Activism Change

Teacher pleads guilty to sex with boy, 14

Question:

> And the problem now is that women have been given all the rights that > Men have, without and equal responsibility to go with them. > There is no reason not to hold them accountable for their actions, the > same as Men. > None whatsoever.

Of course there is.. Men raping women is a crime..Women raping men is a gift. ATTRACTIVE women that is.

Response:

"Mad Mambo Master of Macedonia" <n…@newb.com> wrote in message news:Xns9719399C4E522newbnewbcom@70.169.32.36… >> Every single one of these bitches gets a slap on the hand. Then they go >> on Oprah or somewhere else to sell their "love story". And they get >> paid too. > Do you call prison a slap on the hand? Not that logic & reason matter in > your world, which is as cuckoo as an NRA meeting.

Uhhhhh CUSE me!!!! MZZZZZZZZ. Le Tourneau did NOT  get prison until the SECOND time she got knocked up by the LITTLE BOY! Of the half dozen other FEMALE TEACHERS busted for shagging LITTLE KIDS……………. NONE so far have done prison time.

Response:

Hardpan writes: > Wrong!

Because you say so? > In America a slave was considered 3/5th a man under law, so they were > considered human.

I was not limiting my observation to the United States, and the context of my observation was different (the moral justification for slavery, as opposite to legal definitions and details). > Slavery was condemned long before the DOI was written.

Yes, but prohibitions weren’t written into law in the U.S. until much later. > Morality has a basis in survival, so it is not to be swept under the > rug as easily as some would have it.

Morality and survival are unrelated. > I didn’t say that, and we are talking about all children, not just > teens.

A 14-year-old is a teen. However, I don’t see why sexual activity at any age must automatically be molestation.  Sex is not torture, and even toddlers masturbate. > Molestation is not just a sexual term, you understand that, of course.

If it is not a sexual term, then it has no place in a discussion of sex. > Myself, for one.

I thought so.  But you are not necessarily representative. > Its also a fact that children born to single mothers do worse in life > then children raised in a two-parent family, in a large percentage.

I don’t see the relevance of this. > So for you consent means everything, correct?

Consent is the key.  If people consent, it’s nobody else’s business. If they do not, their rights are being violated and it seems morally justifiable to me to intervene to protect those rights. > And you can always prove that a rape victim was consent/no-consent > rape, correct?

All you have to do is ask the alleged victim. > "The law" used to say that Jews could be shunned and taken prisoners > as well, but I fail to see that that fact made it right either.

Then you also see that declaring sex with minors to be rape does not make it so. > And when they don’t, they go to jail where this teacher should be.

I don’t see the relevance of this comment. > You claim you live in another country, correct?

Another as opposed to which country? > In America, children are covered by one health care system or another, > but not adults, like a 25 year old man.

Which health-care systems cover children but not adults? > Yes, it is when they pass transmittable diseases and unwanted children > along with the sex.

Which STDs and unwanted children were produced by the sexual activity between LaFave and her student? > So the age does make a difference to you, else why bring up her age at > violation?

Because the law bases a great deal on age.  I don’t personally care much about age. > Becoming a Man and being an adult are two different things altogether.

Explain the difference. > A 25 year old female is a grown woman to a little 14 year old boy.

She is a grown woman, period.  And a 14-year-old boy isn’t necessarily little, if he has passed through puberty. > And non-sexually repressed societies often have lax standards in all > their affairs as well.

So? > A 14 year old girl having sex with 2 or 3 adult men a day would not > make her a slut in your eyes?

Sluttiness, to the extent that it exists at all, is a function of one’s attitude towards sex, and not the frequency with which one engages in it.  So the frequency of her sexual activity is uncorrelated with her supposed sluttiness.   In other words, no, it would not make her a slut in my eyes.  Lots of people enjoy sex, and I don’t see why she cannot be among them. > Which country are you from again?

What difference does that make? > Where are you?

Why does it matter?  Isn’t morality universal? > Why don’t you ask her?

Some things are none of my business. > I assume that, as a young child, that you let every boy (or girl) that > wanted to, to come over and have sex with her in your home,  correct?

