Re: ASCII Art Fart for Sun, 2005 Jan 2

ABCGi <abc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Bateau wrote:
>> ABCGi <abc...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> 
>>>Bateau wrote:
>>>
>>>>Sharky <sha...@hellsgates.cor> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>In <k7t...@4ax.com>, Bateau wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>Sharky <sha...@hellsgates.cor> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>In <2nn...@4ax.com>, Bateau wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Sharky <sha...@hellsgates.cor> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>In <czLCd.10078$_X7...@newssvr33.news.prodigy.com>, Iconoclast
>>>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Note - This is a molestation joke, /not/ a rape joke.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Why do you think child molestation does not include rape?  And why
>>>>>>>>>would you think that the emotional scars resulting from the
>>>>>>>>>"less_than_rape" of a child could be any less damaging than rape
>>>>>>>>>itself?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Child molesting includes consensual sex acts.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>That is just sick.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>It's factual.
>
>There is a difference between fact and law.
>
>>>>>Consensual molestation is not possible when your dealing with
>>>>>children.  There is a reason most civilizations have laws regarding
>>>>>when a child is capable of giving reasoned consent to sexual behavior
>>>>>- most children are simply not capable of judging the consequences of
>>>>>such things. "But it felt good" is in no way consensual when applied
>>>>>to child molestation.
>>>>
>>>>Below a certain age "consent is not a defense". Yet it can still be
>>>>given. It's like how homosexual sex can be consensual but still illegal.
>>>
>>>Says who?
>> 
>> Most western criminal codes. The concept isn't even unique to sex. It's
>> also used in laws about assault, physician conduct, hazing etc.
>> 
>>>If this is a reference from some law or other please state the 
>>>reference.
>> 
>> Massachusetts supreme court:
>> "Consent is not a defense to charge of statutory rape." Commonwealth v.
>> Elder, 389 Mass. 743 (1983). 
>> 
>> North Carolina general statutes:
>> � 14-27.7.  Intercourse and sexual offenses with certain victims;
>> consent no defense.
>> If a defendant who has assumed the position of a parent in the home of a
>> minor victim engages in vaginal intercourse or a sexual act with a
>> victim who is a minor residing in the home, or if a person having
>> custody of a victim of any age or a person who is an agent or employee
>> of any person, or institution, whether such institution is private,
>> charitable, or governmental, having custody of a victim of any age
>> engages in vaginal intercourse or a sexual act with such victim, the
>> defendant is guilty of a Class E felony.   Consent is not a defense to a
>> charge under this section. (1979, c. 682, s. 1; 1979, 2nd Sess., c.
>> 1316, s. 9; 1981, c. 63, c. 179, s. 14; 1993, c. 539, s. 1132; 1994, Ex.
>> Sess., c. 24, s. 14(c).)
>> 
>> Punitive Articles of the UCMJ:
>> Article 134 - (Indecent acts or liberties with a child)
>> (1) Consent. Lack of consent by the child to the act or conduct is not
>> essential to this offense; consent is not a defense.
>> 
>> Florida statutes:
>> Title XLVII Chapter 944 (State Correctional System)
>> 3.  The consent of the inmate or offender supervised by the department
>> in the community to any act of sexual misconduct may not be raised as a
>> defense to a prosecution under this paragraph.
>> 
>> The law says that consent is possible but it's illegal anyway. Just like
>> how it used to be with gay sex.
>
>Pretty good, I see your point. Although it doesn't state above whether 
>reasonable consent is possible or not - it says it cannot be used as a 
>defence - from which you can not infer the former, esp. under black 
>letter law.

Well every judge seems to know that minors can consent to sex because
they say so in court. I'm not going to bother looking up specific cases
though. Denying it would be unreasonably sceptical.

>IMO Clearly the difference to gay sex is that it may involve two 
>consenting adults capable of providing reasonable consent - however your 
>quote does point out the anarchism of the law, and that it may represent 
>less difference than perhaps it should.

I was never comparing the fairness of it to sodomy laws. It's just a
similar kind of crime in that the victim is often the least offended or
harmed.

>>>If it's just what you believe to be self-evident then IMO 
>>>would be appropriate (IMO). And IMO it is not at all akin to your latter 
>>>sentence.
>
>I take it you agree that in the social context (as opposed to the legal) 
>that a child cannot give reasonable consent?

Is that using a social or a legal definition of "child"?
Many minors have a better understanding of and more mature attitude
towards sex than adults.

Related ASCII art in the Gallery

Explore these categories from our collection of 11,000+ artworks:

      .
   \  :  /
    ' _ '
-= ( (_) ) =-
    .   .
   /  :  \
      '

Make your own ASCII art

Turn images, text or 3D into ASCII, or draw your own – right in your browser.