Paedophilia is OK if you "don't know" it is a crime.

reply to post by Golantrevize


It's wrong, it's illegal, he SHOULD be punished.

First, it is illegal in Islam to have sex outside of marriage, so even if he was ignorant of british law he knows damn well its illegal in Islamic law.

This is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard. The law is not nor should it be subjective, wrong is wrong and should be tried as such.

reply to post by alienreality


My parents brought me up very strict, aka, no girl friends or dating until high school is done. I have experienced through my friends of what high school sex life was like. Its hard to avoid when it was in front of your face, catholic school was no exception.

These 13, 14, 15 yrs "children" were already exploring the way with adult guys(im pretty sure these guys were 18-19), who comes to pick them up in their cars. Naive, we were, we thought they were going to movie and shopping.

These "children" brag how their boyfriends is "older" and has cars and can buy things. While us high school boys, 14, 5 yrs olds, were "too immature".

Tho im not blaming the "victims" here, calling them children now a days is an understatement.


When i have kids, im putting the same rules on them as my parents did, No dating until high school is done, might even step it up until a degree is done..

Pedophilia or paedophilia is a psychiatric disorder in which an adult or older adolescent experiences a primary or exclusive sexual attraction to prepubescent children, generally age 11 years or younger

I am always in awe that no one knows what they are talking about when they use that word. The OP should be referencing Ephebophilia not Paedophillia. Even the MSM is clueless when it comes to the definition of the words.

These is no defence for rape of a child under 13 within UK law. The police have done a fantastic job by gaining the trust of the victim and their parents and gathering enough evidence to bring the case to court via the Crown Prosecution Service. It's judges such as this gentleman who make serious errors of judgement by saying such stupid things which deters victims from reporting serious sexual offences.

reply to post by Golantrevize

I don't believe the story is accurate. I believe there was consent and therefore no rape took place.

fractal2
reply to post by Golantrevize

 

I don't believe the story is accurate. I believe there was consent and therefore no rape took place.

At 13 no matter where you are there should not be the implication of consent with an adult (I know it's legal in some places but I'll get to that par tin a second) a 13 year old girl doesn't have the mental capacity to say yes to sexual contact with an adult..

HOWEVER..... that is my own view, and probably not necessarily that of others, having been raped at age 13 I harbor a very ill mindset when it comes to this sort of thing and I do know that in some cultures it is conceivable that she could have given consent. I do know for a fact that 13 is UNDER the age of consent for UK law though, and therefore no matter if she said yes no or i don't care, it is statutory rape, end of discussion.

What bothers me more is the fact that anyone from the western world could even begin to think a 13 year old should be allowed to give consent to an adult and that the adult is in the right in all of this, it's just sick...

Have the conservatives come in with their links showing how it is legal to have to have sex with children yet?

They did that in another thread concerning underage sex. They brought in links to show how it is legal in some states to have sex with children as young as 13,14 or 15, they brought it up in a duck dynasty thread.


I have no idea what type of person could think paedophilia is OK in any instance.

vkey08

fractal2
reply to post by Golantrevize

 

I don't believe the story is accurate. I believe there was consent and therefore no rape took place.

At 13 no matter where you are there should not be the implication of consent with an adult (I know it's legal in some places but I'll get to that par tin a second) a 13 year old girl doesn't have the mental capacity to say yes to sexual contact with an adult..

HOWEVER..... that is my own view, and probably not necessarily that of others, having been raped at age 13 I harbor a very ill mindset when it comes to this sort of thing and I do know that in some cultures it is conceivable that she could have given consent. I do know for a fact that 13 is UNDER the age of consent for UK law though, and therefore no matter if she said yes no or i don't care, it is statutory rape, end of discussion.

What bothers me more is the fact that anyone from the western world could even begin to think a 13 year old should be allowed to give consent to an adult and that the adult is in the right in all of this, it's just sick...

