Nestor/NST reaches new low

**RavensInBrazil** · 09-01-2006, 08:45 AM

So Sinclair's wife and any kids he might have weren't affected? This girl's parents aren't affected? This girl obviously has some kind of psychological issues or she wouldn't be blowing some old guy (and it isn't like he is a good looking 61). She is 16, even at 18 she is immature. She is an immature young lady with obvious problems and this guy took advantage of that to get a blow job.

Hmm, I did miss out on the family part. The idea remains the same though, what he did was pretty stupid, but not criminal

About the girl though, great job judging her. Do you know her? Are you her shrink? You can have any opinion you want regarding her mental health, but don't just go assuming she's mad just because she gave a blowjob. Is it possible that she has problems? Of course. However, none of us know exactly what happened, under what circumstances. We all think the guy's a swine, but it's a longer shot to call him manipulative. For all we know, the girl manipulated him

Just to be perfectly clear: it's only OK for 60 year-old men to boink adolescent girls when they can talk them into it.

...

When you get older you'll realize that you really didn't know everything when you were a teenager

As opposed to knowing everything when I turn 40 or 60? No one knows everything, but everyone has a point of view, and it would be nice of y'all not to dismiss someone's opinion just because they're younger. If Einstein had come up with his relativity theory when he was 13, it wouldn't have been any less valid (and no, I'm by no means comparing myself to Einstein or any genious)

a growing number of policymakers are embracing the notion that adolescent pregnancy rates can be lowered and welfare costs reduced if states more rigorously enforce statutory rape laws prohibiting sex ual intercourse between adults and minors.

That would be attacking the consequences, not the cause. Making it illegal for teenagers to have sex isn't going to magically remove their natural urges, not is it going to make men start finding older women more attractive than young ones. This is a cultural and educational problem, not a judicial or political one. I'm sure there's a number of parents here who can attest to the fact that prohibiting their child to do something isn't gonna make them stop wanting to do it, or maybe even stop them from doing it at all

It also directs the attorney general to implement a program to study the connection between statutory rape and adolescent pregnancy, with particular attention to "predatory older men."

And where are the studies about the connection between sex ed and teenage pregnancy, with particular attention to abstinence programs? When looking at causes for a problem, all the possibilites should be examined, not just the ones we like or don't like. By focusing this issue on the "predatory old men", they're taking their eyes away from the other aspects of the problem

**ravenmaniac** · 09-01-2006, 09:48 AM

I'm sure there's a number of parents here who can attest to the fact that prohibiting their child to do something isn't gonna make them stop wanting to do it, or maybe even stop them from doing it at all

They aren't prohibiting the kids, they are enforcing laws against the ADULTS who are fucking the kids. Obviously, you want to make the argument that its okay for young people to fuck adults because you'd like to get laid. If you can't figure out that a girl at 16 SHOULDN'T be interested in a dirty old man, then there is no arguing with you. If you want to make the argument about a 16 yr old blowing a 22 yr old, then there'd be more of an argument.

**RavensDomination** · 09-01-2006, 12:27 PM

Originally Posted by B-more Ravor

Umm, look, I was only commenting on Drew's gratitious swipe at our current Governor - Drew said "Maybe our next new Governor will take that one on". I was just pointing out that he didn't pass the friggin' Law. That's not his role. On the other hand, the GENERAL ASSEMBLY did. That is their role. Understand?

If the GENERAL ASSEMBLY didn't liked what the Gov. - any Gov. - was influencing, they wouldn't pass the Law. If you've been paying any attention to anything at all recently, that would be pretty evident to you.

And, BTW, the age of consent law has been on the books since BEFORE Ehrlich took office, so Drew's original statement had absolutely NO merit whatsoever. My prior post was made when this thread was still on the main board, so I wasn't going to bring politics into it - although that is what Drew did - so I just made it a generic statement about Governors not being the ones passing the Laws.

Drew also made a generic statement about the law and the Gov. and you came back with your smart ass comment.

If you have been paying attention to anything at all recently you would realize the governor of a state is a highly influential person in determining what laws get passed or don't get passed.

