US Teenager expelled, arrested for underage relationship, Homophobia alledged motivation

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 NEXT
 

Super Not Cosmo:

Bashfluff:
Do you think that people who are homosexual in places like Saudi Arabia deserve to be killed?

I'll bite! No, it's certainly wrong the of the Saudis to summarily execute homosexuals. I won't try to argue otherwise. Even so, just because it might be wrong on multiple levels doesn't mean I'm going to encourage guys in the Middle East to walk around Riyadh belting out a round of It's Raining Men.

However what is happening to this woman really isn't any kind of comparison to gays being killed in The Middle East. Two adult Saudi men making the beast with two backs is a consentual act between two adults. The other is an adult alleged to have engaged in sexual activity with a minor who, by law, is incapable of giving consent. It's apples and oranges.

I've said it multiple times in this thread that I find this woman's actions to be largely selfish and and incredibly disrespectful. She was aware from the onset this young girl's parents were wholly opposed to their relationship. Even so, she thumbed her nose at them for multiple months and continued on with her relationship with this girl who was barely a teenager when their relationship started.

I don't see how she can be the least bit surprised that things have turned out the way they have. Before she turned 18 her acts were just incredibly disrespectful even if they were legal. However once she turned 18 those same acts became illegal and the parents were doing what any good parent would do when their children are being sexually courted by an adult they disapprove of, they called the authorities.

Actions have consequences and this woman is finding that out the hard way it seems. She didn't give two solitary fucks that this minor's parents didn't want their daughter involved in a relationship with her. Had she respected their wishes she would likely be graduating with the rest of her class and in a couple years she could have looked to legally have a relationship with the younger girl once she too became an adult. However, she selfishly and foolishly chose to proceed down the path she did and has nobody to blame but herself for where she has ended up.

There are too many problems with this:

Why would it matter if someone's parents were opposed to their daughter dating someone? Do they have the right to control her romantic life? No parent should have that right over their kid. It's disrespectful and selfish, and it stunts the growth of the child. The child is not some possession. You don't have to get permission from the parent to date the kid. You get permission from the kid.

It's this disgusting, "How DARE she not bow to the whims of the parents when they didn't like it?! Doesn't she know that they're the ones that matter when you're in a relationship with someone else? You're so selfish for wanting to continue a relationship with someone you love! How entitled are you?" It's the weird, backwards attitude that's more than a little shameful.

Insofar as the law was concerned, this relationship was fine until someone got a little bit older. Do you think that's right? I don't think that's right. The law thought it was okay until then! No harm was being done...until then! There are states with Romeo and Juliet laws for this very situation. This is nothing less than controlling bullshit from the parents that should have landed them consequences, not the lover of the child.

Bashfluff:
Why would it matter if someone's parents were opposed to their daughter dating someone? Do they have the right to control her romantic life? No parent should have that right over their kid. It's disrespectful and selfish, and it stunts the growth of the child. The child is not some possession. You don't have to get permission from the parent to date the kid. You get permission from the kid.

Parents absolutely have the right to control the child's romantic life until such a time that child turns 18 or gets legally emancipated. Parents keep their children from associating with people they don't approve of all the time. It's not only their right to do so but their responsibility.

Any parent that lets their minor child date who they choose without some form of oversight is simply a bad parent. Kids make horrible choices all the time and if left to their own devices they may start dating criminals, addicts, sexual predators, and/or any one of a million other different types of unseemly people. Maybe you grew up in a household where it was all good to come home and tell your folks "Hey ma, this is Bill. He's married with three kids a mortgage and a raging coke habit but his wife of ten years doesn't understand him like I do so were just going to head on down the swingers' club on 43rd and Lake so he can "help me with my English homework" *nudge nudge wink wink*". Most families thankfully don't work like that. It's a parent's job to screen those people as best they can lest their children end up in god only knows what kind of bad predicament.

