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.

 

Banned From Having Sex By High Court Because IQ Is Too Low!

page: 3
7
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 08:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Okandetre

Originally posted by hounddoghowlie
thats just a sad story, couldn't the guy doing him find some other gay fella's.
i mean if he that's sick to want to be doing some one thats mentally challenged.
i guess it goes to show ya, that perversion runs in all kinds of of sexual orientations
now don't slam me i'm not knocking gay folks just saying, you got perverts everywhere.


I didn't know it was perverted to have relations with someone of a certain IQ level....

You learn something new everyday

Well, logically it is! Think about it... It's illegal here as far as I know, and people below a certain IQ level can't legally marry, even if their parents consent...
It's the same thing as having sex with a child. Someone with an IQ of 48 is not capable of giving meaningful consent, any more than a child is.
Vicky




posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 08:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Unity_99
I was wrong , 48, not 41. He's not a child being preyed on. Someone hates him having sex, too bad! He obviously has a say himself.


If someone has a mental disability that means that they can't give adequate consent, then I'm afraid that his say may have to be overridden for his own protection, just as a child's say in whether he or she has sex with an adult has to be.



posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 08:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kangaruex4Ewe
They don't really specify what this man can and can not understand.

It is entirely possible that he can umm.. enjoy/want/need the act and could have feelings for his partner while not having the intellect to cook a turkey. We have common sense, book sense, and emotions in between.

This is a very slippery slope. While I agree some people may need protection from themselves who is to say how this guy feels emotionally? His age makes him an adult while his IQ may read differently. The court may well think he shouldn't have sex anymore, but he may well be hell bent that this is what he wants.

Tricky situation to be sure. And his "vigorous sex drive" says he is going to do "it" anyway.
edit on 2/5/2011 by Kangaruex4Ewe because: (no reason given)
Sooooo more or less if the court bans this man's right to sovereignty of his own body then we have essentially given our rights away inadvertentingly and therefore let the gov't be our babysitter. Without personal sovereignty we are but sheep and not able to make our own decisions. Either way, would you like someone to tell you that you couldn't get a drink of water because your body wants a drink yet the gov't doesn't believe we are thirsty......? I believe if this legislation goes through then we will effectively cut our own throat regardless if the man has a low I.Q. It is the the foundation of this country to every man the "right" of sovereignty, plain and simple. As far as the under a certain age consent.... well that is boloney because age doesn't equate maturity and define "maturity" please. Given that we have kids going to war and killing people and using handling nuclear and biological weapons in the armed forces yet they aren't "mature enough to drink>>?????????
Take suicide from Jack Kevorkian's POV. It is not an issue of morality( morality is fluid and changes via Time and Culture) but an issue of sovereignty. If you have the positive right to live then you have the negative right to die. Same as voting, you have the right to vote or not to vote because it is your right to do as such. If the high court rules on the man's choices with his own body aren't what they see fit then we have doomed all of us. If this ruling is handed down and the low IQ guy is not permitted to have sex then how long will it take before YOU are deemed unfit to have sex because YOU don't meet the guidelines set forth by the state to get it on or have kids??????? Even people that aren't as mentally capable as you and I have rights and to take that away is just the same as living in NAZI Germany.



posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 09:06 PM
link   
Wow,
Lot of arrogance floating around in here.
It's sad that situations like this sometimes require interference from "authorities" when abuse is going on.
It's sad that people prey on others like this.
It's also sad that people make arbitrary decisions for other people based on their own sense of being better/smarter/superior.
"Somebody can't understand sex like you do so you just "Deny" him/her the option....for the rest of his life.

What a mess this world is.



posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 09:12 PM
link   
Here in Florida the Man he was having Sex with would be charged with Sexual Battery,incarcerated,probation and be forced to be registered as a sexual offender. once registered he couldn't move without notifying an authority figure and couldn't live within 1000 feet (1 mile in my city)of anywhere children gather. (schools,churches,playground,public parks etc) without going back to prison.

rules for sexual battery that apply to this case

(a) "Consent" means intelligent, knowing, and voluntary consent and does not include coerced submission. "Consent" shall not be deemed or construed to mean the failure by the alleged victim to offer physical resistance to the offender.

