Jump to content
DetroitCity313

8/28 Rally in Washington

Recommended Posts

So an 18 year old "woman" who has sex with a "boy" one day prior to his 18th birthday is rape? He will be harmed emotionally and psychology but give it 24 hours and he won't be? Something magical happens?

Alrighty then......

It depends on the laws of the state they're in. In at least some states the situation you give above wouldn't be considered rape, but if the woman were 20 or 21 it would be.

But yeah, I'm not completely comfortable with the law in this type of case either.

edit: if I'm not mistaken sexual contact between two heterosexual, unmarried adults is illegal in some states. It's not often enforced, though.

Edited by Lousluggage

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BetRivers Michigan Sports Betting

BetRivers Michigan $50 Launch Offer

Michigan online sports betting is launching in January 2021. Pre-register at BetRivers Sportsbook and get a free $50 bonus at their online sportsbook & casino with no deposit necessary.

Claim $50 at BetRivers Michigan Now

that's kind of the point of the discussion we're having. It helps to read the rest of the thread before responding to a point right away.

What I quoted contradicts what you said here:

Besides NAMBLA, this country agrees 12 is too young. I really have not heard of any organization or group trying to lower the age of consent. Seems to me the age of consent works.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I say this extremely tongue in cheek but...

No one ever became black on a weekend at summer camp with a fifth of SoCo.

On a more serious note, regardless of one's natural proclivity to homosexuality (or pederasty, for that matter), it is still a choice to commit the acts of homosexuality.

Who DOESN'T have a natural proclivity to sin? We each have our own, it doesn't excuse us. My father was biologically prone to alcoholism and died 20+ years sober. Others have a natural weakness to heterosexual sex...doesn't mean that one-night-stands are OK for that person.

Race is different, completely and utterly different.

While being black is somewhat immutable (this actually depends on the person but we'll ignore that for now), regardless of one's natural proclivity to being attracted to black women it is still a choice to commit to spend the rest of your life with that woman. The argument still comes down to the fact that it is not considered immoral anymore for a white man to marry a black woman (or a catholic to marry a muslim or any number of other combinations that were considered unacceptable at one time).

This doesn't imply race and sexuality are the same or even similar. It does imply that the treatment of multi-racial relationships (in the past) and homosexual relationships (currently) is similar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Besides NAMBLA, this country agrees 12 is too young. I really have not heard of any organization or group trying to lower the age of consent. Seems to me the age of consent works.

Do you realize that in some states it's 14 and in some states it's 18? Obviously society feels this is a movable standard so the whole point is that if it can be set at 14 then it isn't unreasonable to say that it can be set at 12. That's not a 'slippery slope' argument. It's only 2 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do you realize that in some states it's 14 and in some states it's 18? Obviously society feels this is a movable standard so the whole point is that if it can be set at 14 then it isn't unreasonable to say that it can be set at 12. That's not a 'slippery slope' argument. It's only 2 years.

800px-Age_of_Consent.png

Seems like a lock-solid rule to me :cheeky:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do you realize that in some states it's 14 and in some states it's 18? Obviously society feels this is a movable standard so the whole point is that if it can be set at 14 then it isn't unreasonable to say that it can be set at 12. That's not a 'slippery slope' argument. It's only 2 years.

It certainly is slippery slope. First, this debate has nothing to do with homosexuality. There is no connection between allowing gay marriage and what would happen in the courts with the age of consent. We could easily make this link between heterosexual marriage. Second, while states may differ between 16-18, the 18 is not trying to go to 16 and the 16 is not trying to go younger. I would really be interested to see what legislator is interested in lowering the age of consent in any state.

Edited by DetroitCity313

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do you realize that in some states it's 14 and in some states it's 18? Obviously society feels this is a movable standard so the whole point is that if it can be set at 14 then it isn't unreasonable to say that it can be set at 12. That's not a 'slippery slope' argument. It's only 2 years.

There are states where 40 year olds can have legal intercourse with a 14 year old that is not their spouse? That is what I think we have been talking about as the context for age of consent, an adult and a child.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do you realize that in some states it's 14 and in some states it's 18? Obviously society feels this is a movable standard so the whole point is that if it can be set at 14 then it isn't unreasonable to say that it can be set at 12. That's not a 'slippery slope' argument. It's only 2 years.