As a young child, I had no children. — Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Response:

"Mxsmanic" <mxsma…@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:a4lfo1hec34af71uo24dlt3733ec44q5ha@4ax.com… > Stinky writes: >> Prison?  She got two years house arrest.  That’s a slap on the wrist >> for a teacher abusing her power and having sex with a minor. > Where was the abuse of power in this case?

When she yanked his dick out of his pants and started in on the KID! >> Granted she can never teach again and has to register as a sex offender. > Which seems harsh.

Awwww POOOR BAYYYYBEEEEEEE!

Response:

"Mxsmanic" <mxsma…@gmail.com> wrote in message

news:2qtfo1hoqnde5fo5ubta2gcgb5t75hmars@4ax.com… > greg writes: >> Do you want your daughter to be taught by convicted pedophiles? > Pedophilia isn’t a crime.

Not per se, but SCREWING little kids IS!!!

Response:

greg writes: > I would say that your attitude is apalling.

You’re entitled to your opinion. > This woman took advantage of a fourteen year old.

He consented to it.  She asked him several times if he really wanted to do it, and he said yes.  Nobody forced anyone, and he unambiguously consented. > She is a rapist.

Hardly.  Rape is a very different thing, and most notably it involves a lack of consent. > Take it from somebody who’s been there.

Lots of people have been there, but the only ones you hear about are the ones who are screwed up by it.  Some adults are screwed up by sexual relations as well.  That doesn’t mean that everyone is screwed up by sex, at any age. > The kid may be apparently OK now but I’d be checking again > in ten years. The affects on young men and boys > who are molested by women are subtle, insidious and long term.

The effects on adult men are also subtle, insidious, and long-term. Additionally, the same is true for women, at all ages. > She has taken a huge risk with this kid’s whole future.

Lots of people have sexual experiences very similar to this one, and they don’t all end up mentally ill.  For some people, sex is traumatic at any age; and for some others, it is never traumatic, irrespective of age. — Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Response:

greg writes: > Do you want your daughter to be taught by convicted pedophiles?

Pedophilia isn’t a crime.  It’s probably not ideal for pedophiles to teach children, since that puts them in the midst of temptation, but many other people are placed in other similar situations, and they manage to control themselves. On the other hand, if someone has engaged in harmful behavior, such as rape (real rape, not statutory rape) or the like, I don’t think that she should be hired for jobs that might present her with potential victims.  In this case, she has an actual record of harmful behavior, which is very different from just a state of mind that might be associated with something that is socially unacceptable. Do you want your daughter to be taught by lesbians? — Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Hardpan wrote: >On Sat, 26 Nov 2005 04:27:14 +0100, Mxsmanic <mxsma…@gmail.com> >wrote: >>Hardpan writes: >>>You will get no argument from me on that score, but it applies to >>>pretty WHITE females, for the most part. >>Being pretty and/or female is always an advantage. >I this case, yes. >Being female is never an advantage outside the law, but that’s just my >opinion, of course. >>>Back in the 1850’s one could say that every Black male should rightly >>>be a slave, because thats what Black men were, for the most part. >>That’s exactly what people did say in those days, at least in the >>southern U.S.  That’s why the South had slaves. >And we had a foundation laid down by White men that said all men were >equal under God and the laws of man. >I wonder what ever happened to that little tidbit of history? >>>Would that have made it right? >>There’s no objective standard of right and wrong, although I >>personally disagree with slavery because of its inherent injustice. >Really? >So there is no objective standard that murder and rape is wrong? >Could have fooled me, as all countries in the known world have laws >against these crimes. >>>She didn’t? Then why did she get convicted by a jury of her peers? >>Because what she did was illegal.  That doesn’t mean there was >>anything morally wrong with it. >That’s your opinion, not the law. >There is nothing moral about adults molesting children. >There is nothing moral about letting them molest each other either for >that matter. >It  leads to all manner of anti-social behaviors later on in life, >that are not good for the individual or society at all. >>>Some people would consent to be tortured or even killed. >>>Would that make it right if we allowed that to slide under the rug as >>>well? >>Absolutely.  As far as I’m concerned, if all involved parties consent, >>anything goes, and it’s none of my business or anyone else’s. >The Marquee de Sade’ would have loved you ! >>>There is a law against raping 14 year olds for a good reason. >>This 14-year-old was not raped.  He just happened to be under 18, >>which is not the same thing (except by statute). >Yes, it is rape. >A child cannot give consent. The child was a minor. >>>When your little boy gets an STD or knocks the adult female up, make >>>sure that we taxpayers don’t foot the bill. >>Big boys get STDs and knock up females, too.  Why does age make any >>difference? >Because big-boys foot the bill for child support and doctor bills. >Little boys don’t and the taxpayers often end up paying the bills. >>>And don’t complain about it either when he is messed up in the head >>>because of this, and blows his brains out, down the road, after >>>turning to drugs and alcohol. >>Why would he be messed up in the head by sex?  The only real source of >>trauma in this case is the hysteria that ensued after people found out >>about the sex.   >You seem to one of those who think this is all innocent stuff, since >it happened to a young boy, but you are incorrect. The woman was an >adult well past 21 years of age. >Having sex with a woman does not make a boy into a Man, no more so >then a 14 year old girl becomes a woman by fucking some 25 year old >guy. >Do you really think this is even slightly normal behavior, that leads >to a sane, rational life in the future for the victims? >>>So you would have NO PROBLEMS at all with a few 25 year old men >>>banging your 14 year old daughter at least three times a day, correct? >>Correct, if she consents.   >Really? >So the idea of your daughter being a total slut doesn’t bother you at >all? >>Of course, she should take precautions >>against STDs and pregnancy, although ultimately that’s her decision, >>not mine. >Yes, it is until, she is 18 in the USA >You are not a parent, are you?