When my sister was in high school every boy she wanted to date had to come over and do dinner with my parents before he could ever hope to go on a one on one date with her. I can say that a few didn't even make it to desert and a couple were even turned away before stepping foot inside the house. When I started dating I had to go to more than a few houses to meet the parents of various girls in what were little more than thinly veiled auditions.

Super Not Cosmo:

Bashfluff:
Why would it matter if someone's parents were opposed to their daughter dating someone? Do they have the right to control her romantic life? No parent should have that right over their kid. It's disrespectful and selfish, and it stunts the growth of the child. The child is not some possession. You don't have to get permission from the parent to date the kid. You get permission from the kid.

Parents absolutely have the right to control the child's romantic life until such a time that child turns 18 or gets legally emancipated. Parents keep their children from associating with people they don't approve of all the time. It's not only their right to do so but their responsibility.

Any parent that lets their minor child date who they choose without some form of oversight is simply a bad parent. Kids make horrible choices all the time and if left to their own devices they may start dating criminals, addicts, sexual predators, and/or any one of a million other different types of unseemly people. Maybe you grew up in a household where it was all good to come home and tell your folks "Hey ma, this is Bill. He's married with three kids a mortgage and a raging coke habit but his wife of ten years doesn't understand him like I do so were just going to head on down the swingers' club on 43rd and Lake so he can "help me with my English homework" *nudge nudge wink wink*". Most families thankfully don't work like that. It's a parent's job to screen those people as best they can lest their children end up in god only knows what kind of bad predicament.

When my sister was in high school every boy she wanted to date had to come over and do dinner with my parents before he could ever hope to go on a one on one date with her. I can say that a few didn't even make it to desert and a couple were even turned away before stepping foot inside the house. When I started dating I had to go to more than a few houses to meet the parents of various girls in what were little more than thinly veiled auditions.

That's different. You're talking about someone having standards and looking out for their kid by searching for criminals and sex predators, not just people they don't like. An overly strict parent with unreasonable standards should not be respected, and such a parent is doing their child a disservice. You're welcome to try and say that my parents have no standards for whom I date, just as I could say you've argued that the standards of any parent are fine and should be respected by every party as reasonable and binding, that they should be followed out of some respect automatically given.

The difference? I would have a solid basis for thinking that, while you are just trying to imply that only someone with no standards would ever think the way I do.

CHRIS HAYES: Kelly, there were people at the news conference today wearing t-shirts that said "stop the hate," and my sense from following this is that your belief is that the parents of the girl in question called authorities because this was a relationship between two teenage girls.

KELLY HUNT SMITH: Yes, that is my opinion.

HAYES: And is there anything that has led you to believe that specifically?

SMITH: Lots of things, several things. You know, we have a situation where we have two teenaged girls in a mutual dating relationship, you know, I've had this girl in my home. We had a relationship with her. She has relationships with my younger children, and-

HAYES: So you knew about it and their parents knew about this relationship?

SMITH: I can't speak for them, but I did know about their relationship, yes, I did not know it had become a physical relationship, but I did know that they were dating.

http://youtu.be/WJ2qkkSphbE?t=3m02s

Still nothing from the party pressing charges. This is, from everything I've examined, a 100% one-sided story alleging discrimination without proof.

Huh, interesting, it seems the girl being charged rejected the plea deal: http://www.cnn.com/2013/05/24/justice/florida-teen-sex-case/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

Do people still think it's purely a case of a teen being utterly selfish and not respecting a parent's wishes? Cause you know, 15 years in prison is a pretty hefty thing to go up against unless she is sure she'll be vindicated or really loves her girlfriend and that the whole thing wasn't a case of simple teenage lust. Then again, there's probably a lot of teenage stupidity involved either way, so this may just be a sign of that.

Super Not Cosmo:
Kids make horrible choices all the time and if left to their own devices they may start dating criminals, addicts, sexual predators, and/or any one of a million other different types of unseemly people.

Why do you assume this girl's girlfriend is "unseemly"?

We don't know the girl's parents' rationale for disliking the relationship. All we have to go on is a potentially revealing remark as to their own prejudice.

