U.S. Politics episode 4: A New Thread

1171820222343

Comments

  • statutory rape is also a legal term and not necessarily a moral one...  even if 16 is the age of consent, by most people's modern standards there's something very off and morally questionable about a 30-something man pursuing 16-year-olds even if it's not illegal.  it would technically be statutory rape for an 18 year old guy to have sex with a 15 year old girl but i don't think most people would consider that as immoral because there's so much more in common life experience and power between 15 and 18 but yeah i agree, pedophilia is something different (and even worse).
  • MrXMrX CO
    edited November 2017
    voodoorat said:
    statutory rape is also a legal term and not necessarily a moral one...  even if 16 is the age of consent, by most people's modern standards there's something very off and morally questionable about a 30-something man pursuing 16-year-olds even if it's not illegal.  it would technically be statutory rape for an 18 year old guy to have sex with a 15 year old girl but i don't think most people would consider that as immoral because there's so much more in common life experience and power between 15 and 18 but yeah i agree, pedophilia is something different (and even worse).
    An 18 year old is a senior in high school or freshman in college, whereas a 15 year old would be a high school freshman/sophomore. The 18 year old certainly can hold a lot of power in terms of social standing etc. and there could be a huge difference in physical and mental maturity and life experience.
  • DeeDee Adelaide
    Statutory rape in Aus - not sure about anywhere else - is having sex with someone under the age of consent. My daughter went to school with a girl who was 16 and her girlfriend was 17. The parents of the 16 year old were horrified to discover she was a lesbian and had the 17 year old charged with statutory rape as the age of consent in South Australia is 17. It was a very sad, messy situation. 
  • CretanBullCretanBull Toronto
    edited November 2017
    voodoorat said:
    statutory rape is also a legal term and not necessarily a moral one...  even if 16 is the age of consent, by most people's modern standards there's something very off and morally questionable about a 30-something man pursuing 16-year-olds even if it's not illegal.  it would technically be statutory rape for an 18 year old guy to have sex with a 15 year old girl but i don't think most people would consider that as immoral because there's so much more in common life experience and power between 15 and 18 but yeah i agree, pedophilia is something different (and even worse).
    In Canada, an 18 year old with a 15 year old isn't statutory rape.  Our law here is that no one under 16 can consent to sex with two exceptions, 12 and 13 year olds can consent to having sex with someone less than 2 years older and 14-15 year olds can consent to sex with someone less than 5 years older...so here, a 14 year old can consent to sex with an 18 year old.

    And "sex" isn't specifically about intercourse...so Roy Moore's touching would be illegal here.

    Edit: there's another stipulation too - if the older party has a position of authority or influence over the younger person, the age of consent is raised to 18.
  • MrX said:
    voodoorat said:
    statutory rape is also a legal term and not necessarily a moral one...  even if 16 is the age of consent, by most people's modern standards there's something very off and morally questionable about a 30-something man pursuing 16-year-olds even if it's not illegal.  it would technically be statutory rape for an 18 year old guy to have sex with a 15 year old girl but i don't think most people would consider that as immoral because there's so much more in common life experience and power between 15 and 18 but yeah i agree, pedophilia is something different (and even worse).
    An 18 year old is a senior in high school or freshman in college, whereas a 15 year old would be a high school freshman/sophomore. The 18 year old certainly can hold a lot of power in terms of social standing etc. and there could be a huge difference in physical and mental maturity and life experience.
    yes, the difference in life stations between a 15 year old and an 18 year old is significant precisely until you compare it to the difference in life stations between a 30 year old and a 16 year old.  lol
  • The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • Saw this joke headline: Trump orders the execution of five turkeys pardoned by Obama.

    Yep.  That's about right.   :s
    CretanBullFlukesDaveyMac
  • MrXMrX CO
    edited November 2017
    With everything else going on this isn't getting nearly enough attention. The FCC under Trump is paving the way to allow Sinclair media to have massive amounts of market share in local news all over the country to push pro-Trump narratives. At least people usually know that they're getting if they choose to watch Fox. Local news on the other hand doesn't sell itself as partisan, and for a lot of folks (especially older people) it's their main source of news.


