Page 11 of 42 FirstFirst ...
9
10
11
12
13
21
... LastLast
  1. #201
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Wildtree View Post
    You show zero sign or will to even acknowledge anything of reason, even when you're presented with the applicable law..
    Instead you only try to enforce your own made up mind onto those that discuss with you.. That's not discussion. That's acting like a dick.
    The second quote was only a suggestion.. Could as well have said "think about this for a moment"..
    We both know you were acting like an ass on purpose because you believe your argument - you can't kid a kidder ;-)

    Anyway, I wasn't even talking about the plausibility of the law, I was just mentioning that statutory rape is not related to rape just because of the word rape. Your question of "How can it be called rape" had an answer, and I provided you with that answer - it's not called rape. S'all I was saying.

  2. #202
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Mooneye View Post

    I'm referring to the woman giving birth as opposed to demanding custody of an already existing child.
    Could you elaborate on this with reference to the post you quoted? I'm not sure I understand; it sounds a little like you're saying 'it's right that the woman gets custody in this case because she gave birth to the child, while the man did not'. But that can't be it, surely?

  3. #203
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Anchorman View Post
    It was badly worded on my part. The 'you are wrong' part was supposed to be separate. I intended to say that A) it is the law, so it should be upheld to the letter in this case, which it isn't, and also B) your opinion on the law is wrong, as explained by Xanjori.
    Tell me how does such a law protect underaged people. I could be 14 and 11 months old, an adult having sex with me then would be illegal. Cue 1 month later I'm free to be gangbanged by 10 men without it being illegal. What changed in that 1 month? Nothing and that's why I think the law is stupid.

  4. #204
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Mooneye View Post
    If you can't see how it's different then I don't know what to say.
    there is no difference beyond the gender.

  5. #205
    Deleted
    i´d love to see an older woman rape a teen, i imagine myself in his place...cept if she goes for the backdoor ofc, but i doubt that happens

  6. #206
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Anchorman View Post
    Could you elaborate on this with reference to the post you quoted? I'm not sure I understand; it sounds a little like you're saying 'it's right that the woman gets custody in this case because she gave birth to the child, while the man did not'. But that can't be it, surely?
    Woman is raped by a man, man sues for custody but is unlikely to get it because he hurt the woman.
    Woman rapes a guy, gives birth to child and has custody of the child.

    They're pretty different. I don't see why you should take the child from the woman unless she abuses it.

  7. #207
    The Undying Wildtree's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Iowa - Franconia
    Posts
    31,500
    Quote Originally Posted by Zeruge View Post
    We both know you were acting like an ass on purpose because you believe your argument - you can't kid a kidder ;-)

    Anyway, I wasn't even talking about the plausibility of the law, I was just mentioning that statutory rape is not related to rape just because of the word rape. Your question of "How can it be called rape" had an answer, and I provided you with that answer - it's not called rape. S'all I was saying.
    No, you were the ass .... You were nitpicking over the first sentence, when the second sentence made it absolutely clear that I did talk about statutory rape the entire time.

    Peace now? lol
    "The pen is mightier than the sword.. and considerably easier to write with."

  8. #208
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Wildtree View Post
    The child support issue..... careful..
    While it might seem unjust... Those are done for the child. The third person involved in such event.
    People, we, tend to always focus on the two people that had sex.. The one that should suffer the least from such circumstances is the third person, the child. Hence why the courts usually rule in favor of them.
    A, not about child support, B, i can drag up studies quite clearly proving that being taken care of by your mother is better then pre schooling and kindergarten, Should women be mandated to be stay at home mom's?
    Or better yet, be mandated to have an abortion ?
    if the child's welfare is paramount i have plenty of ways to fuck with the mothers too, so all gender bias here is bad not just the ones hurting women.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Mooneye View Post
    I'm referring to the woman giving birth as opposed to demanding custody of an already existing child.
    Hence, SHE SHOULD HAVE THE KID TAKEN FROM HER.

  9. #209
    The Undying Wildtree's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Iowa - Franconia
    Posts
    31,500
    Quote Originally Posted by bany View Post
    i´d love to see an older woman rape a teen, i imagine myself in his place...cept if she goes for the backdoor ofc, but i doubt that happens
    I've mentioned that before already..
    Somehow the thread reeks a bit after hypocrisy. As teenager of that age, every guy I know/knew be it school, friends, neighbors what not.. Every single one would have felt in heaven to get laid by a 20 yrs old... That's totally normal..
    "The pen is mightier than the sword.. and considerably easier to write with."

  10. #210
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by goblinpaladin View Post
    Hence, SHE SHOULD HAVE THE KID TAKEN FROM HER.
    No, not unless she's abusing it.

  11. #211
    Deleted
    I didn't read all replies, but my opinion is:
    The article doesn't make it clear if he wanted to have sex with her or not.
    So it may only considered rape because he was 14, not because she forced him to have sex with her.
    It's not like he was raped by his 50yo priest or sth...

    I know, I wouldn't have minded to have sex with a hot 20 yo back then

  12. #212
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Mooneye View Post
    Tell me how does such a law protect underaged people. I could be 14 and 11 months old, an adult having sex with me then would be illegal. Cue 1 month later I'm free to be gangbanged by 10 men without it being illegal. What changed in that 1 month? Nothing and that's why I think the law is stupid.
    There has to be a line somewhere.