I'm not saying they made this decision because it was a lesbian relationship; as I posted earlier, I'm not convinced of that. But, we have more evidence for that, than for the conclusion that the girlfriend was some "unseemly" creep.

We really should give out warnings for horribly misleading titles.

The laws against 18 year olds having sex/relationships with underage people apply to straight couples as well. She did not get into legal trouble for being a lesbian.

Bashfluff:
There are states with Romeo and Juliet laws for this very situation.

That state has such a law. This couple has an age difference just large enough to create a window that falls outside that state's Romeo and Juliet clause.

Father Time:
We really should give out warnings for horribly misleading titles.

The laws against 18 year olds having sex/relationships with underage people apply to straight couples as well. She did not get into legal trouble for being a lesbian.

If you bothered to read the OP you would have seen as much admitted. The title (which is lifted from 70% of the articles on the matter) refers to the second girl's parents alledged homophobia which led to them getting charges pressed. Granted, only one side is saying that and the other side has chosen to remain silent for whatever reasons.

But if you take the claim at face value; homophobia was the main reason for the second girl's parents pressing charges, which makes the title accurate.

So thanks for going over the argument on page one, but we're on page six now.

EDIT: Well looks like the younger girl's parents have spoken and are denying the homophobia angle and it was just the age difference. So it's now "he said she said" unless the school confirms or denies the claims.

Shaoken:

Father Time:
We really should give out warnings for horribly misleading titles.

The laws against 18 year olds having sex/relationships with underage people apply to straight couples as well. She did not get into legal trouble for being a lesbian.

If you bothered to read the OP you would have seen as much admitted.

My complaints that the title was misleading and that there should be warnings still stand.

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/bury_the_lead

Shaoken:

But if you take the claim at face value; homophobia was the main reason for the second girl's parents pressing charges, which makes the title accurate.

You'd have to be a mind reader to know that. This stuff happens with straight couples too.

Father Time:

Shaoken:

Father Time:
We really should give out warnings for horribly misleading titles.

The laws against 18 year olds having sex/relationships with underage people apply to straight couples as well. She did not get into legal trouble for being a lesbian.

If you bothered to read the OP you would have seen as much admitted.

My complaints that the title was misleading and that there should be warnings still stand.

Well if you feel that strongly about it go report it and move on.

Shaoken:

But if you take the claim at face value; homophobia was the main reason for the second girl's parents pressing charges, which makes the title accurate.

You'd have to be a mind reader to know that. This stuff happens with straight couples too.

And if you bothered to do actual reading you'd have seen I have said it happens with straight couples since post 1. At the time the topic started the younger parents hadn't commented, leaving homophobia as the main suspected cause. So, everything in the title is true, it just becomes a question of wether or not the second half was the main factor or not, which is the entire point of a discussion topic on a discussion forum.

GothmogII:
Huh, interesting, it seems the girl being charged rejected the plea deal: http://www.cnn.com/2013/05/24/justice/florida-teen-sex-case/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

Do people still think it's purely a case of a teen being utterly selfish and not respecting a parent's wishes? Cause you know, 15 years in prison is a pretty hefty thing to go up against unless she is sure she'll be vindicated or really loves her girlfriend and that the whole thing wasn't a case of simple teenage lust. Then again, there's probably a lot of teenage stupidity involved either way, so this may just be a sign of that.

No, still belive it was just that. It was selfishness, stupidity, and thoughtlessness. However, even so, the prosecution gave her a GIFT in the form of house arrest. Seriously, that offer couldn't have been a bigger gift if they had fucking wrapped it, slapped a bow on it, and threw it under a tree of some sort. That was a gift she should have jumped at then gotten down on her knees with tears of relief pouring from her eyes and hands extended to the heavens to thank whatever god she happens to believe in for this gracious gift of not going to prison the state has graciously bestowed upon her. Sadly for her that's not what happened though.