it varys from state to state, I’m sure you know that.

Response:

"greg" <gwa…@impulse.net.au> wrote in message

news:438807E4.9080005@impulse.net.au… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Mxsmanic wrote: >> greg writes: >>>I would say that your attitude is apalling. >> You’re entitled to your opinion. >>>This woman took advantage of a fourteen year old. >> He consented to it.  She asked him several times if he really wanted >> to do it, and he said yes.  Nobody forced anyone, and he unambiguously >> consented. > His consent is irrelevant. No fourteen year old can possibly have the > maturity >>>She is a rapist. >> Hardly.  Rape is a very different thing, and most notably it involves >> a lack of consent. >>>Take it from somebody who’s been there. >> Lots of people have been there, but the only ones you hear about are >> the ones who are screwed up by it.  Some adults are screwed up by >> sexual relations as well.  That doesn’t mean that everyone is screwed >> up by sex, at any age. >>>The kid may be apparently OK now but I’d be checking again >>>in ten years. The affects on young men and boys who are molested by women >>>are subtle, insidious and long term.

HAHAHA..  you are actually serious in that this kid will be affected in a negative way?   Remember this kid consented to having sex with her and she was a beautiful woman!!   So the only affect this kid will have will probably be a higher feeling of achieving his goals and probably more success with women and his career will be better probably for feeling superior to most men….  This kid has it made…….lucky bastard…… Women will want him..  you just watch how time gives this kid everything he wants. It’s not like he was forcibly raped by a fat ugly woman!!!! That would be a negative affect   LOL. Wasn’t there was a recent case where the teacher ended up marring the kid after having two of his children.. she did some time..  but I dont think she should have. >> The effects on adult men are also subtle, insidious, and long-term. >> Additionally, the same is true for women, at all ages.

HAHAH  you are comparing the long term affects of rape on women and comparing them to men   LOL  too funny….there is a difference whether the predator is attractive enough to be actually wanted by the victim.. also consider the means used..  violent rape vs. victim consenting …BIG DIFFERENCE >>>She has taken a huge risk with this kid’s whole future.

Yea she improved his future tremendously…..  that teacher was friggin’ hot! >> Lots of people have sexual experiences very similar to this one, and >> they don’t all end up mentally ill.  For some people, sex is traumatic >> at any age; and for some others, it is never traumatic, irrespective >> of age.

yea well.. they should have a psychological examination for the victim before handing down a sentence to a so called "sexual predator" especially in the case of this woman and cases like them. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Mxsmanic wrote: >Stinky writes: >>Prison?  She got two years house arrest.  That’s a slap on the wrist >>for a teacher abusing her power and having sex with a minor. >Where was the abuse of power in this case? >>Granted she can never teach again and has to register as a sex offender. >Which seems harsh.

she *was* a teacher when she did the deed after school hours. so, in a sense, she did abuse her position of "authority" by engaging sex with one of her students. statutory rape is a lame charge particulary if the sex was consensual between 2 different age groups of either sex.