    The key is the word 'PROTECT'. The law is there not to PREVENT adults from having sex with kids, but it's there to PROTECT kids from having sex with adults. Look at your own case, for instance. You had sex with adults when you were a minor. You had the protection of the law, but chose not to use it. Now take someone else's case, a case where they as a kid had sex with an adult but felt manipulated and forced into doing so; again, they CAN use the law if they want to, but they could choose not to as in your case, if they consented to it.

    Therefore: the law punishes those who as an adult have non-consensual sex with a kid (because the kid pressed charges) and does not punish those who have consensual sex as a kid (because the kid - like you - does not press charges). In essence, the law works.

    There are only two situations where it does not work. 1) Where there are different standards for male and female, as here. 2) When stupid parents get involved by insisting that their wonderful, perfect 14 year old daughter can't possibly have consented to the sex she had with the 19 year old and they feel it's necessary to prosecute him to the full extent of the law.

  13. #213
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Mooneye View Post
    Woman is raped by a man, man sues for custody but is unlikely to get it because he hurt the woman.
    Woman rapes a guy, gives birth to child and has custody of the child.

    They're pretty different. I don't see why you should take the child from the woman unless she abuses it.
    Woman is raped by a man, man sues for custody but is unlikely to get it because he hurt the woman.
    In what way?

    In the meaning it was aggravated rape with a degree of violence utilized?

    As opposed to the most common form of intoxication or the like?

    And i don't think a rapist should have any right to a child, female or male, they're a rapist.

    Woman rapes a guy, gives birth to child and has custody of the child.
    Curious, you added an element of violence for the women but not the male; Why?

    And if we remove it, it's essentially the same scenario, except the rapist gave birth to the victims child.

    My point above in regards to rapists not having children still rings true, possession of ovaries doesn't remove such an act of rape.

  14. #214
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Mooneye View Post
    Woman is raped by a man, man sues for custody but is unlikely to get it because he hurt the woman.
    Woman rapes a guy, gives birth to child and has custody of the child.

    They're pretty different. I don't see why you should take the child from the woman unless she abuses it.
    So essentially what you're saying now is 'possession is 9/10 of the law'.

  15. #215
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Manakin View Post
    In what way?

    In the meaning it was aggravated rape with a degree of violence utilized?

    As opposed to the most common form of intoxication or the like?

    And i don't think a rapist should have any right to a child, female or male, they're a rapist.

    Curious, you added an element of violence for the women but not the male; Why?

    And if we remove it, it's essentially the same scenario, except the rapist gave birth to the victims child.

    My point above in regards to rapists not having children still rings true, possession of ovaries doesn't remove such an act of rape.
    I made no mention of violence.

    You can't just take children away unless they're being abused.

  16. #216
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Wildtree View Post
    I've mentioned that before already..
    Somehow the thread reeks a bit after hypocrisy. As teenager of that age, every guy I know/knew be it school, friends, neighbors what not.. Every single one would have felt in heaven to get laid by a 20 yrs old... That's totally normal..
    It's as "normal" as it is in the reversed situation. Would you say it's normal (or "expected") if a 14 year old girl would want to have sex with a 20 year old?

  17. #217
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Mooneye View Post
    I made no mention of violence.
    You used the phrase "hurt the woman" which Mana took as meaning violence was involved while not saying that a female rapist "hurt" anybody.

  18. #218
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Bervose View Post
    You used the phrase "hurt the woman" which Mana took as meaning violence was involved while not saying that a female rapist "hurt" anybody.
    Because she has the custody of the child when she gives birth to it, she doesn't have to sue for custody.

  19. #219
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Mooneye View Post
    I made no mention of violence.

    You can't just take children away unless they're being abused.
    I made no mention of violence.
    Hurt is synonymous with violence.


    You can't just take children away unless they're being abused.
    In my opinion, male or female, rapists shouldn't be allowed to have children.

    It just seems you think female rapists should be allowed them and not male rapists.

    Which seems a rather huge fallacy.

    They're both rapists, they both raped, they both broke the law, one has a penis the other ovaries; That seemingly changes everything for you, why?

  20. #220
    The Undying Wildtree's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Iowa - Franconia
    Posts
    31,500
    Quote Originally Posted by goblinpaladin View Post
    A, not about child support, B, i can drag up studies quite clearly proving that being taken care of by your mother is better then pre schooling and kindergarten, Should women be mandated to be stay at home mom's?
    Or better yet, be mandated to have an abortion ?
    if the child's welfare is paramount i have plenty of ways to fuck with the mothers too, so all gender bias here is bad not just the ones hurting women.
    They mentioning a case in Kansas where the court ruled and the reasoning was exactly that...
    Child support is demanded for the child, in the name of the child. Technically the money belongs to the child. That's btw. not different in Germany either.
    By definition of the law such payments belong to the minor. The parent that raises the child only uses the money in the child's best interests.
    Let's say a couple parts ways, and all is on good terms. Parents agree kiddo stays with mama. Mama doesn't file for child support. In the events down the years, when the kid becomes a case where govt resources have to help to support, like welfare.. The government then comes after the father and demands child support.
    That's pretty common law handling it seems. I know guys here that owe child support, and the govt. is very harsh in getting it. To the extent where it doesn't make much sense anymore. Had a guy working with me, who had his drivers license seized, because he was a few month behind on payments..
    How the fuck you suppose to catch up fast, when they take away the means from you to do it?
    "The pen is mightier than the sword.. and considerably easier to write with."

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •