JWeinCom said:
Nem said:
I am pretty sure you are wrong.
Bill mahr is fighting the good fight, in a country where it would be easier to just give up.
Also, i didn't watch the video, but from skimming the article, it sounds like a rape vs love situation, wich are very different. The case he defended was a couple where she was pregnant twice. She wasn't forcing the boy either and it's quite difficult to rape men. That doesn't qualify as rape, when its consentual.
|
When we talk about consent in a legal sense, we are almost always talking about informed consent.
If there is an attractive male teacher in a middle school or high school, I'm sure there are young girls who would absolutely consent to have sex with him. However, at that age, they are incapable of giving informed consent. Their brains literally haven't developed to the point where they have the executive function to consider the long term effects of their actions, and they likely don't understand enough about sex to make an informed decision.
Adults are smarter, more worldly, more sophisticated, have more money, and weild more power than a 12 year old girl does. A teacher is in a position where students are taught to implicitly trust that teachers are looking out for their best interestes. It's not a matter of consent among two equals. It's an inherently unequal situation.
Changing the gender of the student does nothing to change the situation. Whether it is a girl or a boy they might want, with all of their heart, to fuck their teacher. However, that does not mean that this is what's best for them. In this case, do you think that the 14 year old boy is happy to have two children with a woman who will be in her 50s when he turns 30? I'd say it's very likely he will regret this decision.
|
The problem is that is not necesserely true. It varies from person to person.
In a legal sense yeah, its the law that was aproved. But morally, i think it depends on the situation. One remedy for all situations is not always the right thing to perscript.