Response:

"Stinky" <awlecl…@hotmail.com> wrote in news:1132967428.219585.149830@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com: – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Mad Mambo Master of Macedonia wrote: >> "Darkfalz" <darkfal…@gmail.com> wrote in >> news:1132924271.521901.181580 @g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com: >> > Every single one of these bitches gets a slap on the hand. Then >> > they go on Oprah or somewhere else to sell their "love story". And >> > they get paid too. >> Do you call prison a slap on the hand? Not that logic & reason matter >> in your world, which is as cuckoo as an NRA meeting. > Prison?  She got two years house arrest.  That’s a slap on the wrist > for a teacher abusing her power and having sex with a minor.  Granted > she can never teach again and has to register as a sex offender.

Others have gotten prison for it, I’m sure. — As for the pastor, after four days of listening to science experts dismantling the case for intelligent design, he was unimpressed.   "They’re babblers," said the pastor, the Rev. Jim Grove, who leads a 40- member independent Baptist church outside of Dover. "The more Ph.D.’s you get, it seems like the further away from God you get."  (NY Times, 10-2- 05)

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Mxsmanic wrote: > greg writes: >>I would say that your attitude is apalling. > You’re entitled to your opinion. >>This woman took advantage of a fourteen year old. > He consented to it.  She asked him several times if he really wanted > to do it, and he said yes.  Nobody forced anyone, and he unambiguously > consented.

His consent is irrelevant. No fourteen year old can possibly have the maturity – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->>She is a rapist. > Hardly.  Rape is a very different thing, and most notably it involves > a lack of consent. >>Take it from somebody who’s been there. > Lots of people have been there, but the only ones you hear about are > the ones who are screwed up by it.  Some adults are screwed up by > sexual relations as well.  That doesn’t mean that everyone is screwed > up by sex, at any age. >>The kid may be apparently OK now but I’d be checking again >>in ten years. The affects on young men and boys >>who are molested by women are subtle, insidious and long term. > The effects on adult men are also subtle, insidious, and long-term. > Additionally, the same is true for women, at all ages. >>She has taken a huge risk with this kid’s whole future. > Lots of people have sexual experiences very similar to this one, and > they don’t all end up mentally ill.  For some people, sex is traumatic > at any age; and for some others, it is never traumatic, irrespective > of age.

Response:

Mxsmanic wrote: > greg writes: >>Do you want your daughter to be taught by convicted pedophiles? > Pedophilia isn’t a crime.  It’s probably not ideal for pedophiles to > teach children, since that puts them in the midst of temptation, but > many other people are placed in other similar situations, and they > manage to control themselves.

Answer the question. Do you want your daughter to be taught by somebody with a history of engaging in sex with children. I’m not interested in your definition of paedophilia. You know exactly what I mean. > On the other hand, if someone has engaged in harmful behavior, such as > rape (real rape, not statutory rape) or the like, I don’t think that > she should be hired for jobs that might present her with potential > victims.  In this case, she has an actual record of harmful behavior, > which is very different from just a state of mind that might be > associated with something that is socially unacceptable. > Do you want your daughter to be taught by lesbians?

The teacher’s sexual orientation is irrelevant. You are trying on the standard feminist diversionary tactics. This is not relevant. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Mxsmanic wrote: > greg writes: >>I would say that your attitude is apalling. > You’re entitled to your opinion. >>This woman took advantage of a fourteen year old. > He consented to it.  She asked him several times if he really wanted > to do it, and he said yes.  Nobody forced anyone, and he unambiguously > consented.

Consent is irrelevant. He is fourteen. >>She is a rapist. > Hardly.  Rape is a very different thing, and most notably it involves > a lack of consent.

As I said he’s fourteen. >>Take it from somebody who’s been there. > Lots of people have been there, but the only ones you hear about are > the ones who are screwed up by it.  Some adults are screwed up by > sexual relations as well.  That doesn’t mean that everyone is screwed > up by sex, at any age.

Vastly more likely with a fourteen year old tho. >>The kid may be apparently OK now but I’d be checking again >>in ten years. The affects on young men and boys >>who are molested by women are subtle, insidious and long term. > The effects on adult men are also subtle, insidious, and long-term. > Additionally, the same is true for women, at all ages.

Were not discussing adults here. >>She has taken a huge risk with this kid’s whole future. > Lots of people have sexual experiences very similar to this one, and > they don’t all end up mentally ill.  For some people, sex is traumatic > at any age; and for some others, it is never traumatic, irrespective > of age.

OK then. How old is your daughter? How about an intro. You never know, she could be as "open minded" as yourself. Could be a lark eh. Funny how all of these little diversions and excuses and justifications start coming out when it’s women being caught. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –

Response:

Mxsmanic wrote: > Stinky writes: >>Prison?  She got two years house arrest.  That’s a slap on the wrist >>for a teacher abusing her power and having sex with a minor. > Where was the abuse of power in this case? >>Granted she can never teach again and has to register as a sex offender. > Which seems harsh.

Do you want your daughter to be taught by convicted pedophiles? – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –

Response:

Hardpan writes: > Being female is never an advantage outside the law, but that’s just my > opinion, of course.

I disagree.  There are numerous advantages to being female, particularly in developed nations. > And we had a foundation laid down by White men that said all men were > equal under God and the laws of man.

At one time, people with black skin were not considered human beings, at least not by many people with white skin.  It was thus possible to enslave them without infringing on the principle of equality, for people with these beliefs. > I wonder what ever happened to that little tidbit of history?

Standards were different in those days. Explicit condemnation of slavery was considered as early as the writing of the Declaration of Independence, but it became clear that the slave-holding colonies would never sign on if such text appeared. > Really?

Yes. > So there is no objective standard that murder and rape is wrong?

Correct. > Could have fooled me, as all countries in the known world have laws > against these crimes.

Some people are easily fooled.  There are one or two states with no laws against murder, as I recall, and there are considerably more with no clear prohibitions of rape, again IIRC. > That’s your opinion, not the law.

Morality is always a matter of opinion. > There is nothing moral about adults molesting children.

Having sex with a consenting teenager is not molestation. > There is nothing moral about letting them molest each other either for > that matter.

Sex between consenting teenagers is not molestation, either. > It  leads to all manner of anti-social behaviors later on in life, > that are not good for the individual or society at all.

Does it?  Show cause and effect. > The Marquee de Sade’ would have loved you !

I don’t know.  I’m not sure that he favored consent. > Yes, it is rape.

Not in reality.  Statutory rape is rape declared de jure, as opposed to actual rape (which involves a lack of consent). > A child cannot give consent. The child was a minor.

That’s what the law says, but the reality is that anyone can give consent.  The law used to say that blacks could be enslaved, too. > Because big-boys foot the bill for child support and doctor bills.

Sometimes they do, and sometimes they don’t. > Little boys don’t and the taxpayers often end up paying the bills.

Show cause and effect. > You seem to one of those who think this is all innocent stuff, since > it happened to a young boy, but you are incorrect. The woman was an > adult well past 21 years of age.

The fact that it happened to a young boy is irrelevant.  To me, sex between consenting parties is fine, and is really none of my business. The woman was 23, and the man was 14.  They were only nine years apart.  And people get married younger than 14.  And 14-year-olds have generally passed through puberty, and can reproduce. > Having sex with a woman does not make a boy into a Man, no more so > then a 14 year old girl becomes a woman by fucking some 25 year old > guy.

Many 14-year-olds are already adults sexually, particularly if they are interested in sex.  They don’t have to be "made into" anything, as they become physiological adults automatically and inevitably. > Do you really think this is even slightly normal behavior, that leads > to a sane, rational life in the future for the victims?

I don’t see any problem with it.  Some societies don’t mind, but sexually repressed societies often have a problem with it (and with just about everything else involving sex). > Really?

Absolutely. > So the idea of your daughter being a total slut doesn’t bother you at > all?

Having sex would not make my daughter a slut.  She’s entitled to engage in sex if she wants to.  It’s harmless, if she takes reasonable precautions. > Yes, it is until, she is 18 in the USA

I’m not in the USA. > You are not a parent, are you?

What would my daughter say? — Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Mxsmanic wrote: > Hardpan writes: >>Being female is never an advantage outside the law, but that’s just my >>opinion, of course. > I disagree.  There are numerous advantages to being female, > particularly in developed nations. >>And we had a foundation laid down by White men that said all men were >>equal under God and the laws of man. > At one time, people with black skin were not considered human beings, > at least not by many people with white skin.  It was thus possible to > enslave them without infringing on the principle of equality, for > people with these beliefs. >>I wonder what ever happened to that little tidbit of history? > Standards were different in those days. > Explicit condemnation of slavery was considered as early as the > writing of the Declaration of Independence, but it became clear that > the slave-holding colonies would never sign on if such text appeared. >>Really? > Yes. >>So there is no objective standard that murder and rape is wrong? > Correct. >>Could have fooled me, as all countries in the known world have laws >>against these crimes. > Some people are easily fooled.  There are one or two states with no > laws against murder, as I recall, and there are considerably more with > no clear prohibitions of rape, again IIRC. >>That’s your opinion, not the law. > Morality is always a matter of opinion. >>There is nothing moral about adults molesting children. > Having sex with a consenting teenager is not molestation. >>There is nothing moral about letting them molest each other either for >>that matter. > Sex between consenting teenagers is not molestation, either. >>It  leads to all manner of anti-social behaviors later on in life, >>that are not good for the individual or society at all. > Does it?  Show cause and effect. >>The Marquee de Sade’ would have loved you ! > I don’t know.  I’m not sure that he favored consent. >>Yes, it is rape. > Not in reality.  Statutory rape is rape declared de jure, as opposed > to actual rape (which involves a lack of consent). >>A child cannot give consent. The child was a minor. > That’s what the law says, but the reality is that anyone can give > consent.  The law used to say that blacks could be enslaved, too. >>Because big-boys foot the bill for child support and doctor bills. > Sometimes they do, and sometimes they don’t. >>Little boys don’t and the taxpayers often end up paying the bills. > Show cause and effect. >>You seem to one of those who think this is all innocent stuff, since >>it happened to a young boy, but you are incorrect. The woman was an >>adult well past 21 years of age. > The fact that it happened to a young boy is irrelevant.  To me, sex > between consenting parties is fine, and is really none of my business. > The woman was 23, and the man was 14.  They were only nine years > apart.  And people get married younger than 14.  And 14-year-olds have > generally passed through puberty, and can reproduce. >>Having sex with a woman does not make a boy into a Man, no more so >>then a 14 year old girl becomes a woman by fucking some 25 year old >>guy. > Many 14-year-olds are already adults sexually, particularly if they > are interested in sex.  They don’t have to be "made into" anything, as > they become physiological adults automatically and inevitably. >>Do you really think this is even slightly normal behavior, that leads >>to a sane, rational life in the future for the victims? > I don’t see any problem with it.  Some societies don’t mind, but > sexually repressed societies often have a problem with it (and with > just about everything else involving sex). >>Really? > Absolutely. >>So the idea of your daughter being a total slut doesn’t bother you at >>all? > Having sex would not make my daughter a slut.  She’s entitled to > engage in sex if she wants to.  It’s harmless, if she takes reasonable > precautions. >>Yes, it is until, she is 18 in the USA > I’m not in the USA. >>You are not a parent, are you? > What would my daughter say?

I would say that your attitude is apalling. This woman took advantage of a fourteen year old. She is a rapist. Take it from somebody who’s been there. The kid may be apparently OK now but I’d be checking again in ten years. The affects on young men and boys who are molested by women are subtle, insidious and long term. She has taken a huge risk with this kid’s whole future. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –

Response:

Mad Mambo Master of Macedonia wrote: > "Darkfalz" <darkfal…@gmail.com> wrote in news:1132924271.521901.181580 > @g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com: > > Every single one of these bitches gets a slap on the hand. Then they go > > on Oprah or somewhere else to sell their "love story". And they get > > paid too. > Do you call prison a slap on the hand? Not that logic & reason matter in > your world, which is as cuckoo as an NRA meeting.

Prison?  She got two years house arrest.  That’s a slap on the wrist for a teacher abusing her power and having sex with a minor.  Granted she can never teach again and has to register as a sex offender.

Response:

Stinky writes: > Prison?  She got two years house arrest.  That’s a slap on the wrist > for a teacher abusing her power and having sex with a minor.

