Underage Gay Sex Worse than Underage Straight Sex in Kansas - Until Now

Remove all ads!

Topic: Underage Gay Sex Worse than Underage Straight Sex in Kansas - Until Now

Yes! Emphatically Yes!

When a person is capable of making a valid decision depends on the mental and emotional maturity of the person. Laws are set up to protect the general population.

Having said that let me get back to 'Underage homosexual sex VS underage heterosexual sex'

One is equally as bad as the other. Having had a close female relative sexually molested as a child, Starting about age eight until about 14, I can tell you the emotional scars are deep.

I have also known boys who where sexually molested by men. There also the scars are deep.

The way I feel about child molestation I would give them a minimum sentence of life.

In the particular case referenced in this topic there are extenuating circumstances and I do not have enough information to make a judgement.

 

You are right, dmc. I reacted to some of the comments made. This is one subject I feel really strongly about.

If the age of consent is say 16 and a 17 yr old has sex with a 15 yr. old, I wouldn't approve but I wouldn't put him or her in jail.

 

@Morgoroth: Why is polygamy so repulsive to you if monogamous homosexual relationships aren't? Why are you so offended by the mere comparison?

Next, the more is talked about gay rights, the more courageously paedophiles or zoophiles or even necrophiles step up. All around we here voices against the age of consent, even here, as people believe it's restrictive. I remember arguments against keeping paedophilia criminal also on these boards. I can't recall arguments in favour of zoophilia being legal, although that may well be a hole in my memory.

Back in the time when "free love" was advocated, along with non-committed relationships and one night stands, people would have been similarly offended by the mere suggestion that the liberal movement might lead to gay marriage in the future. Heck, back in the time when homosexualism was becoming legal and accepted, the idea that that would lead to gay adoption was probably similarly absurd to many people. Experience teaches, however, that the slippery slope is still there, no matter how offended people get in the meantime.

What I am stressing again is that homosexual sex is a perversion of the sexual drive and as such, having homosexual intercourse with a minor has a potentially more damaging effect than a heterosexual one. From an internal point of view, a person having homosexual intercourse with a minor may be doing the same as a person having a heterosexual one. There is also the question of the minor's healthy or perverted sex drive and his or her contribution in the act. However, on the material level, it's worse. It's statutory rape with homosexual intercourse added on top of it.

Next, my experience is subjective and may have been very specific, but it seems to me that girls are more into older guys than guys are into younger girls. Back when I was eighteen, slow-dancing with a fourteen year old felt a tad bit weird. Of course, some people mature fasture or simply look older or are smarter than their age. However, I don't think a boy aged 18 and a girl aged 14 are a normal coupling, considering average people. By not normal, I don't necessarily mean it in a negative sense. It may be weird or just unusual, depending on the situation and the people involved. However, it's not normal.

 

Repulsive? No, it's not repulsive but it has a fair share of problems. The first being the purely legal part where a large part of our inheritance laws would have to be rewritten. The second problem is that I doubt that a person could equally love two or more persons and if the marriage is not equal then it's doomed to fail. I see polygamy as inpractical not directly repulsive.

Yes, let's scrap good old democracy and silence those gay activists so that we'll get none of those unfortunate collateral effects.

Personally I think it's their democratic rights (yes even the paedophiles have some rights) to step up and talk about if they want. Now if they're suicidal enough to go and advocate paedophilia on the streets then they can go ahead. The result would be quite messy though and their community would hardly recieve any more sympathy than they did before. Additionally they will never grow as large as the gay community, so they will most likely never get their demands through.

The age of consent should be at 14 and that's my view. If there is any sort of sexual abuse involved then it will be criminal no matter what the legal age is. At the age of 14 most people are allready biologically sexually mature so the only thing lacking is the knowledge, which they in here should have been taught about quite a few times allready. I see no sensible reason why the age of consent should be any higher. The complete scrapping of the "legal age" might also be a working idea since in my opinion it's difficult to exactly define when the youth is acting out of consent and when he/she is not. A case to case investigation might be more effective to find out if there was mutual consent or not.

Yes that is what you are stressing over and over again, but I won't agree. Even so that won't change the fact that the homosexual community is becoming increasingly organized and politically significant and there is only so long you can deny them their rights.

While I could agree that homosexual intercourse can have a more damaging effect especially if the target was heterosexual, the crime is still the same and it's injustice to treat it differently than a case of heterosexual sex. At the same time you'd have to start redefining laws according to different ways of having sex. Anal sex could well be more damaging than vaginal sex but I doubt that there are separte laws making anal sex more severe.

 

Actually, though I'm not 100% sure, I believe sodomy (anal sex) is illegal even between a consenting man and woman in some southern states in the US. I know they at least used to be enforced, but I can't say for sure if they're still in place.

Oh, and chev, I'll give you a reason to partially legalize zoophilia if you really want it. Though I'd never be a part of something like that.