**Greg** · 09-01-2006, 12:29 PM

About the girl though, great job judging her. Do you know her? Are you her shrink? You can have any opinion you want regarding her mental health, but don't just go assuming she's mad just because she gave a blowjob. Is it possible that she has problems? Of course. However, none of us know exactly what happened, under what circumstances. We all think the guy's a swine, but it's a longer shot to call him manipulative. For all we know, the girl manipulated him

I would bet that any 16 or 18 year old girl giving an old guy a blow job, one she has just met, has some serious issues to resolve. Please, how many girls this age that are normal psychologically are going to be blowing some old guy, for any reason?

If you have been paying attention to anything at all recently you would realize the governor of a state is a highly influential person in determining what laws get passed or don't get passed.

WHAT? If you have been paying attention to anything at all you would see the governor can't get anything he wants, LIKE SLOTS, passed and he can't stop the legislature from what they want even if he hates it (WalMart bill, early voting in only some locations, one other). Thankfully they were all struck down because they weren't Constitutional. The current governor can't get anything through those partisan asswipes now running our legislature, even if it is something like slots most of them have supported in the past.

**RavensInBrazil** · 09-01-2006, 12:32 PM

How are a 60-year-old man and a 22-year-old man different? I mean, perhaps the older one has some plumbing issues, but other than that it's pretty much the same. A young man can have any of the qualities and any of the vices of any old man

People in the world SHOULD love to eat cabbage and broccoli, but, wait a second, it's a taste! No one can control what they like themselves, let alone what others like

Odds are that a relationship between an old man and a young woman wouldn't be really healthy (unless the young woman is manipulating the old man, in that case it's perfectly acceptable, right?), but that doesn't give anyone the right to judge any relationship based solely on age. Either way, this is hardly a relationship we're talking about, it's a one-night stand, not even. Did anyone bother to ask the girl whether SHE wanted to give the old man a blowjob? Oh, no, she's not 18 yet, she's too stupid to make her own decisions, right?

Obviously, you want to make the argument that its okay for young people to fuck adults because you'd like to get laid

Obviously, you want to make the argument that it's NOT okay for teenagers to screw with adults because you're in denial about finding Lindsay Lohan attractive

Oh, wait, neither of us are shrinks!

I would bet that any 16 or 18 year old girl giving an old guy a blow job, one she has just met, has some serious issues to resolve. Please, how many girls this age that are normal psychologically are going to be blowing some old guy, for any reason?

How many have you asked? How many answered honestly? Were you a 16-year-old girl once? Do you know what reason she had for blowing him?

Perhaps she has some issues to solve, indeed. Maybe she needs to get over finding older men hot, or maybe she needed to find another way to make a quick 20 bucks. Hard issues to deal with!

**B-more Ravor** · 09-01-2006, 04:09 PM

Originally Posted by RavenDomination

Drew also made a generic statement about the law and the Gov. and you came back with your smart ass comment.

If you have been paying attention to anything at all recently you would realize the governor of a state is a highly influential person in determining what laws get passed or don't get passed.

Oh please give it a rest - how is pointing out that the legislative branch is responsible for enacting laws being a smart ass? I was simply pointing out that the age of consent law has nothing to do with who the present Gov is.

Drew's comments were not generic - his target was clear - and he was also off base (since the age of consent law has been on the books for years).

As far as whether the Gov has influence or not, sure he does, but it's not his job to PASS the laws - that is the role of the legislative branch under the seperation of powers doctrine. Of course, the Gov has more influence when he and legislature are of the same party. As Greg already said, if you really think that Ehrlich has much of any influence over the present legislature, then you really haven't been paying much attention.

**df1570** · 09-01-2006, 05:16 PM

I finally thought of something that Erlich DOES influence in our state. And he most certainly doesn't need the general assembly for this task.

Erlich is completely free to pick the moving company of his choice to move all of his stuff out of the state house in late December.

I just looked it up. It's true.

**LBoogy** · 09-01-2006, 06:11 PM

I finally thought of something that Erlich DOES influence in our state. And he most certainly doesn't need the general assembly for this task.

Erlich is completely free to pick the moving company of his choice to move all of his stuff out of the state house in late December.

I just looked it up. It's true.

Out of ideas?

**B-more Ravor** · 09-02-2006, 08:22 AM

Originally Posted by df1570

I finally thought of something that Erlich DOES influence in our state. And he most certainly doesn't need the general assembly for this task.

