Statuatory rape Options

[T00000]

What are you opinions on statuatory rape? Do you think it's a fair law? You are considered a rapist if you are 18 or older, and you have sex with someone under 18. Even if it's your girlfriend or boyfriend, and it was consensual.

[angel-roh]

so your saying that statuatory rape is a guy/girl but have a young boyfriend/girlfriend... umm like do sex with them and they are like younger than u is illegal? like having sex with a younger age than you is illegal? or am i not making any sense, michelle? haha

[T00000]

well umm haha the law is that, if you are 18 or older, you aren't allowed to have sex with anyone under 18. So basically it's a really dumb law that was made to prevent incest and shit. but it's so dumb, because unless your boyfriend and you were born the exact same second, you are committing statuatory rape if you have sex with him and he's 18 or vica versa before your 18th birthday. if that makes sense...

[angel-roh]

omg that law is so stupid!! damn lotta laws are changing these days... hmm i wonder wat`z next scary T_T i think that's messed up... well i guess they did that so the teen pregnancy can reduce... hm but yeah i think that's messed up. wait hmm i guess it's ok.. i guess it's fair...nvm i dont know sometimes i have that feeling that it's not fair and all...but yeah okok the honest answer is that...hmmm i think the law is gay and stupid period.

[ryfitaDF]

how is it going to make a difference? if it's not really rape then why would anyone press charges?

So basically it's a really dumb law that was made to prevent incest

how is it going to stop you from having sex with a family member?

[xHalf nHalf]

i personally think it should be changed cause its not like ppl even care about it...its happening anyway so they might as well?

[T00000]

how is it going to make a difference? if it's not really rape then why would anyone press charges?



how is it going to stop you from having sex with a family member?

because a parent who knows about her kid's sexual relations and doesn't approve of it, or otherwise, can report their kid for being raped, and the "offender" would go to jail. it doesn't just stop incest, it stop child molestation too, it's one of the major anti child molestation laws but it also applies to teens who are sexually involved if one of them is older than 18.

[sadolakced acid]

it's made to stop older people from tricking younger childern into having sex.

won't really matter, if it's both parties agree, it's not likely that the police are going to find out.

[onenonly101]

Yeah sure it's nasty but it ain't none of my business since they bot hagreed to having sex. It is also for parents who do not want there girls dating older men.

[JlIaTMK]

well.... laws tend to be one sided.... it prevents incest.... true.... but i really dont know.... ppl still break the law.... the other day i was watching news on the tv and they talked about how the precentage of underage sex goes up.... and we really dont do anything against it

[ComradeRed]

All victimless crie laws should be abolished because they do more harm than good. They create victms. If my right hand werent injuted id elaborate more in depth which ive done elsehere.

[visualfusion]

well.... laws tend to be one sided.... it prevents incest.... true.... but i really dont know.... ppl still break the law.... the other day i was watching news on the tv and they talked about how the precentage of underage sex goes up.... and we really dont do anything against it

Laws and rules are made to be broken.

[dragyn]

actually they aren't. they're made to be followed.
but the nature of a law/rule is like an unspoken challenge.

I think that law is kind of pointless, but then again, not. they're trying to keep people under 18 from having sex, but instead of punishing the consenting "illegals", they're only punishing the "adults"

and calling it rape.

incredibly stupid, if you ask me.

if they're going to punish people at all, they should punish both of the people involved.

[redsoxbaby87]

this may be a little random but...giving someone a wet willy is considered rape and just thought i would let you all know.

if it was consesual it shouldnt be considered rape.

[onenonly101]

rape1 ( P ) Pronunciation Key (rp)
n.
The crime of forcing another person to submit to sex acts, especially sexual intercourse.
The act of seizing and carrying off by force; abduction.
Abusive or improper treatment; violation: a rape of justice.


It should be called statutory rape

[melface]

I'm still not understanding this whole 'stops incest' thing... How does it STOP incest? And plus... I think there is also this thing where if you are 16 years old and your parents are OKAY with you having sex with a person over 18 then it's not considered statutory rape.
what if I willingly wanted to have sex with someone that was 19? would it still be called statutory RAPE?.... it just doesn't make sense to me

[sarangxai]

I believe it is the dumbest law in America. If the person agrees to it, then what's the problem? It's like saying someone under the age of 18 doesn't have a brain and can't decide what they want to do with their own body! People should be able to do what they want with their own bodies.

[Spirited Away]

^^ So let say your baby girl of 14 years wants to have sex with her 23 year old boyfriend... You'd let it slide? Or what if that 23 year old boy coerce your child to have sex even though she didn't want to?

I think this law is mainly to deter older, perverted losers, from targeting young girls for their sexual pleasures.

And I'm with omg_melface... what does this law has to do with preventing incest?

[ComradeRed]

Statutory rape laws are wrong. Here is why:

Coercion is inherently wrong. Thus, the purpose of law ought to be to prevent coercion. Law prevents coercion through counter-coercion (the police). But when "law" (or, more appropriately anti-law) is used to coerce non-coercive behavior (such as consensual sex), then the law itself BECOMES the soruce of the coercion, and therefore is unjust.

[Spirited Away]

Statutory rape laws are wrong. Here is why:

Coercion is inherently wrong. Thus, the purpose of law ought to be to prevent coercion. Law prevents coercion through counter-coercion (the police). But when "law" (or, more appropriately anti-law) is used to coerce non-coercive behavior (such as consensual sex), then the law itself BECOMES the soruce of the coercion, and therefore is unjust.

How then, do we prevent it, or any other crime for that matter, if not by the force of law?

[ComradeRed]

You misunderstand the point.

Law is supposed to use coercion to prevent coercion --> this is called defense, and is perfectly fine.

But "victimless crime laws" use coercion to prevent non-coercion --> this is no different from coercion in the first place (AKA crime).

The point is that, "crimes" are really using coercion and fraud -- in other words, hurting someone. "Victimless crimes" hurt no one and/or are consensual -- therefore they are not really crimes. By trying to enforce laws against them, the laws themselves become criminal, because they are the things that are causing harm.

[pikimoo]

Here in Nevada(unsure about other state laws), it is considered statuatory rape if anyone under 18 has sex at all. Wether it's with someone older or younger than 18.

I do think it IS pretty stupid and maybe should be lowered to 15 or 16 and under. Though it probably won't make much of a difference. Many people under the age of 18 have already had sex without being caught.

With REAL consent (no pressuring), it should be fine.

[KaraBaby]

I think that it's wrong for a 30 year old woman/man to be having sex with someone under the age of 18. However my boyfriend will be turning 18 in january. I don't turn 16 until april (the law does allow a 2 year "leeway") So for 3 months that law applies to us.

Stupid.

[Spirited Away]

You misunderstand the point.

I think I still don't understand.

How is it consensual, if a young girl doesn't want to have sex with an older man, but is forced to do it?

I don't see how it's a victimless crime.

[ComradeRed]

If a young girl is FORCED to have sex, that is normal rape -- not statutory rape. But CONSENSUAL sex between an older and younger person is victimless.