|
|
Post by idrinkthereforeiam on Jan 13, 2009 22:58:08 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by NOTTHOR on Jan 14, 2009 7:43:42 GMT -6
Yet another matter I'm sure the religious whacked out neocons and ultra liberal feminists like socal and lpcalihawk are on the same page. If both parties are 18 and there is no coercion or quid pro quo involved, who the hell cares other than the repressed religious nut or man hating feminazi?
|
|
|
|
Post by socal on Jan 14, 2009 9:45:38 GMT -6
Since the kid was 18, I'll post this...
|
|
|
|
Post by thunderhawk on Jan 14, 2009 11:34:12 GMT -6
Hold on.
It's a crime...but the two could also head down to city hall and be legally married.
So which is it?
Also, while I generally frown on this kind of behavior, do you think that this 18 year old dude and his friends consider himself a "victim?"
I'm guessing they are using other terms.
|
|
|
|
Post by roxxstar on Jan 14, 2009 12:05:43 GMT -6
I think it has more to do with the teacher/student relationship. Most people think teachers shouldn't fuck students, psychologists shouldn't fuck patients, guards shouldn't fuck prisoners, funeral home directors shouldn't fuck dead people, etc.
I say ligthen up. Let's all fuck each other. Just one big gang bang.
|
|
|
|
Post by hawkeyescott on Jan 14, 2009 12:09:05 GMT -6
Hold on. It's a crime...but the two could also head down to city hall and be legally married. So which is it? Also, while I generally frown on this kind of behavior, do you think that this 18 year old dude and his friends consider himself a "victim?" I'm guessing they are using other terms. I heard it is a crime because she was in a supervisor position over this kid but that doesn't make much sense to me because a 38 year old boss can be fucking his/her 25 year old employee and it isn't a crime. Probably against company policy but not a crime. |
|
|
|
Post by thunderhawk on Jan 14, 2009 12:09:46 GMT -6
I think it has more to do with the teacher/student relationship. Most people think teachers shouldn't f**k students, psychologists shouldn't f**k patients, guards shouldn't f**k prisoners, funeral home directors shouldn't f**k dead people, etc. I say ligthen up. Let's all f**k each other. Just one big gang bang. The nature of the relationship is the basis for the criminality. Still, technically they are consenting adults. |
|
|
|
Post by NOTTHOR on Jan 14, 2009 12:31:53 GMT -6
I think it has more to do with the teacher/student relationship. Most people think teachers shouldn't f**k students, psychologists shouldn't f**k patients, guards shouldn't f**k prisoners, funeral home directors shouldn't f**k dead people, etc. I say ligthen up. Let's all f**k each other. Just one big gang bang. The nature of the relationship is the basis for the criminality. Still, technically they are consenting adults. I agree on the basis for criminality - but the basis by itself is bogus unless you believe the programmed feminist response of "every time a woman is porked by a man it is the product of coercion" or the ultra right's response that "I don't care how old my daughter is, her body is my property and I don't want no stinkin' teacher adulterating her." I am assuming, too, that the law was initially passed under the guise of protecting females from male teachers. I have no problem with making this a crime when an 18 year old is involved, IF and only IF the state is able to prove some element in addition to the commission of sex, such as actual coercion (if you don't have sex with me, you'll fail the class, you won't be on the swim team, etc.) or an actual quid pro quo (give me tug, and you'll get an A in the class). The left wing PC police have reached a point where they infer coercion in every relationship between a man and woman - that's how they are able to justify a woman's property right when aborting her fetus (the woman owns her body and everything in it and the state can't coerce her to carry the baby to term) but if that same woman wants to sell a service that she could give away for free (sex), they infer that the woman doesn't really own her own body, the state does, and the state's job is to make sure that she is not the victim of coercion by engaging in a voluntary transaction. |
|
|
|
Post by Solar Stud on Jan 14, 2009 14:30:48 GMT -6
Blah blah blah......I'll weigh in on this one....
Yes, I'm decidedly old-school, but, in the Navy we have a saying...."Staff and students don't mix."
Which I agree with 100%. There has to be a dividing line between students and staff until the student graduates...regardless of the age of either.
In my world, staff/student relationships degradate morale, good order and discipline. And the 'senior' member of the relationship is held much more accountable than the younger member. Always. To the point where the senior member of the tryst lost their career/pension because of it.
She should not have entered into this type of relationship. Period.
|
|
|
|
Post by NOTTHOR on Jan 14, 2009 14:39:08 GMT -6
Blah blah blah......I'll weigh in on this one.... Yes, I'm decidedly old-school, but, in the Navy we have a saying...."Staff and students don't mix." Which I agree with 100%. There has to be a dividing line between students and staff until the student graduates...regardless of the age of either. In my world, staff/student relationships degradate good order and disclipine. And the 'senior' member of the relationship is held much more accountable than the younger member. Always. She should not have entered into this type of relationship. Period. I agree - so fine, let the licensing board take her license. No big deal. But don't waste the god damn taxpayers' money prosecuting and imprisoning this gal. A violation of the rules of the teacher licensing board? Fine. A felony punishable with 5 years in the slammer? GMAFB. |
|
|
|
Post by NotMyKid on Jan 14, 2009 14:58:36 GMT -6
Blah blah blah......I'll weigh in on this one.... Yes, I'm decidedly old-school, but, in the Navy we have a saying...."Staff and students don't mix." Which I agree with 100%. There has to be a dividing line between students and staff until the student graduates...regardless of the age of either. In my world, staff/student relationships degradate good order and disclipine. And the 'senior' member of the relationship is held much more accountable than the younger member. Always. She should not have entered into this type of relationship. Period. I agree - so fine, let the licensing board take her license. No big deal. But don't waste the god damn taxpayers' money prosecuting and imprisoning this gal. A violation of the rules of the teacher licensing board? Fine. A felony punishable with 5 years in the slammer? GMAFB. I have to agree yank her teaching license and leave it at that, anything more is a bunch of BS. |
|
|
|
Post by twinegarden on Jan 14, 2009 15:54:16 GMT -6
I wonder if she took it in da butt.
|
|
|
|
Post by lpcalihawk on Jan 14, 2009 16:49:27 GMT -6
I wonder if she took it in da butt. I'm sure if BTaRd were the 18 year old he would have taken it in the butt from the teacher's big brown strap-on |
|
|
|
Post by idrinkthereforeiam on Jan 16, 2009 7:43:21 GMT -6
Hold on. It's a crime...but the two could also head down to city hall and be legally married. So which is it? Also, while I generally frown on this kind of behavior, do you think that this 18 year old dude and his friends consider himself a "victim?" I'm guessing they are using other terms. They can't get married because she has a husband and a kid. |
|