Erlich is completely free to pick the moving company of his choice to move all of his stuff out of the state house in late December.

I just looked it up. It's true.

Good one, Drew.

Too bad you couldn't come up with anything better to support your silly assertion.

Now, RD, do you still think Drew's original statement was "generic".

**Greg** · 09-02-2006, 12:16 PM

Why in hell would anybody support O'Malley. The guy has been a horrible mayor. Ehrlich balanced a budget left a mess from the last yahoo the dead people of Baltimore voted in.

How are a 60-year-old man and a 22-year-old man different? I mean, perhaps the older one has some plumbing issues, but other than that it's pretty much the same. A young man can have any of the qualities and any of the vices of any old man

Dude, there is a maturity that should come with age. The interests of people so disparete in age also can't be compatible. If this old guy is into the same music and culture the 16 year old is, something is wrong with one of them. That is just natural.

Generally people date to find mates to spend their life with, to raise a family with, there is a reason why this is not natural.

And finally, if they had known each other and over time developed an affection for one another that would be one thing, this was just some old coot getting a blowjob from a girl who is young enough to be his grand daughter. It isn't natural and a mature man shouldn't be involved in such things.

**RavensInBrazil** · 09-03-2006, 01:41 AM

Greg, why are you telling me something I pretty much already agreed to? Obviously, people with that big an age difference are highly unlikely to be able to have a good relationship...it's not impossible, but not probable

Like I said, this is pretty much a one-time thing. What's the big deal? Everyone likes or used to like one-night stands, it's just two people having fun. If both parties get something out of it, so what? If the girl is already willing to give the guy a blowjob, actually doing it won't make much of a difference in the end

This thing about "natural" though bugs me. It's fine if you disagree with certain behaviour, but when it's none of your business, so what? It wouldn't be "natural" if went on an elevator and stood with my back to the door, but that isn't really cause for commotion, is it? What is "natural" anyway? What's found in nature (thus excluding pretty much everything we do)? Aren't WE a part of nature? Or perhaps it's just not what's commonly sociably acceptable, but in that case, I'm sure there's a better word to be used

Look, we all agree that the guy probably didn't make the best decision in his life, nor the girl, but in the end it's none of our bee's wax. The only difference here is that this is related to a sexual conduct, but sex is just a part of our lives, as anything else. I thought the United States were founded on the principle of freedom, not of taboos

**ravenmaniac** · 09-03-2006, 09:48 AM

I thought the United States were founded on the principle of freedom, not of taboos

In half of our states, he'd be in jail for getting a bj from a 16 yr old. This isn't just about the law in the state of MD. Its about what is morally right. A married man manipulating someone who clearly isn't an adult into sucking his dick is morally reprehensible but of course you see nothing wrong with that because you want to be treated as an adult.

**RavensInBrazil** · 09-03-2006, 10:23 AM

Because I'm NOT an adult? Give me a break. Have you ever thought that I might believe certain things because I have actually thought about them? Or maybe just because I don't agree with you I'm acting like a child. You're telling me I want to be treated like an adult...in this case, yes, I do, I want to have a discussion based on opinions and arguments, not on accusations. But hey, perhaps you're never actually wrong, right?

And how the hell do you know how that girl's mind works? You're doing an incredible amount of mind-reading here, huh? What if SHE manipulated the old man because she was desperate for a quick 20? What if she *gasp* didn't have a problem with what she did after think about it? You say that it's morally reprehensible to manipulate a young person, well guess what, it's also morally reprehensible to judge people like that

**RavenMad2099** · 09-03-2006, 11:33 AM

What if SHE manipulated the old man because she was desperate for a quick 20?

I don't know about the rest of you, but I've never needed to be "manipulated" into accepting a blowjob from an *adult* female.

You're saying he accepted oral sex from this high school student out of the goodness of his heart because she needed a quick $20?

That's prostitution, BTW...in which case he is guilty of committing a crime whether the girl was 16, 18, 21, or 35.

You say that it's morally reprehensible to manipulate a young person, well guess what, it's also morally reprehensible to judge people like that

She isn't even a legal adult. That's because legislators decided that people under the age of 18 don't have the life experience to make responsible choices...that's why their parents are still legally responsible for them...and that's also why it's not "morally reprehensible" to make these judgements.

You've said in the past that some 15 and 16 year-olds are mature for their age and perfectly capable of making the "mature" decision to blow a 60 year-old in a car. Leaving aside the sheerly ludicrious nature of your argument, who gets to make that determination? The teen herself? She will say she's mature enough every time. The courts? Isn't that kind of decision a little too subjective for a judge to make? The parents? What's to stop Dad from putting his little girl on the streets to earn a buck?

Like it or not, the line has to be drawn somewhere. A vast majority of Americans believe that adults having sex with adolescents is morally reprehensible...especially since an adolescent is not intellectually, emotionally, or economically equipped to successfully provide for themselves or anyone else in today's economy. That being the case (and since this is a democracy), legislators pass statuatory rape laws.

Frankly, you don't live here anyway...so I don't see why you give a damn. If people in Brazil think it's OK to use children for sexual gratification, it's your damn country and you have to live in it.

**ravenmaniac** · 09-03-2006, 12:23 PM

Frankly, you don't live here anyway...so I don't see why you give a damn. If people in Brazil think it's OK to use children for sexual gratification, it's your damn country and you have to live in it.

People in Brazil DO think its okay.

Further details.

It’s also noteworthy that the “age of consent” here applies not only to sexual intercourse (penis in the vagina), but also to all forms of “libidinous acts” (which includes oral and anal sex, manipulation and/or mouth contact with the breasts and the vagina, and the masturbation of the other). One can be prosecuted by the parents of a minor in case of doing any of these libidinous acts with the minor (and not only in case of sexual intercourse).

Dating and kissing are allowed at all ages and are not subject to law enforcement (sex is not presumed from dating).

To sum up everything :

- Age of consent in Brazil is NORMALLY 14

(WITH parents’ approval – or at least their tolerance);

- However if there’s PREGNANCY with SUBSEQUENT MARRIAGE (or vice-versa), then :

A) Age of consent becomes 14 in any case (WITH or WITHOUT parents’ approval, because the partner can't be prosecuted anymore once the marriage is now valid);

OR

B) If below 14, age of consent becomes age of puberty/fertility (WITH parents’ approval).

In other words, while everyone consents (including the parents) and the girl is pregnant (or was pregnant, being now a mother), the age of consent in this very particular case (marriage with pregnancy) is reduced to the age of puberty (or if you prefer to the age of pregnancy or the age of fertility).

**RavensInBrazil** · 09-03-2006, 03:44 PM

I don't know about the rest of you, but I've never needed to be "manipulated" into accepting a blowjob from an *adult* female.

You're saying he accepted oral sex from this high school student out of the goodness of his heart because she needed a quick $20? That's prostitution, BTW...in which case he is guilty of committing a crime whether the girl was 16, 18, 21, or 35.

My point was that we don't know exactly what happened, so we might be reaching premature conclusions

She isn't even a legal adult. That's because legislators decided that people under the age of 18 don't have the life experience to make responsible choices...that's why their parents are still legally responsible for them...and that's also why it's not "morally reprehensible" to make these judgements.

How can they have life experience if we don't allow them to have it? American society, and perhaps Western society as a whole, denies young people the possibility of learning about sex and other things of life, and expects them to magically be able to learn them at age 18. It would be the same thing is adults constantly denied teenagers access to information about cars and expected them to be able to handle them perfectly well at 18

You've said in the past that some 15 and 16 year-olds are mature for their age and perfectly capable of making the "mature" decision to blow a 60 year-old in a car. Leaving aside the sheerly ludicrious nature of your argument, who gets to make that determination? The teen herself? She will say she's mature enough every time. The courts? Isn't that kind of decision a little too subjective for a judge to make? The parents? What's to stop Dad from putting his little girl on the streets to earn a buck?

How can you expect someone to be mature about a situation they've never experienced? So a 16-year-old isn't mature to handle sex (which is given a wrong value in society, IMO), but then when she becomes 18 she will?