I guess it bothers me possibly more than you are bothered right now that when a 17 year old has sex with an 18 year old in the UK you consider it to be rape because your authorities tell you so. Rape is having sex with someone without their consent. The law defines rape as defined by the law, not rape as defined by people in general. What most people consider rape is forcibly having sex with someone. I adapt the most commonly used definitions so I can communicate well, as opposed to adapting lawyer definitions where nobody has a clue what you are talking about.

The story gives a false impression that the girl was forced to have sex, which is false. This belittles the people who were actually raped, which is a HUGE deal. The harm from having sex with a different age group is nothing compared to the harm from having sex against you will with a different age group. For you to say "rape is when two people have consenting sex but are a different legal status" it waters down the facts.

My view on adulthood is that when someone makes a formal public declaration that they are an adult, they are an adult. I know myself better than you know me. Therefore, I have more authority than you to decide whether I am an adult more than you do. When they are a child, then it is up to their parents to decide who they can and can't have sex with, not you or me.

I'm sure some people are psychologically scarred from having sex with people who are a lot different age as them. And others simply are not harmed at all. I know for a damned fact when I was 13 years old I would have been HELPED, not harmed, by having sex with a college girl. I would have never regretted it and I'd be happier for it. Given the number of 13 year olds looking at adult pornography, I have a feeling I'm not the only one LOL.

I think what could psychologically scar me is if this happened to me and everything would have gone well except my parents decided it was the end of the world and put the college girl who I had sex with in prison and then told me over and over that I was scarred for life. Then yeah maybe I'd be scarred for life because people made a deal out of something that wasn't a deal. I felt like an adult at age 14. Was I immature? Yes. But I would have respected my parents wishes to hold off until I was older to declare myself an adult, so I guess they could have fairly imprisoned the college hottie that never was just like you would have wanted under my personal scenario.

fractal2

vkey08

fractal2
reply to post by Golantrevize

 

I don't believe the story is accurate. I believe there was consent and therefore no rape took place.

At 13 no matter where you are there should not be the implication of consent with an adult (I know it's legal in some places but I'll get to that par tin a second) a 13 year old girl doesn't have the mental capacity to say yes to sexual contact with an adult..

HOWEVER..... that is my own view, and probably not necessarily that of others, having been raped at age 13 I harbor a very ill mindset when it comes to this sort of thing and I do know that in some cultures it is conceivable that she could have given consent. I do know for a fact that 13 is UNDER the age of consent for UK law though, and therefore no matter if she said yes no or i don't care, it is statutory rape, end of discussion.

What bothers me more is the fact that anyone from the western world could even begin to think a 13 year old should be allowed to give consent to an adult and that the adult is in the right in all of this, it's just sick...

I guess it bothers me possibly more than you are bothered right now that when a 17 year old has sex with an 18 year old in the UK you consider it to be rape because your authorities tell you so. Rape is having sex with someone without their consent. The law defines rape as defined by the law, not rape as defined by people in general. What most people consider rape is forcibly having sex with someone. I adapt the most commonly used definitions so I can communicate well, as opposed to adapting lawyer definitions where nobody has a clue what you are talking about.

The story gives a false impression that the girl was forced to have sex, which is false. This belittles the people who were actually raped, which is a HUGE deal. The harm from having sex with a different age group is nothing compared to the harm from having sex against you will with a different age group. For you to say "rape is when two people have consenting sex but are a different legal status" it waters down the facts.

My view on adulthood is that when someone makes a formal public declaration that they are an adult, they are an adult. I know myself better than you know me. Therefore, I have more authority than you to decide whether I am an adult more than you do. When they are a child, then it is up to their parents to decide who they can and can't have sex with, not you or me.

I'm sure some people are psychologically scarred from having sex with people who are a lot different age as them. And others simply are not harmed at all. I know for a damned fact when I was 13 years old I would have been HELPED, not harmed, by having sex with a college girl. I would have never regretted it and I'd be happier for it. Given the number of 13 year olds looking at adult pornography, I have a feeling I'm not the only one LOL.

