Re: Susie Bright on Foley etc
On Oct 3, 2006, at 6:48 PM, andie nachgeborenen wrote:
Vis a vis 18 and maybe 20 year olds, 16 year olds aren’t entirely kids. (They are largely kids — you will see, Doug!)
I’m not sure parents, or someone in a parental role, is the best
judge of this.
Vis a vis 50 year olds, I think they are just plain kids. Lines are hard to draw but there’s a difference between 16-18 year olds and 12-13 year olds and younger. It’s futile to expect teens not to boff each other, and absurd to make it a crime (I had one girlfriend in HS with whom part of our entertainment was counting up the statutes we were violating, not being lawyers we probbaly got it wrong) but it’s not futile to expect grownups to not to squeeze the Charmin — if you are over 21, make passes at people 18 or over, please. The older the grownup, the worse the, uh, indiscretion. Morally speaking.As I say, the severe criminal penalties we impose on sex with minors seem excessive, but I also don’t know what to do about undeterrable and essentially incurable sexual predators like Foley.
Foley’s icky, but I don’t see how it should be a crime. But in any
case, he’s the product of American sex phobia.
The Note noted today that Dem politicians have survived their sex
scandals, while Reps haven’t. Who says there’s no difference between
the parties?
Doug