Now, I would wager largely to the outpouring of support from people with fuck all skin in the game, she wrongly believes she can beat these charges. She can't. She is going to end up doing jail time and end up as a felon. She is listening to all the people screaming how unfair this is and how she hasn't done anything wrong and BLAH BLAH fucking BLAH and ultimately this support will amount to a hill of beans that aren't really beans at closer inspection but rather some kind of large rodent shit that just happens to look amazingly like beans at a bit of a distance when she is in jail and all these same people who are supporting her move on to the next cause celebre and forget entirely of her existence about thirty seconds after the jail door slams behind her.

Shaoken:
So, everything in the title is true,

No. She was not arrested for being in a lesbian relationship she was arrested for being in a relationship with a minor. Maybe she was reported by someone who hated her for being a lesbian (maybe), but none of the charges have anything to do with being a lesbian.

Father Time:

Shaoken:
So, everything in the title is true,

No. She was not arrested for being in a lesbian relationship she was arrested for being in a relationship with a minor. Maybe she was reported by someone who hated her for being a lesbian (maybe), but none of the charges have anything to do with being a lesbian.

The Hell you say ?!?! If you've been following this story on The Huffington Post or Gawker or any of the other handful of Liberal "News" websites that are more or less just liberal echo chambers you'd think that she was charged with Being a Lesbian in the First Degree and instead of a trial they are going to wrap her in log chains and throw her in the deepest lake they can find at which point they will decide her guilt or innocence based entirely on her buoyancy or lack there of.

Why did the OP get a warning? I didn't see anything really that offensive so reading the moderation FAQ didn't really give much insight.

Olrod:
Why did the OP get a warning? I didn't see anything really that offensive so reading the moderation FAQ didn't really give much insight.

Posting a Thread with a misleading thread title is against the Code of Conduct.

Topicless Thread Creation
Posting a thread without any discussion value, or with a deliberately misleading title, will get you penalized and your thread locked. This includes creating a poll without an accompanying discussion.

Several of us had asked the OP to change it, but the OP refused.

madwarper:

Shaoken:
Point conceeded.

Then, would you mind editing the thread's title? As it stands, the title is inflammatory and misleading, because the teenager in question is being charged with "two felony counts of lewd and lascivious battery on a child 12 - 16 years of age", not with "being in a Lesbian relationship".

Olrod:
Why did the OP get a warning? I didn't see anything really that offensive so reading the moderation FAQ didn't really give much insight.

Father Time took me up on my offer and hollered for a mod. I got a PM for "making a misleading thread title";

Probation Details
Post: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/jump/528.408351.17057545
Reason: Please do not make threads with deliberately misleading thread titles. Read the Code of Conduct.

I have since appealed disputing the "deliberately misleading" titles since it's a copy of a major news article which alledges this is more based off homophobia than the age difference, back in the dark ages where there were no decent articles around.

But I went and changed the thread title so hopefully nobody comes into a discussion thread to talk about the title and not the topic.

Shaoken:
I have since appealed disputing the "deliberately misleading" titles since it's a copy of a major news article which alledges this is more based off homophobia than the age difference, back in the dark ages where there were no decent articles around.

Thread title: US Teenager expelled arrested for Lesbian Relationship
Linked article: Gay teen expelled and arrested in US

Do you not see the difference? The title of your linked article does not imply that the sexual orientation of the defendant played a part in their expulsion or arrest. Your thread title, on the other hand, specifically implies that the cause of her expulsion and arrest was due to her being a lesbian in a relationship, which is false and misleading.

madwarper:

Shaoken:
I have since appealed disputing the "deliberately misleading" titles since it's a copy of a major news article which alledges this is more based off homophobia than the age difference, back in the dark ages where there were no decent articles around.

Thread title: US Teenager expelled arrested for Lesbian Relationship
Linked article: Gay teen expelled and arrested in US

Do you not see the difference? The title of your linked article does not imply that the sexual orientation of the defendant played a part in their expulsion or arrest. Your thread title, on the other hand, specifically implies that the cause of her expulsion and arrest was due to her being a lesbian in a relationship, which is false and misleading.

Thread title changed while you were busy typing that up, so are you actually going to talk about the topic at hand or are you going to keep going on about wether or not the title is more or less misleading than any other title in this section?