I guess with an IQ of 48 he is actually "intelligent" just not as intelligent as the general population, Hell dogs are "intelligent but you can't have sex with them legally.

(e) When the victim is mentally defective and the offender has reason to believe this or has actual knowledge of this fact.

Who determines "defective"? I guess with everyone being all politically Correct nowadays we can't call some one with a 48 IQ Mentally defective now can we?

I don't think the guy should be having sex but I doubt telling him he can't is going to stop him, Throw the perv that's exploiting him in jail.




edit on 5-2-2011 by Adamanteus because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 09:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by badgerprints
Wow,
Lot of arrogance floating around in here.
It's sad that situations like this sometimes require interference from "authorities" when abuse is going on.
It's sad that people prey on others like this.
It's also sad that people make arbitrary decisions for other people based on their own sense of being better/smarter/superior.
"Somebody can't understand sex like you do so you just "Deny" him/her the option....for the rest of his life.

What a mess this world is.

Thanks Badgerprints you have essentially hit the nail on the head alot more effeciently than I did. Thank you. S&F ENDURE FORTE



posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 09:24 PM
link   
reply to post by agentblue
 


Umm.. Since I was against taking this man's rights away just because his IQ ran low, I am not sure why your post is directed towards me.


edit on 2/5/2011 by Kangaruex4Ewe because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 09:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Adamanteus

I don't think the guy should be having sex but I doubt telling him he can't is going to stop him, Throw the perv that's exploiting him in jail.




edit on 5-2-2011 by Adamanteus because: (no reason given)
Wow dude stop! Please! WHO APPROACHED WHO IN REGARDS TO SEX? If the low IQ guy asked the other guy to have sex and the other guy consented then what shoe would you wear? Geez! Like you, we do not have intimate knowledge as to the logistics of the case. I dare to say that you as most people are disillusioned as to the real stats of sex offenders because i was a prosecutor for ten years abd was taught how to propigate fear of an unknown in ordedr to get a conviction. I will burn in hell for crap the system puts people in jail just on emotion and rarely on fact alone. I have since became a defense attorney and work probono on 98% of my cases to try to retribute the way people are falsely misled. I have represented 42 cases of alleged sex abuse of young and old in 2 yrs and I personally pick mine on evidence alone and only turned down 3 to whom with the actual evidence in front of me dictated their guilt. I don't pull strings to release guilty people. With that being said, 83% of my cases ended up being convictions because of one statement taught to almost all prosecutors" when you go in to deliberate would you feel better knowing that you may let a pervert go?" In cases like that the prosecution preys on the emotions of the jurors and it isn't based on any type of fact....Just emotion. Emotions are a surefire way to cloud someones judgement. I am quiting law because of this. I wanted to make a differenc



posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 09:43 PM
link   
Smart girls wont date me.

So where does that leave my love life ?



posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 09:45 PM
link   
I think it is really more of a matter of whether or not he can consent. Which is why they were suggesting that if he took a sex education class he would not be able to understand it.

But at the same time, if they feel he was not mentally capable of consenting to sex, why is this man he was sleeping with, not in trouble for rape?



posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 09:54 PM
link   
reply to post by agentblue
 


It doesn't matter who approached who if he isn't mentally capable. If a 12 year old girl approaches a 25 year old man and he submits then he is still guilty of sex with a minor.

I am very well aware of the way the system forces people into becoming sex offenders because the prosecutor doesn't want to mistakenly let someone off. I have a friend who was accused and the girl and her (witness) were allowed to change their stories 3 seperate times and still didn't get their stories straight, He had multiple witnesses (10-20) saying he was with them on one date and time in question then he was at work 45 mins away for 18 hrs on another supposed day and time. on the third changing he had no alibi but the girls stories didn't match and the other guy that was a minor and was supposed to have been there when this allegedly happened was incarcerated, so couldn't have actually been there. He finally just gave up and pled no contest after spending 75k dollars in defense attorney fees.
Now he is stigmatized for life because of a prosecutor that was over zealous and ignored the facts that were in front of his face.

edit on 5-2-2011 by Adamanteus because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 10:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Whitbit


What's the difference between that and an adult and child having a ''consenting'' sexual relationship ?



