Alabama, Senate Candidate Moore and Age of Consent Laws

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • What should be the age of consent? (either with or without "Romeo" exceptions.


    • Total voters
      0

    SheepDog4Life

    Natural Gray Man
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    May 14, 2016
    5,286
    113
    SW IN
    The allegations against Judge Moore, Republican nominee for the Alabama Senate race, have filled news articles nationally. What astounds me is that it hasn't really started a dialogue about age of consent laws. In Indiana, like Alabama, the age of consent is 16. In Moore's case, in addition to one 14-year-old at the time, many 16- and 17-year olds at the time have come forward with allegations he sought romantic interests with them when he was in his 30's.

    IMO, this is preposterous that a 16-year-old, basically a Freshman/Sophomore in High School, is "legally" mature enough to consent to sex with a 20-something, a 30-year-old, a 40-year-old, a 50-year-old, etc.

    Personally, I think it should be 18 years old, with a 2 year "Romeo" exception so that a 17-year-old who turns 18 would not be considered a rapist for having relationship with a 16-year-old.

    Thoughts?
     

    SheepDog4Life

    Natural Gray Man
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    May 14, 2016
    5,286
    113
    SW IN
    Is your opinion based upon perceived maturity in today's society?

    Yes, even though I formed the same opinion back in HS, it has been reinforced with my children, their friends and schoolmates. The youngest of whom is 16. Even the difference in maturity between a HS Freshman and a HS Senior is huge.

    Plus, 18 is the age of majority, the age to enter into binding contracts, the age to vote, the age to serve in the military, etc.

    Finally, does it make any sense that someone can have sex with a 16 or 17 year old minor, but not consensually take or receive (from them) a nude picture? Prior to 18 it is a federal crime of child pornography, minimum 15 years, maximum 30 years in prison.

    If you had/have a 16 or 17 year old daughter, which would you find worse... that she sent a 35 year old a topless picture? Or that he is actually having sex with her?
     

    bwframe

    Loneranger
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    93   0   0
    Feb 11, 2008
    38,170
    113
    Btown Rural
    Bill Clinton taught my underage girls about sex.

    76de4d309ec316c30809facdb5b099ee--us-presidents-clinton-njie.jpg

    385B8B2000000578-3787427-image-m-2_1473884901498.jpg
     

    hoosierdoc

    Freed prisoner
    Rating - 100%
    8   0   0
    Apr 27, 2011
    25,987
    149
    Galt's Gulch
    What does the age of the elder person have anything to do with the younger person being able to consent?

    liberals have told us kids can get birth control and std treatment without telling parents. They are totally fine with kids having sex :dunno:

    to pretend they are against it is absurdity
     

    SheepDog4Life

    Natural Gray Man
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    May 14, 2016
    5,286
    113
    SW IN
    What does the age of the elder person have anything to do with the younger person being able to consent?

    liberals have told us kids can get birth control and std treatment without telling parents. They are totally fine with kids having sex :dunno:

    IMO, they are wrong on all counts in all but the most extreme cases, like sexual abuse of the child.

    to pretend they are against it is absurdity

    Not sure who is doing that? I think I agree with you that liberals see female children as "little women" who have total "control" of their bodies... they are "forced" by their logic into supporting low age of consent laws by their abortion for all stance and really don't care if older men prey on young girls... well, unless there is a senate seat to be won.
     

    hoosierdoc

    Freed prisoner
    Rating - 100%
    8   0   0
    Apr 27, 2011
    25,987
    149
    Galt's Gulch
    They have been doing it for decades by wanting sex Ed for kindergartenders, std and birth control for any age without parental consent/notification, etc
     

    KittySlayer

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    4   0   0
    Jan 29, 2013
    6,473
    77
    Northeast IN
    What does the age of the elder person have anything to do with the younger person being able to consent?

    IMO, this is preposterous that a 16-year-old, basically a Freshman/Sophomore in High School, is "legally" mature enough to consent to sex with a 20-something, a 30-year-old, a 40-year-old, a 50-year-old, etc.

    Personally, I think it should be 18 years old, with a 2 year "Romeo" exception so that a 17-year-old who turns 18 would not be considered a rapist for having relationship with a 16-year-old.