 

The only arguement you'll get from me is if the Death Penalty is on the table.

I think that the fact that the boy was mentally challenged, thus potentially negating concent. This may be why the more serious charge was used.

I wouldn't either, but there needs to be some sanctions placed so that the door is not opened to adjusting the age limits (lowering age of concent, increasing the age of people allowed to have sex with underagers). It's not so much about punishing those in the situation you mentioned, but to firmly hold the lines in place.

And if Sodomy is outlawed in that state, then that's a whole different charge. Two guys can't have vaginal sex with each other...

 

@Gnarfflinger: Your wouldn't get an arguement from me. my governing word was minimum

 

I really get quite annoyed when I see people righteously shake their fist at the "evilest" of "monsters", the child molester. When things involve sex, people suddenly lose all sense of perspective. The death penalty? Life in jail? How are these punishments in any way equivalent to the suffering of a molested child?

There is a national hysteria with regard to childhood sexual abuse. The reasons are threefold: Catholic priests, politians trying to get votes, and the medias trying to sell products.

Get some perspective.

The actual percentage of human beings who molest children is quite miniscule. In the United States, there are about 500,000 registered sex offenders in a nation of 300 million; that means the population consists of 0.17% of people whom are actually child molesters. That is about one in six hundred people.

And yet the medias talk about molested children almost daily. Do you know why there is the lack of proportion?

As a society, we have decided to use abused children for the purpose of drama. Oh how our blood quickens as we imagine the fear of the child. And the pure disgust that we feel when we look through the eyes of the abuser. And how normal and righteous we feel when we can clearly label the evil person as someone whom we are not.

It is not just the child molester who is taking part in robbing these children of their dignity.

[ October 23, 2005, 23:09: Message edited by: Late-Night Thinker ]

 

For the media part, your words have merit. However the number of registered sex offenders obviously is not the whole truth, because many such cases never get reported. Also one individual molester often has several victims, and often the abuse goes on for a very long time.

Mass hysteria aside, rape is a serious crime and doing it to a child is even more damaging than to an adult, hence the demand for more severe punishment. But using it to make money is pretty low.

On the actual topic: the sentences mentioned represent unequality before the law. It also hints at unequality between sexes; it seems to suggest that a man molesting a boy is somehow more serious and unacceptable than a man molesting a girl.

 

Heh. For some reason I'm not surprised. I think Bush should be more concerned about bringing liberty in those states before he starts exporting it abroad.

 

Late Night Thinker --

I think it's a little more complicated than what you state. People react more to children being sexually abused because

1) Children shouldn't be experiencing this period. (People here were outraged when a Tulsa rapist, molested a TWO YEAR old child (a Hurricane Katrina transplant a couple weeks back). Grabbed her out of her window and HAD SEX with her behind her house. You don't think that's worthy of a little outrage? Are you going to try to say, that that's the same as if a grown adult is raped? (And I'm not saying that either is right)

2) Children are perceived as being defenseless, unable to stop the attack -- innocence robbed because of some idiot with a hard on.

Sorry -- you'll never convince me that we're doing TOO much to stop this insanity.

 

Lawrence v. Texas made it pretty clear that such laws are unconstitutional

 

Me too! This is an emotionally charged subject for me. That I freely admit.

Any comments I made apply equally to men and women molesting either boys or girls. The scars run deep.

@to LNT - I didn't realize that there are 500,000 registered sex offenders and I'm not sure what that means. But sounds scary. so only 1.66% of the population are sex offenders. Tell their victims that.

A child molester usually molests more than one child. Child molesters are frequently relatives or friends.

 

500,000 registered could mean as many as 50,000,000 molested, as many offenders have been known to reach 100+ victims, but I think the average is a bit lower, so that's more like 20,000,000 or so. And that's not even counting the ones who haven't been caught yet. But even 1 child molested is 5 too many.

@AMaster:
That's a relief; thanks for the info.

 

@ Spellbound

Why do you know such sordid details of this child's misfortune? Don't you think the child is going to go through a period of intense shame? Knowing that the entire nation can watch the tale being told on television is not going to help the child get well. I speak from experience when I say that prior to a lengthy healing process, sexual abuse is something the victim wants kept strictly private. Just the fact that you know the details hurts that child.

Not from you. In the long run, your anger is going to hurt the child. That anger the child feels towards his abuser is poison in the well. Having the rest of society use childhood sexual abuse as a personal moral crusade is not going to have a positive effect upon the child's period of sickness. This is not to say you should not be angry when confronted with this tragedy; however, you should not be confronted in the first place. Again, why do you know the horrible details of a child's tragedy?

You absolutely CAN do too much to stop these tragedies. A child raised in protective isolation is a tragedy unto itself.

I think you need to understand something: Being molested is not as bad as people who have not been molested imagine it to be. Don't get me wrong, it is truly awful. The repercussions are of course worse than the physical pain of the actual act. But you are not "broken" or different or weaker or anything other than a normal human being with a traumatic experience.

And don't think I am minimizing the experience. Trust me, my own involved knives and threats of death and it continued for a couple years; but that was then and this is now. I have a really great life. Don't get me wrong, it's not perfect, but in all seriousness, things are good. I don't think the guy who abused me spending his life in jail or being killed is in any way a punishment equal to his crime. To inflict that upon him would just be taking pleasure in vengeance.

I think the problem is that the crime involves sex. Sex does funny things to people. A person would rather have sex with the same gender and suddenly half of humanity wants to persecute them. A person rapes a child and suddenly they are incapable of ever doing a decent thing for the entirety of their lives. A person is raped as a child and suddenly they are incapable of ever having the well-being that they would have had without the childhood rape experience.

Just because sex is titillating and dramatic and eventful does not mean it has the power people think it does. Never have truer words been spoken: "Sex is overrated."

@ Nakia

You moved the decimal place. 0.16% That is approx. 1/600.

 

If that's true, then either you're a better man than I or you're just a coward who can't face his demons. I don't know that much about you, so I can't judge either way, but I'll assume you're the former. Personally, I'd castrate the *******.

Though you do bring up a good point at how we force the victims to relive their experience every time we mention it, would the child have known it was wrong had we not told them? Of course not; they might have even grown up thinking that this behaviour was normal, and would have perpetuated it on their kids. (It's happened, so don't even try to deny it. ) Awareness may hurt the victims, but it can save others from becoming victims.

Oh, they're capable of doing decent things alright, but they will never again be decent people; all the good deeds in the world will not excuse their crimes.

Another valid point, but not every child is so lucky as to have a forceful enough personality to survive mentally. Rape is a violation of your very being; those few who cannot handle it are nearly destroyed, and even those who can are never the same. Every experience you have changes you, some for the better and some for the worse, but I can't imagine any situation where it'd change you for the better.

 

@LNT-You are right about the %. Doesn't change my opinion though. You are a better person than I am.

 

You realize that the information "sex with a child is wrong" can be disseminated without reporting the details, circumstances, and identities of childhood victims. How many abusers do you think are protected by the unwillingness of parents to face such public shame? How many children won't tell anyone because they think, in their naivete, that it will be their face on the news?

I cannot over-emphasize the shame a child feels regarding their abuse, particulary boys (I imagine, as I am not a girl); public knowledge of what happened to them is often the very thing abusers use to enforce secrecy. Playing these stories virtually nightly on the public news, so we all will stay tuned and be enthralled in horror, is playing into the hands of abusers everywhere. I am not advocating enforced public silence, I am just saying we should display some moderation; perhaps public service announcements aimed at victims rather than public news stories. I don't know; it is certainly not a situation that lends itself to easy solutions. But I recognize the entertainment of "horror" news stories and it makes me sad to see the tradegy of a child used to garner ratings so that Mad Bill of Mad Bill's Used Cars will buy commercials from the media outlet.

I really have no idea why when something involves sex, suddenly everyone is capable of judging that person. Who are you to determine the decent people? What crime is ever excused? From what vantage point do you claim such perspective?

Nothing done to you by another removes your ability to make choices; being raped does not make you a victim of fatalism. A choice taken away does not make all choices following less owned.

What future choices has the victim lost? What capabilities? I think all it does is provide an almost impenetrable excuse to be as degenerate as others will allow.


Edit...

Just to finish up:

I think that human beings tend to imagine this invisible cloud just floating around trying to infect people with evil and cause us harm. To provide an example: The Holocaust was not the cumulative result of millions of individuals consciously deciding to, if not outright murder, then certainly cause harm upon Jews; rather, in retrospect, Europe was just infected with "evil" at that time.

I think it is fairly obvious that child molesters have become the modern witches in the woods just looking to steal and eat our young. How about we all put away the burning pole. They are not people infected by demonry... Stamping them to death is not going to make the world less hostile towards us... They are just individuals whom have made a conscious decision to cause someone pain and suffering and should be treated as just that.

The death penalty? Life in prison?

Are those really punishments you have thoroughly considered?

[ October 24, 2005, 11:58: Message edited by: Late-Night Thinker ]

 

I suppose the point people here are trying to make is that not everybody is as strong as you, Late-Night Thinker. Stories from raped adults - from themselves, not a money-hungry third party - suggest they often get unhinged quite badly. I've also read some of what child molestation victims have to say after they grow up, and it seems the scars often indeed are deep. For many it's hard to trust people or let anybody close after something like that.

What I agree on is that the way the media drags all the disgusting details out on display is unethical, the aim being to get better ratings and thus more green for commercials. I think this subject should be talked about, but with more consideration as to *how.* And there are other important things, such as adults getting raped, that get shamefully small coverage in comparison.