[russotto]

Originally Posted by smoothmoniker

russotto, here's the thing of it.

I don’t want some 30 year old guy making the decision about when statutory rape is and isn’t a victimless crime.

You prefer the 50+ year olds in the legislature doing it?

Have you ever listened to a child molester speak about their crimes? I have. It twists your mind around. They never think it was a bad thing. They always think that they were lovingly introducing the child into the world of sex, or that the child was instigating it by “flirting” with them [I just threw up in my mouth a little]. They also see the crime as victimless.

Yeah, the NAMBLA people do turn your stomach. But statutory rape isn't child molestation. Child molestation is sexual activity with a sexually immature (physically) child. Statutory rape is sex with a sexually mature adolescent below a certain age. Two entirely separate issues.

I have a little bit of skin in this game. One of my good friends was an English teacher at a private school. He had an inappropriate relationship with one of his students – she was 16, he was 25. She was definitely the aggressor, the instigator, the one controlling the situation. But he went to jail for 9 months. He’s an honest guy, and a good guy, but what he did was wrong, and he was justly punished for it.

What he did was illegal, but not wrong in itself. And once you let the law control your beliefs about right and wrong, you've surrendered your moral judgement to people like Richard Nixon, Jesse Helms, any Kennedy, or Thomas Druse.