Obviously you can't change age of consent laws overnight and expect everything to be fine, I don't. However, given the appropriate education, anyone should be able to make the correct decisions, regardless of their age. People are taught to count and make calculations by a math teacher, someone who has experience in that given area. Why doesn't the same happen with sex? If parents and educators actually bothered to teach children and teenagers about sex and tell them their experiences with sex, don't you think they would be better able to make decisions in that regard? This isn't an age issue, it's an issue of education. I for one would trust a 15-year-old whose parents tought them about sex and talked about their experiences over a 20-year-old whose parents denied access to any information regarding sex

Like it or not, the line has to be drawn somewhere. A vast majority of Americans believe that adults having sex with adolescents is morally reprehensible...especially since an adolescent is not intellectually, emotionally, or economically equipped to successfully provide for themselves or anyone else in today's economy. That being the case (and since this is a democracy), legislators pass statuatory rape laws.

And since when are adolescents expected to provide for themselves or others? Just because a couple is having sex they have to life together now?

No one will be equipped to do anything unless they are TAUGHT how to do it. I would have never known what a spoon is for unless my mother had taught me how and when to use it

I've read a lot of papers and have taken courses on Psychology of Education and similar subjects, but I guess I can't know as much as you because you're simply older than me, right?

This is NOT a question of age, it's a question of EDUCATION

People in Brazil DO think its okay.

Oh, so because our age of consent is lower than yours that means we think it's okay to use children for sexual gratification? In the US, people are allowed to drive from the age of 16, but I don't conclude from that that it's okay to turn your kids into your personal chauffeurs

Also, consider that teen pregnancy rates in the US were at 84 pregnancies per 1,000 females aged 15-19 (after falling significantly from 1990), while in Holland, one of the most sexually liberal countries in the world, the teen pregnancy rates were at FOUR pregnancies per 1,000 females (15-19). How do you interpret that?

Frankly, you don't live here anyway...so I don't see why you give a damn. If people in Brazil think it's OK to use children for sexual gratification, it's your damn country and you have to live in it.

How is that relevant? Just because I don't live in Spain, I can't give my opinion about Real Madrid? Either way, you'll find that I'm most certainly not representative of the brazilian population

Why do I give a damn? Because I like to make people think about issues that aren't commonly given a lot of thought to. You don't believe people got where they are right now by unquestioningly accepting what was told to them, right? Whether I am right or not is mostly irrelevant, my goal is to make people think about things, to make them see the two sides of any given subject. This is how the human race has advanced, afterall. The conclusions anyone reaches is none of my business, but I like to hear the arguments they have in favour of one or another side, and I like to present arguments from the other side. Is having a discussion about something really that bad? For that matter, if you consider the fact that I'm not American relevant to the discussion, why are you talking to me?

Besides, it's really fun to play the devil's advocate (:

**RavenMad2099** · 09-03-2006, 04:49 PM

My point was that we don't know exactly what happened, so we might be reaching premature conclusions

We know he was getting a blowjob from a high school student.
That is unacceptable, and no amount of ridiculous conjecture on your part to justify it will make it any less so.

How can they have life experience if we don't allow them to have it? American society, and perhaps Western society as a whole, denies young people the possibility of learning about sex and other things of life, and expects them to magically be able to learn them at age 18. It would be the same thing is adults constantly denied teenagers access to information about cars and expected them to be able to handle them perfectly well at 18

Give me a break...a 16 year-old is only a few years removed from playing with Barbie dolls, and you think the only reason she isn't ready for adult decisions is because people won't let her have any responsibility? You can't be serious. She may not magically transform at the age of 18, but at least she'll have a full education and more real life experience.

And since when are adolescents expected to provide for themselves or others? Just because a couple is having sex they have to life together now?

No, but sex carries responsibility...among them is the possible result of getting pregnant. In your world, I suppose Mommy and Daddy should pay for the delivery and upbringing of the child resulting from the 60 year-old perv bonking their daughter without their permission.

I've read a lot of papers and have taken courses on Psychology of Education and similar subjects, but I guess I can't know as much as you because you're simply older than me, right?

Wow...you've read a lot of papers and taken a few courses!!!
Excuse me while I genuflect in awe!!!

You're not the only one with a university education...and since you mention it, I do have more life experience than you...thanks for pointing it out.

Also, consider that teen pregnancy rates in the US were at 84 pregnancies per 1,000 females aged 15-19 (after falling significantly from 1990), while in Holland, one of the most sexually liberal countries in the world, the teen pregnancy rates were at FOUR pregnancies per 1,000 females (15-19). How do you interpret that?

