HipHop Sesame Street: Voice Of Elmo Accused Of Gay With 16-Year-Old Boy

[hollandturbine]

yet that 51 year old has to get the parents of the 16 year old to consent as well, hence the legality of it...... i.e. there are adults engaged in the informed consent part of the action......

That's a good point.

It would appear that informed parental consent would only be valid in regard to the institution of marriage though and not based on mere consent alone, so any moral objections to a relationship between an old man and 16 year old girl would be based on the intentions of the adult, in other words any adult who seeks to engage in debauchery with a total moral disregard towards a young person should be something legislated against, but as marriage is viewed as a serious long term commitment the motive of the relationship is not viewed as being exploitative in nature and I think that's the main objective of the age of consent, to protect young people from being sexually exploited by adults.

[deRaNged 4 Phuk'dup]

This discussion is proving EVERYTHING I talked about earlier in this thread. We're now finding loopholes to justify 51 year olds having relationships with 16 year olds.

Lol.

[hollandturbine]

This discussion is proving EVERYTHING I talked about earlier in this thread. We're now finding loopholes to justify 51 year olds having relationships with 16 year olds.

Lol.

I don't agree with the law, I find it objectionable that the courts would defer a decision to adults when the law deems that a 16 year old is incapable of making their own informed decisions and so must be protected from adults.

While trying to point out what makes an otherwise objectionable relationship acceptable under the law in relation to the institution of marriage, the only thing I could think of is that the law is based on some outdated religious morality, but as I did not want cause offense I thought it best to tip toe around that one.

[deRaNged 4 Phuk'dup]

^^^No offence taken, but now I have to ask to anyone in the thread...do you think the mindframe of EVERY 16 year old in the U.S. is more vulnerable to manipulation than the mind of every 18 year old in the U.S.(since in other countries 16 is more often than not the age of consent)?

Not debating just wondering where you guys stand.

As a father, would you be more angry at your 16 year old dating a 19 year old they met in high school or your 18 year old dating some 51 year old offering to fly them across the country? Who do you think needs laws put in place to protect them?

I ask because everyday young people of legal consent are manipulated into relationships that are abusive, degrading, and isolate them from family and friends...LEGALLY. I doubt some 19 year old dating a 16 year old serves the same threat, but the law will go after the 19 year old before going after the 51 year old.

I know SMART criminals(pimps, dope pushers, ect.)prey on 18-19 year olds so they can manipulate them while 'pimping the system" because they can't be reported as runaways, can't get their pimp/dope traffiker using them charged with anything when they get caught, because even if parents are looking for them they can't MAKE them go back home. The world is crazier for an 18 year old because of how they're cut off as a concern.

All this wraps back around to my beginning statement that if you're 51 and "date" 18 year olds, you're preying on naive inexperienced kids no different than a 49 year old preying on 16 year olds in my book.

I'm 33 and don't have much in common with most 25 year olds. 18 year olds look like 14 year olds to me. I'm not understanding how someone 20 years my elder can find interest in anything barely above 18 without finding interest in things below it as well.

And what about the poor people who get duped by 16 year olds in the club with fake IDs who DO look over 25? Are they not the victim in those situations?

Just thoughts, not trying to debate anything just wonder about everyone's views.

[bandcoach]

No, not finding a loophole, pointing out how the law is constructed and construed in the situation of 51 marrying 16

---------- Post added at 07:36 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:15 PM ----------

As to the rest of what you said - the law is an ass - it is never able to reflect the ethical or moral issues within a situation without drawing some arbitrary line in the sand:

Everyone below this age is a minor and incapable of forming a clear intent to consent (regardless of individual differences or intellectual and emotional maturity).

Everyone above this age, seeking to influence and manipulate and associate in certain ways with those the other side of the line, is deemed to be acting illegally.

Some states and countries allow for some interpretation as to what constitutes statutory misconduct, i.e. this age +/- 1 or 2 years is usually seen as not impinging on the intent of the laws/statutes; however, as with most things, it is a case of dealing with it case by case

One thought to highlight and emphasise the need for the law to be interpreted on a case by case basis

An intellectually disabled person, whilst achieving their majority chronologically, may still be deemed to be a protected minor for the purposes of the law - they are incapable of developing a malicious intent or the mens rea required to satisfy the courts that they have acted to obtain an advantage. In most cases of this type, it is the minor who has formed the intent to manipulate the older, disabled person. Do we then hold the minor accountable or allow them to skate because they are minor? The law is still grey here, and is applied on a case by case basis....

[deRaNged 4 Phuk'dup]

I am not digging for these articles. NYDailynews.com is my homepage.

A civil rights frontier? Man says law standing between him and sex acts with donkey is unconstitutional - NY Daily News

[Foggy]

I am not digging for these articles. NYDailynews.com is my homepage.

A civil rights frontier? Man says law standing between him and sex acts with donkey is unconstitutional - NY Daily News

C'mon Deranged , that's crackpot crap newpapers for you .

In UK we get similar papers doing the same with the abuse of human rights act .
It can be argued that the papers that print so , do for an agenda .
In UK if they "rewrite" the human rights act , it opens up the government to leave the old to starve and freeze , shut down health service , war crimes .....

[deRaNged 4 Phuk'dup]

^^^I don't blame the news for reporting it, I blame the idiot that thinks he has the right to have sex with donkeys, lol. I blame the lawyers who will fight for his rights knowing damn well he's out of his mind to want to "legally" have sex with donkeys.

Just giving clarity to my prior stance on things. If this guy does impact the judicial system with his case in any way...won't be long before marriage to a dog is LEGAL IN THE US. Due process and all, lol.

But don't you dare try to date a 16 year old after turning 18. Even if you were dating before you became "legal", just leave the 16 year old alone and go find yourself someone "legal" to date...like a 51 year old...or a donkey after this trial, Lol. But wait...what if the donkey is under "age to consent?" I bet the prosecution will pull that one in court. He will be charged for messing with an underage donkey, but an adult donkey would've been fine, lol.

Don't take me too serious, just jokes.

Lol @ that guy's mugshot, he's proud of himself.

[bandcoach]

brings a whole new meaning to the phrase thou shall not covet thy neighbours ass.......