For the Record: http://www.examiner.com/article/florida-teen-fights-expulsion-and-criminal-charges-for-same-sex-relationship - Posted on the first page and what the yahoo article was based on.

So after reading the more article and thinking about it for a while I believe now, more than ever that this woman is just reaping what she has sewn. This was an 18 year old adult in a sexual relationship with a 14 year old child. That's borderline Chris Hansen "Have a seat right over there" material and that's all kinds of wrong no matter what way you slice it. That is an adult sexually taking advantage of a child.

Also, the Smith family claims they had warned this woman twice before involving the police. Hell, given the fact their child was having sex with an adult on top of other troubling behavior linked to the relationship including running away at one point I think the fact they warned her not once, but twice is overly fair. There are probably quite a few parents who wouldn't have bothered warning this woman at all. They simply would have handed the matter over to the police from the start.

If you are an adult and the parents of a child that isn't yours tell you to stay away you need to stay the Hell away. It doesn't matter if you are 38 or 18 and a day once they tell you they don't want you near their child you have no business being anywhere near them. Furthermore, it should go without saying that as an adult you don't need to be in sexual relationships with children that are barely even teenagers. This applies doubly when the parents are telling you directly that they find your sexual relationship with their minor daughter inappropriate.

Given the updated facts of the girl being 14, not 15, and the statement by the Smith family that they had warned this woman multiple times I now firmly believe more than ever that this girl deserves to be punished with jail time and she needs to have her name put on a sex offender registry. This woman knowingly engaged in a sexual relationship with a child and despite multiple warnings continued on with her deviant behavior. She is a criminal and deserves to be treated as such.

Thread title is more accurate, just unnecessarily long. Why not just state the fact and leave out the speculation?

It's really too late now because roughly 200 posts have gone by, a tiny fraction of what has spread across the Internet and television. I put this BS squarely on the virtual militia members that spread misinformation like wildfire.

There is an oft repeated underground saying, "/b is not your personal army". Well in today's world, nobody needs them when there's Facebook, an even dumber group with hundreds of millions of people ready to believe anything put in front of them.

AgedGrunt:
Thread title is more accurate, just unnecessarily long. Why not just state the fact and leave out the speculation?

The speculation is the only thing that really keeps this from being a generic "are statutary rape laws a good idea between teenagers" thread. But after six pages I think we're stuck with this title for better or worse.

Super Not Cosmo:
So after reading the more article and thinking about it for a while I believe now, more than ever that this woman is just reaping what she has sewn. This was an 18 year old adult in a sexual relationship with a 14 year old child. That's borderline Chris Hansen "Have a seat right over there" material and that's all kinds of wrong no matter what way you slice it. That is an adult sexually taking advantage of a child.

Also, the Smith family claims they had warned this woman twice before involving the police. Hell, given the fact their child was having sex with an adult on top of other troubling behavior linked to the relationship including running away at one point I think the fact they warned her not once, but twice is overly fair. There are probably quite a few parents who wouldn't have bothered warning this woman at all. They simply would have handed the matter over to the police from the start.

If you are an adult and the parents of a child that isn't yours tell you to stay away you need to stay the Hell away. It doesn't matter if you are 38 or 18 and a day once they tell you they don't want you near their child you have no business being anywhere near them. Furthermore, it should go without saying that as an adult you don't need to be in sexual relationships with children that are barely even teenagers. This applies doubly when the parents are telling you directly that they find your sexual relationship with their minor daughter inappropriate.

Given the updated facts of the girl being 14, not 15, and the statement by the Smith family that they had warned this woman multiple times I now firmly believe more than ever that this girl deserves to be punished with jail time and she needs to have her name put on a sex offender registry. This woman knowingly engaged in a sexual relationship with a child and despite multiple warnings continued on with her deviant behavior. She is a criminal and deserves to be treated as such.

