18 Year Old Girl Facing Felony for Dating 15 Year Old Girl

[Lemanrussland]

u wot m8

Don't bring your imaginary friend into this.

Don't bring pointless condensations in here.

Fine... *puts away water bottle*.

[Page]

I didn't mean it in the Christian sense though if Cosara is a Christian then that's even more pertinent. Does God morally deem a person to be a rapist because of the laws written by men and what invisible state lines the humans in question were hypothetically having sex inside of?

[The New Earth Coalition]

If people don't want to listen to the law, they can go live in a different country where such laws don't exist.

[Sophian]

So an 18 year old who has consensual sex with a 17 year old deserves to be locked up in prison with real rapists, gang bangers, murderers and actual criminals? And then that 18 year old should have to register as a sex offender so that people, neighbors, and potential employers think he/she is a pedophile and a rapist the rest of their life?

Yes! Because they broke the law!

Laws are intended to serve the best interest of the people, and punish people for unethical and immoral behavior, behavior like; theft, harming someone's property or person, or violating a person's free will. In this hypothetical scenario and in the case of this 18 year old girl, nobody had anything stolen, nobody's property was harmed, nobody's person was harmed, and nobody's free will was violated. So, how is is this unethical or immoral behavior that warrants punishment at the tax payer's expense? It seems unethical and immoral on the part of government, because if this 18 year old girl is convicted, government will be locking her behind bars and will be ruining her life and her opportunities of buying a home, applying for a job, applying for a college, and applying for financial aid for college. Yet, this 18 year old girl didn't do anything unethical or immoral, she had consensual relations with the person she is dating, and the person she is dating is 2 years and some months younger, its not as though she maliciously preyed upon a naive infant or someone significantly younger.

[Cosara]

I have to question why it's even illegal when the ages are so close together. Doesn't make any sense, in my opinion.

The laws are written in a quite ham-handed way. There's also been a great witchhunt against pedophiles and such, so these kind of blanket punishments are acceptable/even popular.

This person being subjected to things like "pedophile free zones" for the rest of her life is pretty absurd. She's getting a worse punishment than most felons do.

She's a felon.

[Resora]

If people don't want to listen to the law, they can go live in a different country where such laws don't exist.

Victim blaming is fun.

"If people don't want to be murdered, they should off themselves to prevent that from ever happening!"

[Neo Arcad]

The laws are written in a quite ham-handed way. There's also been a great witchhunt against pedophiles and such, so these kind of blanket punishments are acceptable/even popular.

This person being subjected to things like "pedophile free zones" for the rest of her life is pretty absurd. She's getting a worse punishment than most felons do.

She's a felon.

Because the law is executed ham-fistedly and incorrectly, yes.

[Lemanrussland]

The laws are written in a quite ham-handed way. There's also been a great witchhunt against pedophiles and such, so these kind of blanket punishments are acceptable/even popular.

This person being subjected to things like "pedophile free zones" for the rest of her life is pretty absurd. She's getting a worse punishment than most felons do.

She's a felon.

Yeah, and a registered sex offender, for the rest of her life.

[The New Earth Coalition]

Yes! Because they broke the law!

Laws are intended to serve the best interest of the people, and punish people for unethical and immoral behavior, behavior like; theft, harming someone's property or person, or violating a person's free will. In this hypothetical scenario and in the case of this 18 year old girl, nobody had anything stolen, nobody's property was harmed, nobody's person was harmed, and nobody's free will was violated. So, how is is this unethical or immoral behavior that warrants punishment at the tax payer's expense? It seems unethical and immoral on the part of government, because if this 18 year old girl is convicted government will be locking her behind bars and will be ruining her life and her opportunities of buying a home, applying for a job, applying for a college, and applying for financial aid for college. Yet, this 18 year old girl didn't do anything unethical or immoral, she had consensual relations with the person she is dating, and the person she is dating is 2 years and some months younger, its not as though she maliciously preyed upon a naive infant or someone significantly younger.

Why do you think the US made 18 the age where you become an adult? When you turn 18 (or if you already are) then go change the age when you become an adult.

If you don't like it, then get the hell out of this country.

[Frisivisia]

The laws are written in a quite ham-handed way. There's also been a great witchhunt against pedophiles and such, so these kind of blanket punishments are acceptable/even popular.

This person being subjected to things like "pedophile free zones" for the rest of her life is pretty absurd. She's getting a worse punishment than most felons do.

She's a felon.

And that's bullshit.

[Yankee Empire]

If people don't want to listen to the law, they can go live in a different country where such laws don't exist.

Victim blaming is fun.

"If people don't want to be murdered, they should off themselves to prevent that from ever happening!"