Are you trying to make the case that allowing adults to practice pedophilia and commit statuatory rape reduces teen pregnancy? If not, I fail to see what any of that has to do with what you and I are talking about.

How is that relevant? Just because I don't live in Spain, I can't give my opinion about Real Madrid? Either way, you'll find that I'm most certainly not representative of the brazilian population

Well, you're criticizing American values...and you don't even live here.
Why are you so concerned about the right of an adult to fuck an adolescent without retribution from the law or anyone else?

my goal is to make people think about things, to make them see the two sides of any given subject.

That's certainly arrogant.
Who annointed you to make us think? What makes you think you're qualified? Everyone in this thread has obviously thought about this before, otherwise they wouldn't have posted. Oh, I know...every person in the world thinks they're uniquely qualified to criticize American values, but based on what RM posted about Brazilian law, I'd say you're wrong.

**RavensInBrazil** · 09-03-2006, 07:49 PM

Give me a break...a 16 year-old is only a few years removed from playing with Barbie dolls, and you think the only reason she isn't ready for adult decisions is because people won't let her have any responsibility? You can't be serious. She may not magically transform at the age of 18, but at least she'll have a full education and more real life experience.

A full education? Are you kidding? Teaching her about math and geography will translate to more responsibility? And how in the world will she have more life experience in what relates to the things she is FORBIDDEN to do? In a perfect world of "American values", a recently-turned 18-year-old and an 8 year-old will have the exact same amount of sexual experience. Either I'm not getting my point across well or you're not understanding, so I guess continuing here is pointless

Perhaps you could read my post without automatic bias and dismissal of arguments? I'm here trying to say why I believe what I believe, but you just come and say I'm obviously wrong

No, but sex carries responsibility...among them is the possible result of getting pregnant. In your world, I suppose Mommy and Daddy should pay for the delivery and upbringing of the child resulting from the 60 year-old perv bonking their daughter without their permission.

Perhaps you've heard of a little something called contraception? And as far as I know pregnancy can only occur with vaginal penetration, which is not the only form of sex, as I'm certain our sportscaster can attest. Which would you rather have, a kid who's been told what sex is and what it involves and what they should do to be as safe as possible, or a kid who's completely ignorant about sex but undeniably horny?

You're not the only one with a university education...and since you mention it, I do have more life experience than you...thanks for pointing it out.

Given that I seem to be treated as a complete ignorant usually, I thought it might help. I was obviously naïve there. Having more life experience does not make you automatically right, btw

Are you trying to make the case that allowing adults to practice pedophilia and commit statuatory rape reduces teen pregnancy? If not, I fail to see what any of that has to do with what you and I are talking about.

Your reasoning there baffles me. What I was saying is that Holland is more sexually liberal, ergo, young people have more access to information and more freedom to do as they want, and that translates into far less teenage pregnancies than in America, and your line of thinking leads me to believe you think that teens having sex and pregnancy are correlated. Perhaps, for the sake of argument, you should stop assuming that anything I say will be in defence of pedophilia/rape/whatever

Well, you're criticizing American values...and you don't even live here.
Why are you so concerned about the right of an adult to fuck an adolescent without retribution from the law or anyone else?

I'm not criticizing American values, I'm arguing against some, because last I read, Americans are still human beings. I'm not about the right for x to fuck y without retribution from whoever, I'm for freedom and for information. This seems to be particularly hard, however, because anything that doesn't agree with American values is apparently automatically dismissed

That's certainly arrogant.
Who annointed you to make us think? What makes you think you're qualified? Everyone in this thread has obviously thought about this before, otherwise they wouldn't have posted. Oh, I know...every person in the world thinks they're uniquely qualified to criticize American values, but based on what RM posted about Brazilian law, I'd say you're wrong.

I honestly don't get the violent reaction towards me. Why the hell are you people so defensive? Can't you have a polite discussion without thinking the whole world is against you? Did I ever say my opinion about American values was better than yours? Did I say that American values suck and should be trashed tomorrow? I may not have the same American experience as you, but that does not automatically disqualify from discussing said values

I don't think I'm doing you a favour, I'm just trying to have a civilized conversation. That seems to be impossible, however, given that anything I say is taken a personal attack on Americans or American values

**RavenMad2099** · 09-03-2006, 08:56 PM

A full education? Are you kidding? Teaching her about math and geography will translate to more responsibility? And how in the world will she have more life experience in what relates to the things she is FORBIDDEN to do?