I think what could psychologically scar me is if this happened to me and everything would have gone well except my parents decided it was the end of the world and put the college girl who I had sex with in prison and then told me over and over that I was scarred for life. Then yeah maybe I'd be scarred for life because people made a deal out of something that wasn't a deal. I felt like an adult at age 14. Was I immature? Yes. But I would have respected my parents wishes to hold off until I was older to declare myself an adult, so I guess they could have fairly imprisoned the college hottie that never was just like you would have wanted under my personal scenario.

Considering that 99.9% of the time if a 17 and 18 year old have sex, since both are over the age of consent (which is pretty standardized at 16 in most places) they hardly ever prosecute (and they really shouldn't as that's a 1 year age difference) your example is like totally not in line with the fact that at 13 you are not legally entitled to make the assertion that "I am an adult" and make adult decisions, I don't care if you're a guy or a girl or a whatever... A 13 year old does NOT have standing to give consent to an adult, no matter what..

Could I have made that decision when I was 13? No, I know damn well I couldn't have, I was just aware of what was happening, and seriously my mind was still on all the things I liked to do at that age, like roller skating the aqueducts, and hanging out at the mall with friends, not having sexual relations with an adult. So whether she said "yes" or not, in the eyes of the law she was not competent to make that decision for herself, end of story..

Would I have liked to wait? Yeah I would have... I didn't get that chance though. It's what got me to choose a career as a Social Worker/LEO, I also have a 13 year old daughter, that I can guarantee isn't of sound enough mind to make that decision at her age... which is why they have an Age of Consent to begin with..

reply to post by vkey08

Considering that 99.9% of the time if a 17 and 18 year old have sex, since both are over the age of consent (which is pretty standardized at 16 in most places) they hardly ever prosecute (and they really shouldn't as that's a 1 year age difference) your example is like totally not in line with the fact that at 13 you are not legally entitled to make the assertion that "I am an adult" and make adult decisions, I don't care if you're a guy or a girl or a whatever... A 13 year old does NOT have standing to give consent to an adult, no matter what..

My understanding is that the law allows for a five year age difference between the age of consent and the older person in the relationship. I am DEFINITELY being watched after googling pedophilia and WA age of consent. So in other words, a 16 year old (age of consent in my state) can have sex with someone who is 21 without issue (I suppose depending on birthdays). Not sure if I entirely agree with that, but there it is. I sort of find it morally reprehensible and arbitrary at the same time, a few minutes could make you a felon. Got to start somewhere though.

Completely agree a 13 year old is not capable of consent. To me this situation is akin to having sex with a woman who has been drugged. Yeah, she may want it, but that doesn't make it OK. A five year old may want to borrow your car for the day, but you don't let them.

This judge has set a very disturbing precedent. Agree with other people saying ignorance of the law is not an excuse. That is a can of worms you don't want opened. Otherwise everyone can claim it, for any deviant act ranging from robbery to murder, and without proof they were aware (how are you going to get that?) they walk. Using the excuse that your religion teaches you women are objects is just embarrassing. Most people that molest children were molested (or at least a very high percentage). They don't get to use that as an excuse. You don't hear 'Well I got raped when I was 8 so I thought it was OK.'

reply to post by vkey08

If 16 is the age of consent, then if a 15 year old is having sex with a 16 year old when they both have verbally agreed to have it, then that is by your definition (and the legal definition) a case of rape, so the 16 year old is a rapist. But, by the common usage of the word "rape" that is not rape.

Current legal definitions are mostly arbitrary numbers. People mature at very dramatically different rates both physically and mentally. The legal definition of adult is extremely poor and should be revised. America is a bunch of big babies right now because they can't even be trusted to consume wine at age 20. 16 is apparently the age of consent. At 16 years old you can drive a car. At 15 years old you can get a job. This is inconsistent. There should be a single point to allow all of these activities at once regardless of permission of the parents.

And a step further is that parents should allow their child whatever activity they think benefits their child even when they are a child. If that means allowing a 12 year old to sip from a glass of wine, then okay. Instead of arresting the parents, allow that because parents know whats best for their child more than governments do.

Punishing two people who have each others permission to have sex because of the age difference should generally be confined to civil restitution that is handed to the victimized person when they reach adulthood. If that person thinks nothing too bad happened, they can chose to decline restitution. That is the best way of handling situations where people of greatly different age have sex with each other with permission. Nobody should go to prison over that.

Whats prison-worthy is forcing someone to have sex against their will, which is rape. That is the real definition, not the legal definition.

reply to post by fractal2


What people are trying to say, at least I know I am, is that at 13 a young girl is incapable of saying OK, and therefore no matter what it's coerced. I don't know what scares ME more, the fact that you don' tunderstand that at 13 you're "just" starting to understand all of this stuff, or that you think it's ok for a 13 year old to give informed consent..

vkey08
reply to post by fractal2

 

What people are trying to say, at least I know I am, is that at 13 a young girl is incapable of saying OK, and therefore no matter what it's coerced. I don't know what scares ME more, the fact that you don' tunderstand that at 13 you're "just" starting to understand all of this stuff, or that you think it's ok for a 13 year old to give informed consent..

I think what scares me most is the fact of you claiming it is wrong under a certain age no matter what in your opinion, and trying to push your self-perceived moral authority on others. The law is the law, and if the law says at a certain age a child can give consent then there is nothing you can do about it. A lot of you fail to realize that the u.s. has no right to tell another country to change their laws just to suit them(the u.s.) all because they feel themselves to be of a higher moral authority. In this case though the consent laws seem to be on par with what many of the american states consider to be ok. But taking into consideration his country's consent laws and other such pertinent information, the judge decided to forgo punishment based on the merits of the case presented before him. And as to your reply to the other poster, just because a person's opinion differs from yours does not mean they're going to go out and rape and/or molest the first child that crosses their path.

reply to post by DexteramLucifer


it's not opinion, the UK's age of consent is 16 not 13, most states in the US are 16, a lot of countries vary from 16-18, and some are even 21 for that matter. For the sake of this whole story, this incident took place in a country where the age of consent is 16. The girl was 13, well under the age of consent, and therefore, my opinion doesn't even enter into it.. Going by your logic, that the US has no right to impose it's morality on anyone else, the United Kingdom's own laws do that in this case..

My opinion on the matter notwithstanding, the law is the law here, she was under the age of legal consent, therefore it is statutory rape, end of discussion.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but.. that's not me pushing my own morality, that's the UK's laws being interpreted in the strictest sense...

What the judge in the UK did, was factor the perpetrator's religion into it, and that should NOT have entered into this discussion.. I am sure that upon appeal, the higher UK courts will see to it that he is punished..

mwood
"Paedophilia is OK if you "don't know" it is a crime."


Pedophilia as understood in America is NOT a crime in some countries. Different countries have different laws and different age's of consent.

In one country it may be perfectly accepted and legal for me (48) to have sex with a 13 year old girl where here it is illegal.

Everybody has a right as far as I'm concerned to make their own laws and shape their society how they want. America has no right to tell other countries how to live. A little isolationism would do us some good and we wouldn't be fighting in 30 different countries around the world trying to mold them to our expectations.

There is a much greater law at play when it comes to this crime and the rights of children and it is not of your/mankinds own choosing or design.

Pedophilia itself is not just a culturally specific legal issue or even just a tragedy. It goes way beyond this. It is the rape of Spirit and Mind, not just of body. It's consequences, to the individual victim, to the abuser, to society as a whole in terms of dollars as much as in the necrotic forms of life it mutates spiritually physically and in psyche, and its role in the continuation of the ever descending abuse cycles on this sphere is endless and ongoing. It's not just an insult and crime against a child's right to sanctity over its own body, it is a crime against Life and goodness itself.


From what you have written here I had the feeling you are an apologist for child rape, which is what 'sexual abuse' of minors really is. Yet even putting that feeling aside as not factual for a moment I can still assure you sir, that if I ever found out that you, a 48yr old man was screwing a 13 yr old child, or were conditioning or condoning this form of rape and abuse in any way, I personally, would hunt you down in this life and in the next, on this or any other plane of existence, and I will haunt your nightmares and bring you to hell each day and night you would choose existence over death. And I would do this Law or no law, god or no god, without mercy.

More than god or law, abusers and their cronies and apologists need to fear us, the survivors of this crime and us, the women and men who will sacrifice all to protect children without care to cost for self or even to soul.

We know the lie and what abuse is not, wherever or however it is justified is irrelevent, we know what it does and who and what it serves and we are not afraid.



Forewarned


Roshoshanna

vkey08
reply to post by DexteramLucifer

 

it's not opinion, the UK's age of consent is 16 not 13, most states in the US are 16, a lot of countries vary from 16-18, and some are even 21 for that matter. For the sake of this whole story, this incident took place in a country where the age of consent is 16. The girl was 13, well under the age of consent, and therefore, my opinion doesn't even enter into it.. Going by your logic, that the US has no right to impose it's morality on anyone else, the United Kingdom's own laws do that in this case..

My opinion on the matter notwithstanding, the law is the law here, she was under the age of legal consent, therefore it is statutory rape, end of discussion.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but.. that's not me pushing my own morality, that's the UK's laws being interpreted in the strictest sense...

What the judge in the UK did, was factor the perpetrator's religion into it, and that should NOT have entered into this discussion.. I am sure that upon appeal, the higher UK courts will see to it that he is punished..

edit on 822014 by vkey08 because: (no reason given)

I'm not a denizen of the U.K. so no matter what I perceive to be right, wrong, or indifferent it matters not and if you aren't a denizen of the U.K. as well, then all your complaining about how the case went down has done nothing but to rouse ire amongst the like minded and your squalling has befallen deaf ears. As I'm sure the U.K. isn't to keen on changing the status of a case simply because some americans say their magistrate made a mistake.

reply to post by DexteramLucifer


Ok, so you came to an opinion forum in order to tell us that in your opinion none of us are entitled to have an opinion?

Why are you here again?

reply to post by ketsuko


Have you misplaced your spectacles?. Because you apparently misread what I was attempting to say which was not that you shouldn't have opinions but that once again americans are rousing ire amongst themselves and wanting to change that which does not concern them. Just as they feel the need to tell everyone else to stay out of american affairs when other nations come calling with their own perceived notions of what the u.s. has done/is doing wrong so should they heed their own warnings, lest they be thought of as hypocrites.

reply to post by DexteramLucifer


Ah, so we should respect other civiizations, no matter how depraved we believe their actions to be?

A group rapes a 13 year old, and that is ok because in their religion, this is not a crime?

What if someones religion believes in human sacrifice, they kidnap you, or a relative of yours, and sacrifice you or your relative to their god. Oh, well, its their cultural belief, they didn't know it was wrong, probation, next case.

And you go on living in the same community? Wave to the guy when you are both outside working in the yard?

poet1b
reply to post by DexteramLucifer

 

Ah, so we should respect other civiizations, no matter how depraved we believe their actions to be?

A group rapes a 13 year old, and that is ok because in their religion, this is not a crime?

What if someones religion believes in human sacrifice, they kidnap you, or a relative of yours, and sacrifice you or your relative to their god. Oh, well, its their cultural belief, they didn't know it was wrong, probation, next case.

And you go on living in the same community? Wave to the guy when you are both outside working in the yard?

You can pull all the hypothetical situations from thin air that you want, my opinions will not be swayed. And to answer your first question, Yes!. If you expect other nations to respect your american customs and Ideals then that very same respect shall be given otherwise you're no better than that which you despise. In other words, if you want to meddle in others affairs then expect yours to be meddled with as well.