And this is the attitude that holds our society back and reinforces the idea that growing individuals should submit to the authority of the parents just because they say so. This unhealthy model of parenting in our culture prevents young adults from actually growing up, and oppresses their own individuality and the ability to make decisions about their personal lives for themselves.

So what if they warned her twice? So what if they didn't like it? It's not their girlfriend, and it's not their issue unless she's dangerous. This is a clear case of a parent using their authority unjustly to impose their will on the child about something they should have never been remotely involved in.

Parents take note.

14 and 18 is too wide of a gap. She should be punished. I'd say the same thing regardless of the private parts involved. Still, I hope she recieves a punishment close to the minimum. What she did isn't some extreme degree of abuse, but it still is abusive and is something we cannot allow.

Bashfluff:
And this is the attitude that holds our society back and reinforces the idea that growing individuals should submit to the authority of the parents just because they say so. This unhealthy model of parenting in our culture prevents young adults from actually growing up, and oppresses their own individuality and the ability to make decisions about their personal lives for themselves.

So what if they warned her twice? So what if they didn't like it? It's not their girlfriend, and it's not their issue unless she's dangerous. This is a clear case of a parent using their authority unjustly to impose their will on the child about something they should have never been remotely involved in.

Parents take note.

Yeah that crazy unhealthy model of parenting that subscribes to the notion that 14 year old children shouldn't be having sex. Least of all with a grown adult. If keeping your 14 year old child from having sex is now what is considered "holding society back" then I'm happy to be one of the many people who are willing to bring society to a screeching halt. Now most people would call that good basic parenting but apparently those people are just being oppressive and trying to halt their child's individuality and growth.

It is common knowledge after all that screwing before you're old enough to get a driving permit is a straight up character builder. Not only should it not be impeded but parents should actively encourage it. Afterall, nothing bad ever comes from teenagers having sex. It's well known that teenage mothers are the pinnacle of individuality. They are the specialist snowflakes of the them all.

Now I understand that you believe that children are all special snowflakes that need to be nurtured and allowed nothing but room to grow with as little outside interference as possible. That would be well and good if teenagers were able to demonstrate the smallest bit of good decision making. They can't. Given enough rope the vast majority of teenagers will simply tie it around their throats and proceed to go gleefully running off the largest cliff they can find metaphorically speaking. This story proves that in spades.

Now you may think it's bad parenting to keep your 14 year old child from having sex with a grown adult. Most parents would strongly disagree. Furthermore, if you are a parent of a 14 year old child that is having sex it is absolutely your business. Being in a sexual relationship is inherently dangerous. Especially at such a young age. It is their duty to put at end to such a relationship if they don't feel their daughter is mature enough to handle such a thing and that is just what they did. Judging by the fact this girl was also displaying other troubling behavior like running away I'd say they made the proper choice to put an end to it.

Super Not Cosmo:

Bashfluff:
And this is the attitude that holds our society back and reinforces the idea that growing individuals should submit to the authority of the parents just because they say so. This unhealthy model of parenting in our culture prevents young adults from actually growing up, and oppresses their own individuality and the ability to make decisions about their personal lives for themselves.

So what if they warned her twice? So what if they didn't like it? It's not their girlfriend, and it's not their issue unless she's dangerous. This is a clear case of a parent using their authority unjustly to impose their will on the child about something they should have never been remotely involved in.

Parents take note.

That would be well and good if teenagers were able to demonstrate the smallest bit of good decision making. They can't. Given enough rope the vast majority of teenagers will simply tie it around their throats and proceed to go gleefully running off the largest cliff they can find metaphorically speaking. This story proves that in spades.
.

I don't really need to do anything but highlight this. They're not individuals capable of making their own decisions. Teenagers, to this person, are people incapable of deciding things for themselves and have to be controlled by their parents.

Bashfluff:

Super Not Cosmo:

Bashfluff:
And this is the attitude that holds our society back and reinforces the idea that growing individuals should submit to the authority of the parents just because they say so. This unhealthy model of parenting in our culture prevents young adults from actually growing up, and oppresses their own individuality and the ability to make decisions about their personal lives for themselves.