  • John Oliver did a good bit on the Sinclair group
    MrXAww_PHuuCk
  • So the guys at Pod Save America have a great name for the horrible Tax Bill the Republicans are trying to pass: The Donor Relief Act of 2017.

    gguenotCretanBull

  • So the guys at Pod Save America have a great name for the horrible Tax Bill the Republicans are trying to pass: The Donor Relief Act of 2017.



    PSA was the only thing that kept me sane this year.






    andbaldmove
    April_May_June
  • I have a hard time taking the Pod Save America guys seriously anymore after the glib overconfidence followed by massive crow eating after the election.
  • gguenot said:

    So the guys at Pod Save America have a great name for the horrible Tax Bill the Republicans are trying to pass: The Donor Relief Act of 2017.



    PSA was the only thing that kept me sane this year.






    andbaldmove
    Me too Gguenot!  I especially appreciate John Levett - he totally cracks me up, and I really, really enjoy his Levett or Leave it Podcast. 
    I need to laugh, because if I don't I'll cry.  They're a tiny bit of light in what seems to be an increasingly dark world.

    @Doctor_Nick - I understand what you're saying, but to be fair, there were a LOT of people wrong about the outcome of the election (me included!).  I give the hosts credit for not only honestly trying to figure out what the hell happened, but for keeping people informed, and giving real concrete ways to at least minimize (if not stop) the damage that's being done by this administration.  (All that *and* they make me laugh, so bonus points for that!   :) )
    gguenot
  • Your government working for your - Net Neutrality might be going away . . . discuss.
  • If providers have to proactively and transparently provide “good” service to specific sites, then it looks like a cascade of unintended consequences for them really. Porn, file sharing sites, Craig’s List, etc. could all be potential liabilities if they are proactively supported rather than passively supported under net neutrality.

    This is a bad idea, and to a large extent a solution in search of a problem.
    Brawn
  • tom_g said:
    Your government working for your - Net Neutrality might be going away . . . discuss.
    Ajit Pai - darkhorse candidate for worst Trump administration official.
    Brawn
  • Gotta remove regulations, it's the only way small companies like Comcast and AT&T can make any money.
    Frakkin TDaveyMac
  • Frakkin TFrakkin T Currently Offline
    tom_g said:
    Gotta remove regulations, it's the only way small companies like Comcast and AT&T can make any money.
    And of course an unregulated corporation will always do the right thing by people in general and society at large. And rich folks who get tax breaks will make sure that investment trickles down to the working class. And if we cut social programs then churches, small businesses, and wealthy citizens will pick up 100% of the slack.
    DaveyMac
  • And despite all of the evidence to the contrary, Trump's supports still think that he's looking out for the little guy...
  • tom_g said:
    Gotta remove regulations, it's the only way small companies like Comcast and AT&T can make any money.
    Unless Time Warner is involved, then the administration is anti-business for philosophic reasons. It’s just coincidence that he has a seething hatred for CNN and that happens to be the property that he wants them to divest.
  • I know last time net neutrality was at risk John Oliver set up gofccyourself.com to help people write the FCC.  Is that still helpful for this current situation?
  • The user and all related content has been deleted.
  • emnofseattleemnofseattle Mason County, Washington USA
    tom_g said:
    Your government working for your - Net Neutrality might be going away . . . discuss.
    Cool. It's not the governments role to regulate the internet in favor of big content providers 
  • Getting rid of net neutrality favors big content providers.

    tom_g said:
    Your government working for your - Net Neutrality might be going away . . . discuss.
    Cool. It's not the governments role to regulate the internet in favor of big content providers 

    gguenotAlkaid13MrXPhoebes89DaveyMac
  • Jim and ARon better quit it with the goddamn liberal commie snowflake feminist SJW propaganda or we're all gonna have to pay an extra $74.99 a month for the privilege of downloading their podcasts.
  • emnofseattleemnofseattle Mason County, Washington USA
    Getting rid of net neutrality favors big content providers.

    tom_g said:
    Your government working for your - Net Neutrality might be going away . . . discuss.
    Cool. It's not the governments role to regulate the internet in favor of big content providers 

    For most, net neutrality is a benefit, like Netflix being the biggest offender. 
This discussion has been closed.