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.

 

UK court bans man from having sex because of low IQ

page: 1
11
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 09:43 PM
link   

UK court bans man from having sex because of low IQ


www.rawstory.com

In a ruling that was attacked by some as homophobic and insensitive to disabled peoples' rights, a British court ordered last week that a man with a low IQ be banned from having sex.

The man, a 41-year-old identified in public only as "Alan," was involved in a relationship with another man. Social aid officials from his local town hall had argued in court that Alan's "vigorous sex drive" combined with his "moderate" learning disability made him incapable of consenting to sex, the Telegraph reported.

(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 09:43 PM
link   
This is an extremely BIZZARE case, and it kind of has an undertone of creepiness to it.

Should a court system be able to determine what two consenting adults in the privacy of their own home do, if one of them is deemed of a lower intellectual capacity?

This seems like an AWEFULLY invasive and authoritorian measure to tell this man what he can and can not do with his own body, and that Big Brother knows what is best for him and must "protect" him from himself.

And the part about him being "closely monitored" in his own home, literally gives off a 1984-like vibe to it...

Maybe others will see this decision as just and can offer a counterpoint to my unease about this...

Please discuss...

www.rawstory.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 09:47 PM
link   
reply to post by DimensionalDetective
 


Very creepy!

I wonder if the poor sap will be medicated, because he will be dangerous otherwise. My IQ is just fine, but if I were banned from having sex....with everybody....I would become violent!



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 09:49 PM
link   
That's nothing, as late as the 1970's in Australia, some intellectually challenged people were sterilized routinely.

Horrible!



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 09:54 PM
link   
Just goes to show, the Nazis / Romans never left or died or crumbled...

They just spread out and hid.



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 09:56 PM
link   
reply to post by chr0naut
 


www.youtube.com...


And not that long ago in the US.



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 09:57 PM
link   
reply to post by chr0naut
 


We have had eugenics laws in the US since the 1890s and compulsory sterilization since 1907. We were the first nation to do so.

Between 1907 and 1981, tens of thousands of people were forcibly sterilized in the US. The laws still remain on the books of many states, but are no longer enforced. That could change though.



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 10:06 PM
link   
reply to post by DimensionalDetective
 


Wouldn't it be simpler to just have him sterilized instead of banning SEX?
That's harsh.



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 10:10 PM
link   
How low is his IQ? Automatically I would assume that in the case of IQ testing, everyone with an equal or lower score would therefore be forcibly exempt from sexual activities as well. Draconian and a knee jerk ruling if you ask me, and human rights activists should be all over this, unless they really do only work for criminals.

Or is this because he is engaging in homosexual activities, which is his right to do in the privacy of his own home, but apparantly that now only extends to his bedroom. The article states this all came to light after he made lewd gestures to children in a public place, without stating what these gestures were, which led to them meddling in his private life and what I assume to be a consentual relationship with another man.

Even predatory child molesting monsters don't get sex bans. This smacks of power control and twisting of regulations to suit the personal morals of the judge.


+13 more 
posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 10:10 PM
link   

What does a "vigorous sex drive" and a low IQ get you?


Erm if your a hot girl it gets you your own series on MTV and a few million dollars



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 10:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by DimensionalDetective
 


Very creepy!

I wonder if the poor sap will be medicated, because he will be dangerous otherwise. My IQ is just fine, but if I were banned from having sex....with everybody....I would become violent!



VIOLENT SEX OFFENDER ALERT!!!!!
j/k

I am not sure, if the article here states that "Alan reportedly came to the attention of authorities in 2008 when it was alleged he made "lewd gestures" at children at a dentist's office and on a bus." then I'd be worried that he has not the mental capacity to know limits.

Why stop him having sex with his alleged partner however, is beyond me, but it sets of alarm bells for me in other areas.

Definitely something weird there... "he looked at kids and was lewd, but we didn't arrest him, we just stopped him shagging his boyfriend."

I have no idea what to think... Oo



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 10:11 PM
link   
reply to post by The-Hammer
 


Not in this case, because he's gay, and with a male partner. Which has created a whole other controversy in this case, with folks saying this is discriminatory BECAUSE of his sexual preference.

The bigger story here to me though is one of absolute CONTROL over this individual by Big Brother. They are literally monitoring his life in his own home.



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 10:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by davespanners

What does a "vigorous sex drive" and a low IQ get you?


Erm if your a hot girl it gets you your own series on MTV and a few million dollars


You Nailed it... And I don't mean the hostess!!


zing!




posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 10:16 PM
link   
Yeah cause some self righteous codgers on the court say so that will stop him... Sigh! Not only is it creepy it is plain stupid. What are they going to do put an electronic bracelet on his....



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 10:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by MavRck
Just goes to show, the Nazis / Romans never left or died or crumbled...

They just spread out and hid.


The romans enjoyed lots of homosexuality.

And obviously spread their learning disability to UK courts.

Maybe people should just not be stupid enough to sleep with the guy if he is that bad?

And then when or if the guy does victimize somebody, then they can put him on trial.



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 10:47 PM
link   
this is eugencis, plain and simple...TPTB are obsessed with this stuff, and we are just seeing the baby steps of its reintroduction on a massive scale...pretty soon, there will be more like him to be banned, THEN they will admit that its easier to just sterilize them instead of banning sex...and after that they will just be mass-sterilizing for IQ, class status, etc...i.e. "are you poor and need food? okay first lie down here and hold still for this nice doctor", that sort of thing will become commonplace...



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 10:55 PM
link   
If the judge thinks "Alan does not have the capacity to consent to and engage in sexual relations"
Why haven't they arrested his boyfriend? Surely he must be taking "Advantage" of alan's "low iq"
Furthermore how can the judge knowing that alan is vulnerable not act to protect him from those that would take advantage?
Gay, don't come into this! if he had a girlfriend the same rules apply.



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 11:44 PM
link   
"I love Big Brother" this is how it starts. I can't find the article now but I read last year that they are now able to use video monitoring in people's houses where there is suspicion of child abuse or some such thing... I guess this would fall under that law?

Remember it always makes sense at first. It always starts to protect the children, the feeble minded, and any other group that is deemed unable to think for themselves. A mentally handicapped homosexual man is a fantastic place to start. Not a whole lot of people will risk standing up for him. Once the precedent exists it can go from there.

Call me an alarmist, maybe I shouldn't have read 1984 that 7th time, maybe I have little faith in those who have too much power.

In my opinion under no circumstances should a governing body be allowed to dictate the actions of any adult in so far as they do not negatively and directly effect another person. The risk is some pain, the pay off is freedom. The problem is there just aren't enough gamblers around anymore...



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 11:51 PM
link   
How is it possible to ban someone from having sex? You'd have to lock him in a padded room for the rest of his life.

Granted that he was having sex with another man, it wasn't like he was going to have children.



posted on Feb, 8 2011 @ 11:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Intelearthling
 


I didn't think of it til reading your post, but maybe that is the idea? They don't have enough to lock him up now, so they ban him from having sex, knowing full well that it is impossible for him to stop, and when he violates the ban, they will lock him up for good?



new topics

top topics



 
11
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join