And just how is it possible to gauge their mental facilities with regards to ability to process these emotions? This would probably vary greatly from person to person. Even if he does have a low IQ, he still has that primitive humane urge. So what if it is toward men? That doesn't mean he can't comprehend what he is doing. If he wasn't attracted to men I am sure he would not be doing it.

Regardless of race, sex, religion OR EVEN IQ, no government has the right to treat this man like a child, and like he has no rights. There is no way for them to know what exactly it is that he can comprehend. This is discrimination, plain and simple.

Would you be saying all this if he was with a woman?
V.



posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 10:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Sherlock Holmes
 




People with serious learning disabilities are incapable of giving adequate consent, so the man he was having sex with was exploiting him, and probably should have been charged with rape or sexual assault ( assuming the other man has ''normal'' mental faculties ).

What an absolute load of rubbish...if he's that "incapable" he should have a handler around him at all times to make sure he isn't having constant unsafe gay sex...I mean WTF, does this guy have a job, how does he survive anyway? Is he REALLY all that stupid? I bet he likes the sex, loves it in fact...but the court believes they have a right to intervene in that?



What's the difference between that and an adult and child having a ''consenting'' sexual relationship?

So at what age is a person no longer a child? Do they require a certain IQ before you'll ever consider them a real adult? Do they need to be of a certain appearance? What if the person is 18 but look like they're 12 years old still? What if they're 18 but have the IQ of a 12 year old? Where is the line drawn? When does sex go from a pleasure to a perversion and for what exact reasons? What if the child and adult desire to have a sexual relationship and both enjoy it completely? That act of two people doing something they consent to and enjoy, without harming anyone else, is now perverted simply because the "child" isn't up to your specified age or IQ requirements? Can you explain that to the child's face why their sexual partner whom they probably loved in their own way is now spending a long time in prison because you don't think their relationship was moral?


edit on 5-2-2011 by WhizPhiz because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 10:33 PM
link   
Those who think this is not good: why do you think teenagers with much higher IQs cannot give consent? If the whole argument is to give consent you must be mentally developed, then if they allow this man to have sex, the age of consent is probably too high to be rational.



posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 11:05 PM
link   
This is where I stand on the issue.

The guy has an IQ of 48, only 15% of the population have an IQ below 50 so his brain is pretty deficient.

If he is having sex with a person with an average or above average IQ then he is most likely being taken advantage of.

If he is having sex with someone around his own IQ then let them be but sterilize them because we don't need two people that can't tie their shoes reproducing and further taxing the system.(most people with IQ's that low live with their parents until the parents die then become wards of the state)

Children shouldn't be having sex even though they may have the intelligence to consent they don't have the emotional intelligence to fully understand,plus Children are told to listen to Adults and do what they say so this leaves a door wide open for them to be coerced into having sex with an adult that they may not want to have sex with.It's not about limiting teenagers having sex(because they have sex all the time) but to limit Adults abusing their Authority.


edit on 5-2-2011 by Adamanteus because: (no reason given)

edit on 5-2-2011 by Adamanteus because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 11:28 PM
link   
This is a strange story, who's being abused and who's the victim here?


Known only as Alan, the 41-year-old was in a relationship with a man he lived with and said he wanted it to continue
source.


So he wanted it to continue. Yet...


However, his local council said his 'vigorous sex drive' was inappropriate so started legal proceedings to restrict the relationship.

The authority said that his moderate learning disability and IQ of just 48 - the average is 100 - meant he did not understand what he was doing.
source.


So just because of his low IQ the authorities refuse to accept that Alan wants to continue having his sexual relationship with his live-in boyfriend.

If this man is so mentally disabled then why didn't they put him in to care? Surely that would make more sense then trying to ban him from having sex.



posted on Feb, 5 2011 @ 11:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sherlock Holmes

Originally posted by Whitbit
So what if it is toward men? That doesn't mean he can't comprehend what he is doing. If he wasn't attracted to men I am sure he would not be doing it.


The fact that he's attracted towards men is irrelevant; I don't know why you would choose to bring that up when my comments made no reference to that minor fact of the story.


