It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Court says police illegally taped nursing home sex

page: 8
6
<< 5  6  7   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 21 2008 @ 05:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Yossarian
 



Therefore, you cannot assume consent is given just because there is a ring your finger.


It a much better reason than you or anyone else assuming that a rape has occurred.

At best, all that can be said is that this man will go to prison because he might be guilty of rape. I see the future clearly now, a lot of people going to prison for things that they "might" have done, thanks to people like you. People who don't have what it takes to be free.


What a sad day for America and for Liberty.




posted on Sep, 22 2008 @ 01:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by jackinthebox

It a much better reason than you or anyone else assuming that a rape has occurred.

There is no assumption:


1. the unlawful compelling of a woman through physical force or duress to have sexual intercourse.
2. any act of sexual intercourse that is forced upon a person.


He had sex with an incapacitated woman.. it was not mutual. He used her limp body to sexually gratify himself.

At best, all that can be said is that this man will go to prison because he might be guilty of rape. I see the future clearly now, a lot of people going to prison for things that they "might" have done, thanks to people like you. People who don't have what it takes to be free.

Alot of people going to prison? Men having sex with coma patients isn't all that common.. (least I hope thats the case) so who are you talking about exactly? Men who get women so drunk/drugged she passes out and then have sex with them? If they have to wait till a woman is unconscious in order to have sex with her they obviously know she wouldn't consent while awake. A woman's (or wife's) default to sex is not "yes" so to assume it is is a bit too convenient and self serving. It also overrules her autonomy over her own body.


a sad day for America and for Liberty.

Says a guy who says a woman has to wake up from a stroke induced coma in order to say no to having a penis inside her..


[edit on 22-9-2008 by riley]



posted on Sep, 22 2008 @ 02:44 PM
link   
reply to post by riley
 



He had sex with an incapacitated woman.. it was not mutual. He used her limp body to sexually gratify himself.


You have no way of knowing that. There is no evidence to suggest that she was not, or would not be willing. You also have no way of knowing if this woman would in fact want her husband to be sent to prison for this. I think it is safer to say that she most certainly would not. You also have no way of knowing if his motivation was self-gratification or self-sacrifice for her benefit.

As far as the rest of your post goes, either you are truly ignorant and don't understrand what I am talking about, or you are purposely attempting to deflect through emotional appeal.



Men who get women so drunk/drugged she passes out and then have sex with them?


Nothing illegal about that at all, unless the woman states that she was in fact not willing to have sex. You never had sex with a drunk girl? My woman and I were both so drunk last night that I don't even know who passed out first, right in the middle of having sex!



If they have to wait till a woman is unconscious in order to have sex with her they obviously know she wouldn't consent while awake.


So this man was just waiting for his wife to go into a coma so he could satisfy his urges?




A woman's (or wife's) default to sex is not "yes" so to assume it is is a bit too convenient and self serving. It also overrules her autonomy over her own body.


And what if this man had to make the decision as to wether or not to "pull the plug" if this woman had been on life support? Would you be saying it was murder since he "overruled the autonomy of her body?"

And yes, the default "sex setting" in a marriage is indeed "yes." As I have stated before, I am obligated to satisfy my woman sexually, even if I am too tired. Not that there aren't times when the "no" means no, but both she and I have had times where we participated solely for the benefit of the other. Because that is our obligation to eachother. Is your own relationship so shallow as to not understand what I am even talking about?



Says a guy who says a woman has to wake up from a stroke induced coma in order to say no to having a penis inside her..


She said "yes" when she said "I do."



posted on Sep, 22 2008 @ 03:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by jackinthebox
And what if this man had to make the decision as to wether or not to "pull the plug" if this woman had been on life support? Would you be saying it was murder since he "overruled the autonomy of her body?"


Comparing switching off life support machines to him sexually penetrating her is disgusting. One is to keep her alive.. the other is sexual abuse.

Having sex with coma patients is NOT okay.. they CANNOT consent and any way you look at it they are turning the patient into a sexual object to gratify themselves. Use your hand or go to a brothel instead.



Is your own relationship so shallow as to not understand what I am even talking about?

Getting personal now? My husband (MOST husbands) would have respect enough for me not to violate me while I was in a stroke induced coma. That is not shallow.. that is common decency.

I find your attitude towards women and rape disturbing. You continually ignore the very definition of rape to suit yourself. I really hope you are all talk and do not put your beliefs into practice.

[edit on 22-9-2008 by riley]



posted on Sep, 22 2008 @ 05:37 PM
link   
reply to post by riley
 



Comparing switching off life support machines to him sexually penetrating her is disgusting. One is to keep her alive.. the other is sexual abuse.


You obviously missed the entire point. If he dis-connected her from life support, he would not be keeping her alive. He would be making a decision, that is his right and obligation as her husband, to let her die.



Having sex with coma patients is NOT okay..


That remains to be seen, and your opinion is duly noted. That does not mean that you are right in this case though. I find it bizarre that someone would do something like this, and I certainly don't think it is something that I would ever do, but I have not walked the mile in this man's moccassins. Therefore I can not say with any certainty that this man belongs in prison.



they CANNOT consent...


And how would you know wether or not these people enjoyed the sort of relationship that I happen to enjoy? That being an open-ended "yes" with the exception of the specified "no." In fact, my woman has already stated that she would certainly not consider it rape if we happened to be in this situation, and certainly would not want me to go to prison for it.



...and any way you look at it they are turning the patient into a sexual object to gratify themselves.


Except of course if:

A. This man believed that such an act might bring his wife out of the coma.

Or,

B. This man believed that his wife was indeed aware of his prescense. (In the same way that many people believe that coma patients can hear the voices of loved ones in the room, music, etc.)



Use your hand or go to a brothel instead.


So it is your opinion then that intimacy in a marriage is equivelant to masturbation and cheating?
There are many people that see both acts as a sin against God. I happen to find cheating to be a sin against humanity as well, doing great damage to society. Someone who is willing to go to a brothel has no business being married. And of course you must be aware that going to a brothel is also illegal, punishable by a term in jail.



Getting personal now?


For that I do apologize, I was merely trying to illustrate a point. That being, most people find selflessness to be a fundamental part of an enduring relationship. I find it hard to believe that any one in such a relationship has never once performed a completely selfless sexual act.



I find your attitude towards women and rape disturbing.


And I find it disturbing that with your "know it all attitude" you would have the gumption to dictate the terms of the personal relationships of others.



You continually ignore the very definition of rape to suit yourself.


To suit myself? And what do you think I would possibly have to gain personally by engaging in this debate. My only concern is liberty, and freedom in the American way, for all of my fellow citizens. It is you who is trying to change the definition of the word to fit in with your own personal opinions. Just because you would send your husband to prison if he did this, does not mean that everyone would.

There are some people who also enjoy being physically abused during sex. Not my cup o tea, and I'm sure many people would consider it rape if it happened to them, but it certainly is not rape if the participants do not object.

As I have already stated, I know quite clearly the definition of rape. You have failed to make the case that this woman was in fact forced against her will.



I really hope you are all talk and do not put your beliefs into practice.


I am a lot of things, but a hypocrite is not one of them.



[edit on 9/22/0808 by jackinthebox]




top topics
 
6
<< 5  6  7   >>

log in

join