Posted on 08/21/2012 4:35:16 AM PDT by Kaslin
A former Texas high school teacher was convicted of multiple felonies after having sex with five 18-year-old students at her home. The conviction was a victory for the prosecution but it was a setback for the feminist movement. It was also a setback for the homosexual uncivil rights movement, which seeks unlimited authority to redefine relationships among consenting adults.
Brittni Nicole Colleps, 28, of Arlington, was found guilty of 16 counts of having an inappropriate relationship between a student and teacher. In Texas, this second-degree felony is punishable by two to 20 years in prison per count. Because none of her students sodomized her, the relationships have not yet been enshrined in the U.S. Constitution.
What makes this case difficult for some to fathom is that Colleps is Mrs. Colleps, not Miss Colleps. She is married and has multiple children. She also likes to have sex with multiple school kids at the same time. In fact, she had to turn herself in after one of the student athletes she was having sex with video recorded the encounter using a cellphone. That’s one of the disadvantages of taking on several athletes at once. It’s tough for a girl to know what all the boys in the room are doing at any given time. And it’s tough to keep track of all the electronic devices.
Police Detective Jason Houston testified at trial saying that charges were filed because, whether they are 18 or not, it's a crime for a teacher to have sex with her students. This has some feminists upset because they think it should only be a crime for a teacher to have sex with his students. They think that a woman having sexing with high school students is empowering while a man having sex with high school students is oppressive. As usual, the feminists want to do away with laws that are gender neutral. In their view, it’s the only way to end gender discrimination. It isn’t logical but it doesn’t have to be. It’s feminism so it just has to sound angry.
Feminism has a long way to go to achieve equality but at least it has accomplished one thing: it has more women pursuing careers and acting like hyper-sexualized frat boys. Some women are able to do both at once. (Insert inappropriate multi-tasking joke here).
While Brittni Colleps was at home serving a substantial portion of the boys’ track and field team, her husband was serving in the military overseas. Christopher Colleps said that he is mad at his wife, but stands by her "because `til death do us part means `til death do us part." In other words, Mr. Colleps takes marriage seriously.
Christopher Colleps testified in court that he and his wife had engaged in group sex before – also during the course of their marriage. He also testified that he was “hurt” by what his wife did with multiple high school student athletes. The moral distinction between the group sex in which he participated and the group sex in which he did not participate brings us right to the heart of the marriage debate in 21st Century America.
According to Christopher Colleps, and to homosexual rights activists, marriage is not an agreement between two people and God. It is an agreement between two or more people. The group sex Mrs. Colleps engaged in was not wrong because it violated the laws of God. It was wrong because it violated his rules. Mr. Colleps had to know of the act, approve of the act, and hopefully participate in the act for it to be okay. As long as all the adults offered full knowledge and consent, everything was okay. That is the new view of marriage. It is just whatever the humans want it to be.
The videotaped evidence at trial demonstrated that none of the participants was using a condom. The acts also occurred in a house where three young children were being raised. But remember that if Mr. Colleps had only known and approved – and gotten in on the action! -then everything would have been okay.
The defense attorney for Brittni Colleps said that Texas should not have convicted his client, adding that Texas is too conservative for its own good. He looks forward to the day that the Texas Supreme Court gets the government out of people’s bedrooms and allows consenting adults to do whatever they wish to do in their own homes.
That day has not yet come in Texas. That is good news for Texans who care about their children.
Yes, of course they should. "Morale Turpitude," that's the key. It's not LAW! I'm outraged at the sentencing guideline which is 2-20 for having CONSENSUAL sex! It's puritanical priggish BS! I do think what she did was absolutely morally wrong, but not unlawful. The possibility she could go to jail for TWO years is ridiculous!
Fire her, revoke her teacher's license for life, don't give a judge the power to sentence this "crime" for 20 years. It's wrong and everyone here knows it!
Your screen name implies you search for truth.
Yes, and the truth of this is even in the State Of Texas it's not against the law to have sex with consenting adults no matter how many there are, right? Is this not the "Truth?" Or in your world does morality trump law in our nation, because if it does America cease to exist for you...this is why LAWS keep us FREE. If you don't understand this you need to go read history!
Recruits in training and enlisted personnel are adults. Drill Instructors and Officers still don't get to f*** the snot out of them. Sorry to bust your little rutting obsessed bubble
These kids are still living under the care of an adult, and still entrusted to an older adult who is expected.to prepare them for life, not prepare them to live with venereal diseases or to be a babydaddy/babymomma paying child support.
You have made it clear that this impinges upon your most cherished fantasies, but too damned bad. When you have responsibilities for someone, our society imposes legal penalties if you abrogate those responsibilities in a major way.
Yeah, you hate the idea of reciprocal responsibilities coming with adulthood. You have made that clear. Too damned bad.
Stay away from kids, and it might behoove you to never take a job with responsibilities for other people. You do not have the ability to carry those jobs out.
If some of you do not grasp this simple concept of illegitimate sentencing guidelines then you need to go back to England and be subject to the churches imperialism!
I can't believe some of you actually think these sentencing guidelines for what she did are just, especially those of you who are Texan's.
The TRUTH is she was arrsted for 'consensual sex' because it was a breach of her teaching contract.
------
Or in your world does morality trump law in our nation, because if it does America cease to exist for you...this is why LAWS keep us FREE.
LOL! you complain about 'morality trumping law', yet that is EXACTLY what your asking for.
Your idea of what is or isn't 'moral' vs the LEGAL obligation the teacher imposed on herself by signing her contract.
Unless you believe people should not be held to their signed oaths and their promises to perform to those terms.....which, BTW, IS the Law.
------
If you don't understand this you need to go read history!
Oh, please. Someone who thinks it's a bad thing that teachers are held accountable when they decide to violate the public trust have no clue about law, much less history.
That's ridiculous because these were consenting adults. So the teacher wants to have a sexual relationship with a student who's 30 and your gonna dictate it's against the law?
What is happening here is some of you SEEM to be equating LAW with Morality. It's just not equivalent. You can not legislate morality because you are denying FREE WILL and inalienable rights. I totally think what she did is reprehensible, however that's why the American Idea works because it doesn't allow one belief system to dictate morality or law. In other words I can believe burning her at the stake is morally just because my belief system encourages me too, but the LAW has precedence over my moral code. Thank God! Sometimes these law are just wrong. 2-20 years is the wrong punishment for this lapse in judgement.
Don't worry, I won't be coming to Texas, I wouldn't want to get thrown in jail for throwing an apple core out the window!
If you are a teacher and they are still in school, it is hands off and no exceptions. What they get in if they can’t do that, too bad.
Yeah, I understand that...do really understand it? I'm not arguing the MORALITY of the issue! I disagree with the sentencing guidelines for her having sex with what TEXAS LAW STATES are consenting adults...They are ludicrous! If these were non consenting children, I say throw the book at her and grind the key to dust!
For all the rest of your BS, I just think you like to read what you write.
Let's not throw stones at glass houses, ok Mr. Perfect?
Physics perhaps?
The examples I enumerated exactly parallel the one here, mental and ethical incapacity to debate them on your part not withstanding.
A teacher doesn't get to f*** their students.
An officer does not get to f*** their enlisted personnel.
a psychiatrist doesn't get to bang their patients.
Exact parallels.
Adulthood is irrelevant.
This was probably inevitable for anyone named Brittni and not using it as a stripper pseudonym.
Were these considered graduation gifts or final exams?
Regardless of the fact that these students were 18 or older, she was their TEACHER, being paid by the TAXPAYERS, and working at a PUBLIC school to educate them, not recruit them for sex.
*Teacher gets 5 years in prison with consenting aldults because of some archaic sentencing guidelines in Texas.
*Teacher Gets 3 Years in Prison for Sex with 7 Students
COVINGTON, TN (abc24.com) - Former Tipton County teacher Cindy Clifton pleaded guilty to several counts of rape Thursday afternoon.
She was indicted last fall on 53 counts, 29 of those counts for rape. She pleaded guilty to 15 counts, seven rape charges. The plea deal only puts her behind bars for three years, at the most.
Please tell me Mr. Moral high ground, which sentencing guideline is more just?
That Texas law sure is great!!
As here, the problem stems from the position of authority, and the person in authority abrogating the behavioral restrictions that came with that authority.
Just as in this case, that is as it should be.
I went in the Marines when I was seventeen (and already graduated).
I have indeed been in the sandbox.
I was aware of the rules then.
You need an analogy that supports your position, rather than mine.
Texas is better.
Sex comes with responsibilities.
Bad behavior has consequences.
The reason laws like this are in place regarding ‘positions of authority’ (teacher/student) is that the education system is crappy enough without adding grade bribery or grade inflation via sex blackmail.
The subject was Texas laws, not the ones in Tennessee. Unlike some people, Texans tend to think people in other States should decide their OWN laws, not jump up & down and point judgmental fingers.
I also find it odd you haven't replied to my previous post since you felt so free to scream 'LAW' without the slightest clue as to what it really means.
-----
That Texas law sure is great!!
Yep! It makes life simpler when you ensure people say what they mean and mean what they say.
Particularly when those people are entrusted with our children.
LOL! I'm not sure I can agree that it's the reason, but I do consider it a very nice bonus!
No, MT! the subject is archaic laws no matter what STATE. Look at post #16 by bender2.
The integral point I'm trying to make is if the teacher was raping children younger than a consensual age then 2-20 is probably too lenient. However, what we have here is a law with sentencing guidelines which are grossly inappropriate for the crime committed.
Both parties who can legally enter into a contract have an obligation to fulfill this contract. This includes the 18 year old's! They have a moral responsibility in this, wouldn't you agree?
So, let me ask you, would you sentence this woman for having sex with these 18 year old's if they were not her students? If so, what laws is she breaking other than adultery, which by your definition of a "contract," she has committed a crime! What is the sentence guidelines in Texas for this crime of adultry? Marriage is a contract.
I also find it odd you haven't replied to my previous post since you felt so free to scream 'LAW' without the slightest clue as to what it really means.
I'll be glad to reply, I'm not sure exactly what I should reply too, however I'll say this.
What she did was wrong. Morally, contractually and lawfully. I just think the sentencing guidelines are to rigid for this particular breach when you compare them to other crimes, such as actual RAPE.
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.