Originally posted by Whitbit
Regardless of race, sex, religion OR EVEN IQ, no government has the right to treat this man like a child, and like he has no rights. There is no way for them to know what exactly it is that he can comprehend. This is discrimination, plain and simple.


No it's not discrimination; it's protection, the same as it is for a child who may willingly be involved in a sexual relationship with an adult.

Society has to step in to prevent deviants taking sexual advantage of someone who cannot give adequate consent; whether that is a child or someone who has severe learning disabilities.


edit on 5-2-2011 by Sherlock Holmes because: (no reason given)




I have to politely disagree with you. The comment I made about the sexual nature of the relationship is absolutely relevant, and was not meant to be directed toward you. A lot of this thread seems to point out the fact that he is having a homosexual relationship, that is why I made the comment, no need to be nasty about it


And I also have to say on the second point I still stand that it is discrimination, in my opinion and it is NOT the same as a child. Children are not capable of having adult sexual relationships, but just because someone has a low IQ does NOT mean that they cannot.


Originally posted by Sherlock Holmes

This is the difficult part of it.

Mental faculties are impossible to quantify, and IQ tests are a very flawed way to assess someone's capabilities on an issue such as this.

While I wouldn't want to deny anybody the right to consenting sexual relations, we also have to protect those who are incapable of doing so.

It's quite a fine line. but it is one that we have to be able to define in some way.




This is mainly what I was trying to point out. It is impossible to tell what this individual is capable of emotionally. So how can we even bring up the fact of protecting the guy when nothing seems to point to him being abused or used. I have spent time around people with very similar IQ's. They are capable of connecting with other human beings in extraordinary ways. I just think people need to stop treating them like 'children', because they are very different from children. I see what your whole point is, about them needing to be protected, but ONLY if they should need it. That being said, do we know what this Alan guy has said about the situation? He wants the relationship. What about his family? Therefore, it needs to be investigated, even if that means questioning both parties in the relationship and their families until it is determined what is going on. This could be a dependent relationship as well, and they very well may need eachother to operate sort of like a family unit just as anyone else.
edit on 6-2-2011 by Whitbit because: clarification



posted on Feb, 6 2011 @ 12:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by Vicky32

Originally posted by Whitbit


What's the difference between that and an adult and child having a ''consenting'' sexual relationship ?



And just how is it possible to gauge their mental facilities with regards to ability to process these emotions? This would probably vary greatly from person to person. Even if he does have a low IQ, he still has that primitive humane urge. So what if it is toward men? That doesn't mean he can't comprehend what he is doing. If he wasn't attracted to men I am sure he would not be doing it.

Regardless of race, sex, religion OR EVEN IQ, no government has the right to treat this man like a child, and like he has no rights. There is no way for them to know what exactly it is that he can comprehend. This is discrimination, plain and simple.

Would you be saying all this if he was with a woman?
V.


Yes, because I stand on the point that this is discrimination. Just because a person may not be able to express in words how they feel about someone to someone else does not mean their basic rights as a human being should be taken away,. That is ludacrous! People with a low IQ have human needs to connect with people just like you and I do.
edit on 6-2-2011 by Whitbit because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 6 2011 @ 12:10 AM
link   
reply to post by hounddoghowlie
 


Except that you are knocking gays. Even a blind man could see that.

I don't think the courts have a right to do this, especially with adults, regardless of IQ.

We have plenty of semi-retarded Americans that reproduce everyday.



posted on Feb, 6 2011 @ 12:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Whitbit
 


Your missing the point the court isn't trying to ban him from having sex for a low IQ. What the court determined was he was unable to make decisions. The judge would have ordered testing and the tests concluded he was incapable of understanding the decision he was making. With an IQ that low competency comes into play and with his IQ is the equivalent to a 5 year old still wouldn't have been enough. However if the tests concluded he was incapable of understood what the relationship involved then the court steps in for protection of the individual against abuse that the individual cant even comprehend is occurring.

Sadly there has been several cases of people taking advantage of people without the reasoning skills to make decisions. And i also think if this was a woman people would have an entirely different outlook and feel shes being violated maybe???????



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join