Conveniently, you leave out the second part of my statement - more life experience. Perhaps you can explain to me how someone who is still in the process of going through puberty (passing from child to woman) has enough knowledge and experience to make responsible decisions for themselves? Don't give me any of your "some teens are mature" shit, either...anyone who knows anything about teenagers knows that doesn't apply to 90% of them. That's why their parents are still responsible for them by law.

Perhaps you could read my post without automatic bias and dismissal of arguments? I'm here trying to say why I believe what I believe, but you just come and say I'm obviously wrong

State what you believe, by all means...don't expect everyone to agree with it. Automatic bias and dismissal? Please...don't pretend this is the first time we've had this argument just because the venue has changed.

Perhaps you've heard of a little something called contraception?

Oh, yes...I've heard of it.
Maybe you should look up how many pregnancies are unplanned. We have an organization here in the US called Planned Parenthood...it's name is actually misleading. It primarily helps people with unplanned pregnancies.

Either way, anyone who puts themselves in a postition to get pregnant, planned or not, has a moral obligatigation to have the means to deal with a possible pregnancy. Teens don't, and most of them aren't even "mature" enough to consider that fact before spreading their legs or putting their dicks into someone.

Which would you rather have, a kid who's been told what sex is and what it involves and what they should do to be as safe as possible, or a kid who's completely ignorant about sex but undeniably horny?

Don't try to make out that I'm some kind of Puritan, unwilling to tell kids about sex because it's some sort of sin. I'm against letting 60 year-olds have sex with kids, something you've been defending. Teaching kids about sex is a long way from letting your daughter give a blowjob to an old pervert who picks her up in front of the high school like a common street tramp.

Your reasoning there baffles me. What I was saying is that Holland is more sexually liberal, ergo, young people have more access to information and more freedom to do as they want, and that translates into far less teenage pregnancies than in America, and your line of thinking leads me to believe you think that teens having sex and pregnancy are correlated.

We were talking about adults having sex with kids, and now you're trying to turn this into some kind of debate about sex education...which tells me you know your previous position was untenable. Believe it or not, teenagers in America have sex with each every day other with no legal charges involved. What we are talking about is a 60 year-old perv getting a blowjob from a high school kid.

Perhaps, for the sake of argument, you should stop assuming that anything I say will be in defence of pedophilia/rape/whatever

Perhaps you should stop rationalizing pedophilia and statuatory rape if you don't like being accused of defending it.

I'm not criticizing American values, I'm arguing against some, because last I read, Americans are still human beings. I'm not about the right for x to fuck y without retribution from whoever, I'm for freedom and for information. This seems to be particularly hard, however, because anything that doesn't agree with American values is apparently automatically dismissed

How would you like it if we started posting on a Brazilian message board about how backward your moral standards are? Nice touch about human beings...maybe that's why we defend our kids from sexual predators. Maybe Brazils should do the same.

I don't think I'm doing you a favour, I'm just trying to have a civilized conversation. That seems to be impossible, however, given that anything I say is taken a personal attack on Americans or American values

Ah, you're very good at playing victim...after you just stated that you're here to make us *think* by playing Devil's Advocate. Forgive me if I don't take kindly to being condescended to by a Third World college kid.

**RavensDomination** · 09-04-2006, 12:45 PM

Originally Posted by Greg

WHAT? If you have been paying attention to anything at all you would see the governor can't get anything he wants, LIKE SLOTS, passed and he can't stop the legislature from what they want even if he hates it (WalMart bill, early voting in only some locations, one other). Thankfully they were all struck down because they weren't Constitutional. The current governor can't get anything through those partisan asswipes now running our legislature, even if it is something like slots most of them have supported in the past.

I said influential. Think about it - he is influencing slots, just in the wrong way. Either way its still an influence. Yes the Governor is influential in passing laws and if he champions a certain cause it will surely have a greater impact that if you or I were to do the same thing.