psycho_Bunny
I agree. The legislature, as many state legislatures (and the federal one, as well) passed a very vague statute. It is done purposely for just this reason - i.e. they get to hold a press conference in which they claim to have solved some big problem when they've really just tap-danced around the edges. If the legislature had truly meant to solve the problem, they could easily have produced a clearly worded statute. But that would have required they actually take a stand and that would mean they might offend one constituency group or another. So the statute gets tossed to some judge who is supposed to consult a crystal ball to figure out the intent of the legislators when they crafted their vague statute.

From this article (and it doesn't give a whole lot of detail on the state attorney's presentation, just the writer's interpretation of the judge's reaction to it!) it would appear that the state's arguments are of the "everybody knows it" variety rather than actual fact. If consentual sex among minors is harmful, it should be relatively easy to produce studies or statistics demonstrating that. For the judge to ask the state to do so doesn't seem to me to be unreasonable or to smack of some hidden pedophilic motive.

89 posted on 02/10/2006 8:30:08 AM PST by MarcusTulliusCicero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]

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