So what if they warned her twice? So what if they didn't like it? It's not their girlfriend, and it's not their issue unless she's dangerous. This is a clear case of a parent using their authority unjustly to impose their will on the child about something they should have never been remotely involved in.

Parents take note.

That would be well and good if teenagers were able to demonstrate the smallest bit of good decision making. They can't. Given enough rope the vast majority of teenagers will simply tie it around their throats and proceed to go gleefully running off the largest cliff they can find metaphorically speaking. This story proves that in spades.
.

I don't really need to do anything but highlight this. They're not individuals capable of making their own decisions. Teenagers, to this person, are people incapable of deciding things for themselves and have to be controlled by their parents.

The law agrees. It's why minors can't sign a legally binding contract or anything of the sort. Because they're not considered to be capable of making decisions for themselves.

Kopikatsu:

Bashfluff:

Super Not Cosmo:

That would be well and good if teenagers were able to demonstrate the smallest bit of good decision making. They can't. Given enough rope the vast majority of teenagers will simply tie it around their throats and proceed to go gleefully running off the largest cliff they can find metaphorically speaking. This story proves that in spades.
.

I don't really need to do anything but highlight this. They're not individuals capable of making their own decisions. Teenagers, to this person, are people incapable of deciding things for themselves and have to be controlled by their parents.

The law agrees. It's why minors can't sign a legally binding contract or anything of the sort. Because they're not considered to be capable of making decisions for themselves.

No, they're not considered able of making certain decisions. And in any case, I think that's wrong. There's no GIGANTIC change from 17 to 18. In your mid to late teenage years, you grow as an individual and come to decide things for yourself about who you are and what you want out of life. Like it or not, teenagers do make decisions all the time. Big ones.

Bashfluff:

No, they're not considered able of making certain decisions. And in any case, I think that's wrong. There's no GIGANTIC change from 17 to 18. In your mid to late teenage years, you grow as an individual and come to decide things for yourself about who you are and what you want out of life. Like it or not, teenagers do make decisions all the time. Big ones.

Care to name any of the 'big decisions' that aren't against the law? Because I'd bet the list is pretty short.

Bashfluff:

Kopikatsu:

Bashfluff:

I don't really need to do anything but highlight this. They're not individuals capable of making their own decisions. Teenagers, to this person, are people incapable of deciding things for themselves and have to be controlled by their parents.

The law agrees. It's why minors can't sign a legally binding contract or anything of the sort. Because they're not considered to be capable of making decisions for themselves.

No, they're not considered able of making certain decisions. And in any case, I think that's wrong. There's no GIGANTIC change from 17 to 18. In your mid to late teenage years, you grow as an individual and come to decide things for yourself about who you are and what you want out of life. Like it or not, teenagers do make decisions all the time. Big ones.

There's an abundance of big changes that take place between 14 and 18, or even 14 and 16 or 16 and 18. The fact is, we're dealing with a 14 year old in a sexual relationship with an 18 year old. It is quite reasonable to take issue with that.
However, I will agree that Cosmo is taking this much too far.

Aren't there provisions to take into account when the relationship started? From the OP, it sounds like it was legal when they started. Is it really okay for a legal relationship to suddenly become illegal like that? Maybe this was already discussed earlier in the thread, I'm mostly responding to the OP.

It's amazing just how ass-backwards this entire situation is. If Kaitlyn had been seventeen years old, then this wouldn't have been a police matter in the slightest. But, because she was a little over 18, she was magically old enough to be molesting that 15 y/o.
Sure, it's definitely possible that this would have happened if Kate had been a man. But, there is no denying that this time around, her adult status is being used an excuse and that the real issue is the fact that the 15 y/o's parents have a lesbian or bisexual daughter. And the fact that Kaitlyn is being severely punished, possibly with psychological and legal scars that will haunt her for the rest of her life, is absolutely disgraceful.