I don't think any state has an actual age of consent of 14. Some have an age of consent of 16 with exceptions for people who are close in age but in no state is 14 the general age of consent. According to wikipedia Connecticut actually has consent exceptions for children under 13 (the examples all talk about 12 year olds, but it isn't clear to me that the rules apply only to 12 year olds and not 9 year olds). I don't think this means you can actually consider Connecticut's age of consent to be 12 (or younger) though.

This doesn't change the movable standard point, but I do think it gets at the slippery slope argument. To get the general age of consent to 12 (which is what NAMBLA would like to do) you'd have to move the age by 4 years, not 2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
800px-Age_of_Consent.png

Seems like a lock-solid rule to me :cheeky:

Based on that picture I don't see 14 anywhere. Maybe I am missing it but what state allows for 14 year olds to engage in sexual relations with adults?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's interesting because I just looked up MA laws and the source I looked at said the age of consent was 18, with more severe penalties for when a person is under 16. The map here makes it look like it's 17, though it's hard to tell from the picture. The law did list 18 as the age at which statutory rape could no longer be a charge, so maybe I missed something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing is, the age of consent doesn't really exist as a single fixed age anywhere because of obvious situations like: "So an 18 year old "woman" who has sex with a "boy" one day prior to his 18th birthday is rape?"

And there is also no real clear line delineating childhood and adulthood either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And there is also no real clear line delineating childhood and adulthood either.

So its all based on your (or, probably more true, a judge's) definition of what is proper.

Gotcha...it is insane to think that might be a slippery slope! :cheeky:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So its all based on your (or, probably more true, a judge's) definition of what is proper.

Gotcha...it is insane to think that might be a slippery slope! :cheeky:

I wouldn't say insane, but in general you need more to demonstrate a slippery slope isn't a logical fallacy than just "it could totally happen because it isn't completely under my control." We've generally been defining the age of adulthood upward, not downward, in my lifetime, so I don't really see the dangerous slope we are approaching with respect to the age of consent that affording recognition (comparable to that of long term opposite sex relationships) to long term same sex relationships is going to inevitably cause us to roll down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Based on that picture I don't see 14 anywhere. Maybe I am missing it but what state allows for 14 year olds to engage in sexual relations with adults?

It looks like you got him. I can now only assume all of Oblong's arguments are nullified.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tell me where my interpretation is mistaken? We can't give formal acceptance to a long forbidden coupling (interracial/homosexuals) because another long forbidden coupling (pedophiles) would then be able to take advantage of our sliding standards, even though the first coupling did not by itself challenge the rationale of the other coupling (i.e. if we allow interracial couples or homosexuals acceptance, we're not opening the door for pedophiles in the same way we might think that lowering the age of consent from 18 to 16 would be opening the door ["If we make it 16, what's to keep it from being 14? 12? ..."]).

The age of consent in Michigan is 16.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't think any state has an actual age of consent of 14. Some have an age of consent of 16 with exceptions for people who are close in age but in no state is 14 the general age of consent. According to wikipedia Connecticut actually has consent exceptions for children under 13 (the examples all talk about 12 year olds, but it isn't clear to me that the rules apply only to 12 year olds and not 9 year olds). I don't think this means you can actually consider Connecticut's age of consent to be 12 (or younger) though.

This doesn't change the movable standard point, but I do think it gets at the slippery slope argument. To get the general age of consent to 12 (which is what NAMBLA would like to do) you'd have to move the age by 4 years, not 2.

All states allow for sex within marriage, and some states allow for marriage as young as 13 with parental consent, iirc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Can you tell me the difference between consensual sex and rape? Can you? :ponder:

Consentual sex is sex between two consenting parties. Rape is a sexual act upon a non-consenting party. I could give you the statute citation for criminal sexual conduct in Michigan, if you really wanted it and your Google wasn't broken. What's your point?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
All states allow for sex within marriage, and some states allow for marriage as young as 13 with parental consent, iirc.

Sure, as I said there are exceptions all over the place. that isn't the same as saying that the general age of consent in states that allow sex within marriage and marriage of 13 year olds with parental consent is 13.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree kids are less independent now than they were at the same age a generation or two ago (and I do tend to think that is where the perception that the current generation is less mature than previous ones). I guess I'm not sure that really represents maturity though. I guess it depends on what that word means. We've progressed to the point that we don't have to marry kids off at 13 or put them to work as soon as we can or get them out on their own right away. I'm not sure the fact that we did so in the past represented maturity on the children's part or necessity on the parents part.

Not that it matters, I'm sure I'll be telling my kids about how wikipedia didn't exist when i was in grade school and I needed a quarter to call home because cell phones didn't exist.

I do find the parents walking their kids around at college very annoying. My wife does advising for mechanical engineers and it seems like every week she talks about prospective students who come to visit UC and never say a word while their parents grill her on the school and the program.

This is all true. I also think that there's a lot less real work to be done around the house/yard than used to be so that in turn would mean that there's more time for parents and children to spend together without the necessity of doing chores. Maybe this is why a lot of parents/children act like best friends? I'm not sure whether that's good or bad; I would think having chores to do would help kids in the long run and not just the parents, and as much as I would have hated to admit it as a child there are times when parents need to be parents and not friends. Let's just say I'm now grateful for times mine laid down the law with me, LOL.

That's odd about the parents and colleges, though I know of at least one parent like that-I know one person whose parents actually chose his classes for him all through college. I probably would have very rudely refused the help-I shudder now to think of what I probably put my poor parents through.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sure, as I said there are exceptions all over the place. that isn't the same as saying that the general age of consent in states that allow sex within marriage and marriage of 13 year olds with parental consent is 13.

Never said that. Only said that age of consent and adulthood are not related, and that the idea of sex with children isn't as anathema as it might appear on its face. So, why all the pedophobia? Why the hate?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back to Beckapoluza for a minute...did you see that in his sermon Beck said he went to the National Archives and held in his hands the original handwritten speech written by Washington for the first inaugural address. Well, when the folks at the National Archives were asked about it they said it never happened nor would he be allowed if he asked. Restore the Honor...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Never said that. Only said that age of consent and adulthood are not related, and that the idea of sex with children isn't as anathema as it might appear on its face. So, why all the pedophobia? Why the hate?

I think I was the first one that brought up the age 14 thing. I said X, then others responded and said "X1 is not true". Great. That's not what I said.

The point is, as you said, is that it is legal in our nation, according to the state law in question, for a 14 year old to consent to have sex with an adult.

I find it a bit funny that you and I shabba are on the same side in this regard considering that we are polar opposites on the issue of gay marriage. I'm merely pointing out that I do not think you are a wacko for having those concerns. It's not an unreasonable thing to fear seeing the laws as we do today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think I was the first one that brought up the age 14 thing. I said X, then others responded and said "X1 is not true". Great. That's not what I said.

The point is, as you said, is that it is legal in our nation, according to the state law in question, for a 14 year old to consent to have sex with an adult.

I find it a bit funny that you and I shabba are on the same side in this regard considering that we are polar opposites on the issue of gay marriage. I'm merely pointing out that I do not think you are a wacko for having those concerns. It's not an unreasonable thing to fear seeing the laws as we do today.

A 14 year old can only consent to have sex with an adult as long as you define adult as "over 18" which also isn't consistent throughout our country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think I was the first one that brought up the age 14 thing. I said X, then others responded and said "X1 is not true". Great. That's not what I said.

The point is, as you said, is that it is legal in our nation, according to the state law in question, for a 14 year old to consent to have sex with an adult.

I find it a bit funny that you and I shabba are on the same side in this regard considering that we are polar opposites on the issue of gay marriage. I'm merely pointing out that I do not think you are a wacko for having those concerns. It's not an unreasonable thing to fear seeing the laws as we do today.

Does this mean I can't poke fun at him any more?:wink:

I hope I didn't imply that I thought S4D was wacko. I happen to disagree with him on most political issues, so it's only natural for us to butt heads now and then. Hopefully we haven't gotten to the point where disagreeing with somebody = that person is not being allowed to have an opinion. There's a bit too much whining going on right now about that by people from all sides of most issues, who seem to think that having somebody challenge an opinion is always a personal attack.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


Michigan Sports Betting Offer

Michigan is launching online sports betting and casino apps in January 2021. These top Michigan sportsbooks have pre-launch bonus offers. No deposit is required. Terms and conditions apply.

BetRivers Michigan - If you sign up at BetRivers Michigan now, you will receive $50 in free bets to use one their online sportsbook & casino

Click Here to claim $50 at BetRivers Michigan For Signing Up Now

FanDuel Michigan - If you register now before FanDuel launches in January, you will receive $100 to use at their sportsbook app & online casino.

Click Here to claim $100 at FanDuel Michigan For Registering Now

BetMGM Michigan - If you sign up early at BetMGM Michigan before launch, you will receive $200 in free bets to use at their online casino & sportsbook

Click Here to claim $200 at BetRivers Michigan For Signing Up Early

   


×
×
  • Create New...