Where was the abuse of power in this case? > Granted she can never teach again and has to register as a sex offender.

Which seems harsh. — Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Response:

Hardpan writes: > You will get no argument from me on that score, but it applies to > pretty WHITE females, for the most part.

Being pretty and/or female is always an advantage. > Back in the 1850’s one could say that every Black male should rightly > be a slave, because thats what Black men were, for the most part.

That’s exactly what people did say in those days, at least in the southern U.S.  That’s why the South had slaves. > Would that have made it right?

There’s no objective standard of right and wrong, although I personally disagree with slavery because of its inherent injustice. > She didn’t? Then why did she get convicted by a jury of her peers?

Because what she did was illegal.  That doesn’t mean there was anything morally wrong with it. > Some people would consent to be tortured or even killed. > Would that make it right if we allowed that to slide under the rug as > well?

Absolutely.  As far as I’m concerned, if all involved parties consent, anything goes, and it’s none of my business or anyone else’s. > There is a law against raping 14 year olds for a good reason.

This 14-year-old was not raped.  He just happened to be under 18, which is not the same thing (except by statute). > When your little boy gets an STD or knocks the adult female up, make > sure that we taxpayers don’t foot the bill.

Big boys get STDs and knock up females, too.  Why does age make any difference? > And don’t complain about it either when he is messed up in the head > because of this, and blows his brains out, down the road, after > turning to drugs and alcohol.

Why would he be messed up in the head by sex?  The only real source of trauma in this case is the hysteria that ensued after people found out about the sex. > So you would have NO PROBLEMS at all with a few 25 year old men > banging your 14 year old daughter at least three times a day, correct?

Correct, if she consents.  Of course, she should take precautions against STDs and pregnancy, although ultimately that’s her decision, not mine. — Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Response:

Hardpan writes: > "We all know that no man who raped a 14 year old girl, like this > creature raped this lad,  would NOT be under house arrest, > instead doing hard time in a prison cell with a cell-chum named > "bubba", now don’t we?

Yes, that occurred to me as well. > So much for "equality" and equal rights under the law for Men.

She’s a pretty young female.  Just about anything is permitted if you’re a pretty young female. > Hopefully she will get raped one day and then the rapist can use her > own defense and sentencing to get a lighter sentence, just a she did.

Why?  She didn’t do anything wrong.  Her sexual partner consented, after all.  It’s just that there was a law against it. I suggest that statutory rape laws be repealed instead.  If both partners consent, there’s no reason why it should be illegal. — Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Response:

Every single one of these bitches gets a slap on the hand. Then they go on Oprah or somewhere else to sell their "love story". And they get paid too.

Response:

"Darkfalz" <darkfal…@gmail.com> wrote in news:1132924271.521901.181580 @g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com: > Every single one of these bitches gets a slap on the hand. Then they go > on Oprah or somewhere else to sell their "love story". And they get > paid too.

Do you call prison a slap on the hand? Not that logic & reason matter in your world, which is as cuckoo as an NRA meeting.

Response:

Hardpan <hard…@yahoo.com> wrote in news:49cdo1ddi7hol96q4qa3seq242jnck85u9@4ax.com: > Teacher pleads guilty to sex with boy, 14

You’ll never see me having sex with boys! — As for the pastor, after four days of listening to science experts dismantling the case for intelligent design, he was unimpressed.  "They’re babblers," said the pastor, the Rev. Jim Grove, who leads a 40-member independent Baptist church outside of Dover. "The more Ph.D.’s you get, it seems like the further away from God you get."  (NY Times, 10-2-05)

Response:

Troll writes: > I often read on cosmoforums grecosluts who ask what they should do to > seduce 14-17yo boys.

With that age group, women must make an effort _not_ to seduce them, since everything seems sexy and seductive to a teenager. — Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Response:

Filed under: Feminist

Related Posts

• night sailing, fears & bigotry
• VEGAN GRRRLS
• Clot-abosrbing/blocking tampons?
• Should men sit or stand? OT, Humor I think :))
• Flames for the week... a practical approach
• Okay, I'm going to stop hating women!
• Why not take it to email?
• transmission problem
• My sons hate me
• Gore on Fatherhood - but what has he done for us lately?