Here's the text from the Free Kate facebook page ( http://www.facebook.com/groups/FreeKate/ ):

"As the summer of 2012 came to an end, the future looked bright for 17-year-old Sebastian River High School senior Kaitlyn Hunt. Voted the student with "Most School Spirit" by her peers, Kaitlyn was an active cheerleader, a basketball player, a camp counselor and cheering coach, and a medical assistant training to join the nursing program at Valencia College after graduation. She looked forward to a career helping others and a memorable final year of high school.

At the beginning of the school year, Kaitlyn made friends with a 14-year-old freshmen girl in Sebastian River High's IB program who played varsity sports and took classes with upper classmen. The girls were peers in the same social circle, and as happens every day in high schools across America, their friendship eventually developed into more. In September, shortly after Kaitlyn's 18th birthday, the girls began dating, and they eventually expressed their affection for one another in intimate ways.

When the girls' basketball coach found out that two of her players were dating, she kicked Kaitlyn off the team and informed her girlfriend's parents that their daughter was in a same-sex relationship. The parents then conspired with police to entrap Kaitlyn and press charges.

The police recorded a phone conversation between the two girls, who today are 18 and 15, in which they discussed their relationship. Kaitlyn was arrested and charged with two counts of felony lewd and lascivious battery on a child 12-16. Kaitlyn's girlfriend denies that Kaitlyn ever pressured her and is adamant that their relationship is entirely consensual, but her parents are out to destroy Kaitlyn's life. After two separate judges ruled that Kaitlyn could finish her senior year with her peers, her girlfriend's parents appealed to the Indian River County School Board, who expelled Kaitlyn sent her to the alternative school."

Revnak:

Bashfluff:

Kopikatsu:

The law agrees. It's why minors can't sign a legally binding contract or anything of the sort. Because they're not considered to be capable of making decisions for themselves.

No, they're not considered able of making certain decisions. And in any case, I think that's wrong. There's no GIGANTIC change from 17 to 18. In your mid to late teenage years, you grow as an individual and come to decide things for yourself about who you are and what you want out of life. Like it or not, teenagers do make decisions all the time. Big ones.

There's an abundance of big changes that take place between 14 and 18, or even 14 and 16 or 16 and 18. The fact is, we're dealing with a 14 year old in a sexual relationship with an 18 year old. It is quite reasonable to take issue with that.
However, I will agree that Cosmo is taking this much too far.

From what I understand, the girl was almost 15 and the girl just turned 18. They took advantage of the few months the relationship was illegal to mess with the 18 year old. That's what I understand.

Bashfluff:

Revnak:

Bashfluff:

No, they're not considered able of making certain decisions. And in any case, I think that's wrong. There's no GIGANTIC change from 17 to 18. In your mid to late teenage years, you grow as an individual and come to decide things for yourself about who you are and what you want out of life. Like it or not, teenagers do make decisions all the time. Big ones.

There's an abundance of big changes that take place between 14 and 18, or even 14 and 16 or 16 and 18. The fact is, we're dealing with a 14 year old in a sexual relationship with an 18 year old. It is quite reasonable to take issue with that.
However, I will agree that Cosmo is taking this much too far.

From what I understand, the girl was almost 15 and the girl just turned 18. They took advantage of the few months the relationship was illegal to mess with the 18 year old. That's what I understand.

She turned 18 in august and from what I have read the other girl is still 14 (though she may have turned 15 at this point). Go read JoJo's link on the last page to see when Kate's birthday is. Their relationship began over 100 days after she was 18 and while the other girl was still 14 and all the events that led to her charges occurred while she was still 14.

Edit- I'll put the link below
http://www.scribd.com/doc/142642135/Kaitlyn-Hunt-Redacted-Affidavit-Redacted

Skeleon:
Aren't there provisions to take into account when the relationship started? From the OP, it sounds like it was legal when they started. Is it really okay for a legal relationship to suddenly become illegal like that? Maybe this was already discussed earlier in the thread, I'm mostly responding to the OP.

At no point was their relationship legal. They met after Kate turned 18, and their relationship became physical almost four months later. I'm pretty sure they didn't even know eachother until after Kate turned 18.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked