Rape victim ordered to pay child support

[Kidlicious]

Typical Ben CRAP. You make up what he said and then ask him if he actually believes it. You are such a douche.
He never said the word 'legally' he just said consensual.

Even for a 15 year old there is a difference between consensual and not consensual even if the 15 year old "legally" can't give consent..
I'd expect even a virgin would know the difference.

Since you like to speak for your brother, do the both of you believe the same goes for a 15 year old girl. Might as well be talking about 12 year olds actually.

[The Mad Monk]

It occurs to me that if the law says you cannot give consent, that should apply to all other actions the government can take regarding that situation.

[Kidlicious]

Well yeah. I can understand your confusion. Most of us have working moral compasses.

We all know you're a sociopath by your habitual trolling.

[rah]

Umm. Wow. Ming, you actually believe that a 15 year old can legally consent?

Typical Ben CRAP. You make up what he said and then ask him if he actually believes it. You are such a douche.
He never said the word 'legally' he just said consensual.

Even for a 15 year old there is a difference between consensual and not consensual even if the 15 year old "legally" can't give consent..
I'd expect even a virgin would know the difference.

[Sava]

What are you talking about? There's almost no outrage against this.

Well yeah. I can understand your confusion. Most of us have working moral compasses.

[Kidlicious]

I disagree. I think it's stupid but I could see a case for it. But then, the US can be thankful that I'm not a judge with any real authority.

What are you talking about? There's almost no outrage against this.

[Ben Kenobi]

The fact that it was consensual is a BIG DIFFERENCE.

Umm. Wow. Ming, you actually believe that a 15 year old can legally consent?

[rah]

I believe the reason it is considered statutory rape to have sex with someone underage is the legal theory that consent in certain situations is impossible. If so, it's an interesting double standard for authorities to adopt.

It is either possible or impossible. It cannot be both.

I disagree. I think it's stupid but I could see a case for it. But then, the US can be thankful that I'm not a judge with any real authority.

[Kidlicious]

Minors are not allowed to enter into legal contracts. Such contracts are null a void.

[notyoueither]

DD, while I had a problem with that, I can understand it. But, it didn't matter if it was consensual as far as the criminal aspect, it can matter in the civil aspect. We see differences between criminal and civil prosecution all the time.

I believe the reason it is considered statutory rape to have sex with someone underage is the legal theory that consent in certain situations is impossible. If so, it's an interesting double standard for authorities to adopt.

It is either possible or impossible. It cannot be both.

[Sava]

Ming linked to an actual case. Which is what my post was responding to. Not kid's opening post.

Ah. I wasn't following that exchange closely enough.

But regardless, I don't really give a **** about some random, isolated case.

This may come as a shock to you, but the law isn't always fair. It's written by humans.

And just because laws can sometimes be unfair and imperfect doesn't mean that we should just scrap the whole notion of government... because I know that's the place you are ultimately coming from... even if you don't explicitly say so.

[DinoDoc]

Um. He's a troll.

I can recognize my own kind.

[DinoDoc]

Forgive me for not offering a thought on this fictional scenario. I tend to restrict my comments to reality... not some men's rights ******'s idiotic scenarios.

Ming linked to an actual case. Which is what my post was responding to. Not kid's opening post.

[Sava]

I saw your post Sava. It didn't really give me an answer for the apparent cognitive dissonance on display in the story Ming linked to. The authorities convicted the woman of a crime because of his inability to legally give consent. The same authorities now are holding the victim in that case responsible for the aftermath of that crime because they now view the relationship as consensual. If they convicted the woman of a crime based on the state's unwillingness to recognize his ability to give consent, why should that consent make a difference now?

Oh... my bad. My comments were more about the reality of an adult woman having sexual relations with a minor.

Forgive me for not offering a thought on this fictional scenario. I tend to restrict my comments to reality... not some men's rights ******'s idiotic scenarios.

Can I just yell "THANKS OBAMA"? Will that satisfy the "GUVERMINT IS EVIL" mindset?

[rah]

DD, while I had a problem with that, I can understand it. But, it didn't matter if it was consensual as far as the criminal aspect, it can matter in the civil aspect. We see differences between criminal and civil prosecution all the time.