It's not victim blaming to call someone who breaks the law a Criminal.

And it's also not victim blaming to tell people that say the laws in this country are terrible, to move to those other countries whose laws they claim are better.

[Page]

I am absolutely, 100% sure that if every moment of everyone's life was monitored by the state and every violation of the law were prosecuted and every conviction was met with the maximum sentence allowed under the federal or state statutes they're under jurisdiction of, every single person involved in this discussion would have spent some time in jail, so when are the legalists going to get off their pedestals?

[The New Earth Coalition]

She's a felon.

Yeah, and a registered sex offender, for the rest of her life.

She knew the risks of what she was doing. And if she didn't , she does now.

[Frisivisia]

Laws are intended to serve the best interest of the people, and punish people for unethical and immoral behavior, behavior like; theft, harming someone's property or person, or violating a person's free will. In this hypothetical scenario and in the case of this 18 year old girl, nobody had anything stolen, nobody's property was harmed, nobody's person was harmed, and nobody's free will was violated. So, how is is this unethical or immoral behavior that warrants punishment at the tax payer's expense? It seems unethical and immoral on the part of government, because if this 18 year old girl is convicted government will be locking her behind bars and will be ruining her life and her opportunities of buying a home, applying for a job, applying for a college, and applying for financial aid for college. Yet, this 18 year old girl didn't do anything unethical or immoral, she had consensual relations with the person she is dating, and the person she is dating is 2 years and some months younger, its not as though she maliciously preyed upon a naive infant or someone significantly younger.

Why do you think the US made 18 the age where you become an adult? When you turn 18 (or if you already are) then go change the age when you become an adult.

If you don't like it, then get the hell out of this country.

IF U DON LIEK IT GEDDOWT. MURIKA, YEEEEEE DAWGIIE!!!!!

*fires machine gun into the air*

[Evraim]

The governments of most European and South American countries seem to think so, with their ages of consent of 15 or lower. I think the question is essentially unanswerable, even for a single individual, much less for "most" of a demographic, as "capacity to consent" is not a discrete yes/no value, but rather a collection of continua of mental properties.

Since I cannot answer the question, and neither I think can you, I will accept what an individual says about their own consent or lack thereof. The younger partner in this case insists that she is not a victim of anything, and she knows a lot better than I do (and better than you do, and better than the State does).

I think that's a rather dangerous philosophy to adopt. A nine year old could technically say that they consented to sexual intercourse with a fifty year old. By the standard mentioned above, we would not be able to penalize the sexual predator. What you propose seems tantamount to sexual anarchy with no protections or safeguards in place to segregate children from older people who generally possess far more social capital and authority than they do. I am skeptical that such a system would ever gain support. This is why we go back to old generalizations - because, often, they contained enough truth to be useful.

[The Sector Union]

Laws are intended to serve the best interest of the people, and punish people for unethical and immoral behavior, behavior like; theft, harming someone's property or person, or violating a person's free will. In this hypothetical scenario and in the case of this 18 year old girl, nobody had anything stolen, nobody's property was harmed, nobody's person was harmed, and nobody's free will was violated. So, how is is this unethical or immoral behavior that warrants punishment at the tax payer's expense? It seems unethical and immoral on the part of government, because if this 18 year old girl is convicted government will be locking her behind bars and will be ruining her life and her opportunities of buying a home, applying for a job, applying for a college, and applying for financial aid for college. Yet, this 18 year old girl didn't do anything unethical or immoral, she had consensual relations with the person she is dating, and the person she is dating is 2 years and some months younger, its not as though she maliciously preyed upon a naive infant or someone significantly younger.

Why do you think the US made 18 the age where you become an adult? When you turn 18 (or if you already are) then go change the age when you become an adult.

If you don't like it, then get the hell out of this country.

I've always loved how the US allows each state to have their own kind of laws giving people the choice to live differently in the same country.

Some people just had it with the US in general.

[Lemanrussland]

Laws are intended to serve the best interest of the people, and punish people for unethical and immoral behavior, behavior like; theft, harming someone's property or person, or violating a person's free will. In this hypothetical scenario and in the case of this 18 year old girl, nobody had anything stolen, nobody's property was harmed, nobody's person was harmed, and nobody's free will was violated. So, how is is this unethical or immoral behavior that warrants punishment at the tax payer's expense? It seems unethical and immoral on the part of government, because if this 18 year old girl is convicted government will be locking her behind bars and will be ruining her life and her opportunities of buying a home, applying for a job, applying for a college, and applying for financial aid for college. Yet, this 18 year old girl didn't do anything unethical or immoral, she had consensual relations with the person she is dating, and the person she is dating is 2 years and some months younger, its not as though she maliciously preyed upon a naive infant or someone significantly younger.

Why do you think the US made 18 the age where you become an adult? When you turn 18 (or if you already are) then go change the age when you become an adult.

If you don't like it, then get the hell out of this country.

If you don't like 'Murica then you can GIIIT out!

What, is no debate allowed in the USA?

[The New Earth Coalition]

The governments of most European and South American countries seem to think so, with their ages of consent of 15 or lower. I think the question is essentially unanswerable, even for a single individual, much less for "most" of a demographic, as "capacity to consent" is not a discrete yes/no value, but rather a collection of continua of mental properties.

Since I cannot answer the question, and neither I think can you, I will accept what an individual says about their own consent or lack thereof. The younger partner in this case insists that she is not a victim of anything, and she knows a lot better than I do (and better than you do, and better than the State does).

I think that's a rather dangerous philosophy to adopt. A nine year old could technically say that they consented to sexual intercourse with a fifty year old. By the standard mentioned above, we would not be able to penalize the sexual predator. What you propose seems tantamount to sexual anarchy with no protections or safeguards in place to segregate children from older people who generally possess far more social capital and authority than they do. I am skeptical that such a system would ever gain support. This is why we go back to old generalizations - because, often, they contained enough truth to be useful.

Thank you!

[Cosara]

I didn't mean it in the Christian sense though if Cosara is a Christian then that's even more pertinent. Does God morally deem a person to be a rapist because of the laws written by men and what invisible state lines the humans in question were hypothetically having sex inside of?

God views this as pre-marital sex.

[Resora]

Yeah, and a registered sex offender, for the rest of her life.

She knew the risks of what she was doing. And if she didn't , she does now.

I'm going to go full douchebag and quote (paraphrase) myself.

Defending laws like these is akin to defending a thug who warns his victims "if you call me stupid, I'll break your skull". If someone, after being warned by that thug, calls him stupid anyway and gets beaten for it, the thug is still the one in the wrong because the one that wrongfully used force to cause harm to another. The victim may have been unwise, but what he did was morally inert.

[Mike the Progressive]

The governments of most European and South American countries seem to think so, with their ages of consent of 15 or lower. I think the question is essentially unanswerable, even for a single individual, much less for "most" of a demographic, as "capacity to consent" is not a discrete yes/no value, but rather a collection of continua of mental properties.

Since I cannot answer the question, and neither I think can you, I will accept what an individual says about their own consent or lack thereof. The younger partner in this case insists that she is not a victim of anything, and she knows a lot better than I do (and better than you do, and better than the State does).

I think that's a rather dangerous philosophy to adopt. A nine year old could technically say that they consented to sexual intercourse with a fifty year old. By the standard mentioned above, we would not be able to penalize the sexual predator. What you propose seems tantamount to sexual anarchy with no protections or safeguards in place to segregate children from older people who generally possess far more social capital and authority than they do. I am skeptical that such a system would ever gain support. This is why we go back to old generalizations - because, often, they contained enough truth to be useful.

Honestly, rather than having an age of consent, judges should be given some leeway to decide on a case by case basis what is clearly a technicality and what is really abuse.

[Sophian]

The laws are written in a quite ham-handed way. There's also been a great witchhunt against pedophiles and such, so these kind of blanket punishments are acceptable/even popular.

This person being subjected to things like "pedophile free zones" for the rest of her life is pretty absurd. She's getting a worse punishment than most felons do.

She's a felon.

Has a human 3 years younger than you, or even younger, ever shared romantic or sexual affection with you? (If yes, you are one who indulges in hypocrisy)

[Lemanrussland]

Yeah, and a registered sex offender, for the rest of her life.

She knew the risks of what she was doing. And if she didn't , she does now.

Do you support cutting the hands off of thieves? How about stoning adulterers?

That's about how over the top this punishment is. It's ridiculous.

[Katganistan]

My problem is that when the relationship began, she was 17 and it was legal... but she turned 18 and the relationship she was already in legally suddenly became illegal and she's a sex offender.

It doesn't make sense, no matter what the "ohoho, if it was a man people would want him castrated" and the "all sex is disgusting anyway" camps say. Yeah, an 18 year old trolling for 13 years old, no way. But when because of a birthday that passes in the middle of the relationship this kind of thing can happen, it's a gross miscarriage of justice.

Why didn't the other girls' parents object or try to involve the police before now?

[The New Earth Coalition]

Why do you think the US made 18 the age where you become an adult? When you turn 18 (or if you already are) then go change the age when you become an adult.

If you don't like it, then get the hell out of this country.

If you don't like 'Murica then you can GIIIT out!

What, is no debate allowed in the USA?