Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board Forum Index
 The RulesThe Rules FAQFAQ
   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   CalendarCalendar   SearchSearch 
Log inLog in RegisterRegister
 
You're a victim, you just don't know it.

Users browsing this topic:0 Registered, 0 Hidden and 0 Guests
Registered Users: None

Post new topic   Reply to topic    Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board Forum Index -> Victoria Park Tavern
 
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
View previous topic :: View next topic  

If the allegations are true, was Bowie a rapist?
Yes, clearly. They were underage, end of story.
0%
 0%  [ 0 ]
If he knew they were underage, yes, but otherwise no.
50%
 50%  [ 4 ]
No. This wasn't rape.
50%
 50%  [ 4 ]
Total Votes : 8

Author Message
David Libra

Reel around the fountain


Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Anywhere, I don't care I don't care I don't care

PostPosted: Sun Nov 26, 2017 3:43 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

thesoretoothsayer wrote:
When you start being "flexible" about things like the age of consent you start down a slippery slope. 15 is old enough becomes 14 is old enough becomes 13 is old enough becomes 12 is old enough becomes 11 is old enough becomes ....

http://www.news.com.au/world/europe/girl-11-consented-to-sex-with-man-28-who-lured-her-from-a-park-french-prosecutors-declare/news-story/b2093ce36c9cac0dff795e9305a197bf


I’m not aware of the complexities of French law here, but it’s worth keeping in mind this paragraph from the article:

Quote:
The girl’s mother told the Mediapart websites she was shocked the rape charge had been dropped to the lesser charge of sexual abuse of a minor.


However absurd that might seem in this particular case, and whatever penalties the latter might entail, the court seems to have basically enacted the principle of most statutory rape laws: that consent (as it were) may be given below a certain age, and that this might be a mitigating factor in sentencing, but that the act is still harmful and worthy of criminal punishment regardless. It’s an interesting case, but perhaps not for the reasons you’re expressing.

_________________
Past the pub that wrecks your body, and the church, all they want is your money; the Queen is dead, boys, and it's so lonely on a limb...
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail MSN Messenger  
Mugwump 



Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Location: Oxford, England

PostPosted: Sun Nov 26, 2017 5:01 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

stui magpie wrote:


necrophilia is weird, it would be like having sex with my ex wife so I really don't understand the attraction.


Are you sure you’re not confusing it with bestiality ?

_________________
Two more flags before I die!
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
thesoretoothsayer 



Joined: 26 Apr 2017


PostPosted: Sun Nov 26, 2017 5:18 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

David wrote:
thesoretoothsayer wrote:
When you start being "flexible" about things like the age of consent you start down a slippery slope. 15 is old enough becomes 14 is old enough becomes 13 is old enough becomes 12 is old enough becomes 11 is old enough becomes ....

http://www.news.com.au/world/europe/girl-11-consented-to-sex-with-man-28-who-lured-her-from-a-park-french-prosecutors-declare/news-story/b2093ce36c9cac0dff795e9305a197bf


I’m not aware of the complexities of French law here, but it’s worth keeping in mind this paragraph from the article:

Quote:
The girl’s mother told the Mediapart websites she was shocked the rape charge had been dropped to the lesser charge of sexual abuse of a minor.


However absurd that might seem in this particular case, and whatever penalties the latter might entail, the court seems to have basically enacted the principle of most statutory rape laws: that consent (as it were) may be given below a certain age, and that this might be a mitigating factor in sentencing, but that the act is still harmful and worthy of criminal punishment regardless. It’s an interesting case, but perhaps not for the reasons you’re expressing.


I actually see it as part of the "slippery slope" stuff. A felony becomes a lesser felony becomes a misdemeanor becomes an infringement becomes "let's all have sex with 11 year olds".
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
David Libra

Reel around the fountain


Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Anywhere, I don't care I don't care I don't care

PostPosted: Sun Nov 26, 2017 5:24 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Except there’s precisely no evidence of that happening. What you’re saying is basically an example of the problem with slippery slope arguments, where even the slightest change might usher in all manner of horrors. In any case, French law (which has traditionally been a little less rigid than that of the US and other English-speaking countries when it comes to sexual offences and has an age of consent of just 15) is likely no more ‘liberal’ than it was 20, 50 or 100 years ago; if it’s moving in any direction, the zeitgeist would suggest that it’ll be in the opposite one.
_________________
Past the pub that wrecks your body, and the church, all they want is your money; the Queen is dead, boys, and it's so lonely on a limb...
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail MSN Messenger  
Mugwump 



Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Location: Oxford, England

PostPosted: Sun Nov 26, 2017 7:10 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Having now spent ten minutes thinking about it, I think he has a basically sound point. Once, I would have believed that an individual’s consent was sufficient to justify the ethics of most action.

As I have watched, over many years, the damage done “consensually” to those who are vulnerable, I think consent is a lousy pass. The slot machine addict may consent to destroy their finances and life to feed James Packer ; The prostitute may have consented to use the heroin that necessitates her profession. The fifteen year old girl with serial lovers may be more exploiting than the 18 year old boy with social anxiety who beds her. “Consent” is the access-all-areas-pass of libertarians, and the age of consent, while necessary as a matter of practical policy, is too often a mere sentry at the gateway to hell for those who are over 16/18 or whatever.

We should premise more policy upon wisdom, not on the frailty of each individual soul. We used to do this, before the upper-middle class libertarians decided that their freedom was too important to suffer curtailment for the greater good.

_________________
Two more flags before I die!
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
thesoretoothsayer 



Joined: 26 Apr 2017


PostPosted: Sun Nov 26, 2017 7:20 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Except there’s precisely no evidence of that happening. What you’re saying is basically an example of the problem with slippery slope arguments, where even the slightest change might usher in all manner of horrors.


Correct. There is no evidence of this. It is conjecture.

However, don't discount the slippery slope:
1. Law for the Restoration of the Professional Civil Service (1933)
2. Nuremberg Laws (1935)
3. You know the rest
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Mugwump 



Joined: 28 Jul 2007
Location: Oxford, England

PostPosted: Sun Nov 26, 2017 9:34 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

thesoretoothsayer wrote:
Quote:
Except there’s precisely no evidence of that happening. What you’re saying is basically an example of the problem with slippery slope arguments, where even the slightest change might usher in all manner of horrors.


Correct. There is no evidence of this. It is conjecture.

However, don't discount the slippery slope:
1. Law for the Restoration of the Professional Civil Service (1933)
2. Nuremberg Laws (1935)
3. You know the rest


Slippery slopes are certainly real, and I have often objected to change on the basis of the slippery slope argument. It is very persuasive. But in the end, that argument is a bit of a cop-out, because we simply do not know when something is just benign reform and when it is a slippery slope, or where the slope will truly lead when the cascade does happen. I think the only rational basis for objecting to a policy is because it is objectionable in itself, rather than objectionable for where it might lead.

_________________
Two more flags before I die!
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board Forum Index -> Victoria Park Tavern All times are GMT + 10 Hours

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
Page 4 of 4   

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum



Privacy Policy

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group