    So basically you are saying the combined wisdom and maturity of two Sophomores in High School is enough for them to legally consent to do the Horizontal Hulu with each other? But enter someone who is 20+ suddenly they lose all ability to think and make mature decisions?

    While I agree the dirty old man is just downright creepy I am not sure I follow your logic with regard to being able to consent. Then there is the cougar teachers preying on young men which we all may giggle about but is equally manipulative. The trouble is kids are going to have sex and there is not a law in the world that is going to stop them. Being practical 16 is probably the realistic age of consent although I would prefer to see it higher. I do like the idea of the Romeo exception if the age of consent were bumped to 17 or 18.

    Perhaps if the parents of these young girls would not dress their daughters like whores and teach them some respect for themselves this would not be as big of an issue.

    45176855.jpg
     

    Ggreen

    Person
    Rating - 100%
    49   0   0
    Sep 19, 2016
    3,686
    77
    SouthEast
    Shouldn't even be a discussion. This guy should never be allowed near a position of power, and should have never been a judge. Politics just seems to attract these bottom dwellers, but for some reason we continue to follow their lead.... I don't know who is sicker..
     

    SheepDog4Life

    Natural Gray Man
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    May 14, 2016
    5,286
    113
    SW IN
    So basically you are saying the combined wisdom and maturity of two Sophomores in High School is enough for them to legally consent to do the Horizontal Hulu with each other? But enter someone who is 20+ suddenly they lose all ability to think and make mature decisions?

    Actually, I would put it exactly OPPOSITE that... neither of the two Sophomores has the wisdom nor maturity to make decisions about a sexual relationship. IT IS A BAD IDEA! They aren't equipped to handle the issues of pregnancy, STDs and the emotional fallout of an "adult" relationship that involves sex. They are neither wise enough nor emotionally mature enough for sex and operate purely on "hormones".

    As I mentioned in a post above, a 16 or 17 year old is still considered a child in all other contexts, voting, enlisting, entering into contracts, etc. In fact, even to drive, their one "adult" responsibility, they must have an ADULT sign a financial responsibility statement taking responsibility for the child's actions behind the wheel. Additionally, except in extreme circumstances, a 16 or 17 year old committing a crime is handled in juvenile court.

    ju·ve·nile court
    noun
    a court of law responsible for the trial or legal supervision of children under a specified age (18 in most countries).

    Hence, an older person (an adult) having sex with a 16 or 17 year old is having sex with a child. The adult knows or should know better, the child does not. The basic precept of all such laws is that sex between and adult and a child is inherently illegal.

    While I agree the dirty old man is just downright creepy I am not sure I follow your logic with regard to being able to consent. Then there is the cougar teachers preying on young men which we all may giggle about but is equally manipulative. The trouble is kids are going to have sex and there is not a law in the world that is going to stop them. Being practical 16 is probably the realistic age of consent although I would prefer to see it higher. I do like the idea of the Romeo exception if the age of consent were bumped to 17 or 18.

    Laws should be reasonable, so I think the "Romeo exception" is a good idea for young people close in age. The inverse is also true, a 16 or 17 year old having sex with a 12 year old should be (and is in Indiana, there is a separate younger than 14 category of sex crime) illegal.

    Finally, on the Romeo thing, when I was young, I turned 18 before my girlfriend... so, yeah, I'll just leave it at that. :)

    Perhaps if the parents of these young girls would not dress their daughters like whores and teach them some respect for themselves this would not be as big of an issue.

    While I don't disagree, in general, I will say that I went to HS with a full, strictly enforced dress code. No "whorish" dress allowed. Not even close. Ditto my children.

    I assure you that hormones do all they can in attempting to accomplish their "biological mission" even in the absence of revealing clothing. :)
     
    Last edited:

    KLB

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    5   0   0
    Sep 12, 2011
    23,007
    77
    Porter County
    Yes, even though I formed the same opinion back in HS, it has been reinforced with my children, their friends and schoolmates. The youngest of whom is 16. Even the difference in maturity between a HS Freshman and a HS Senior is huge.

    Plus, 18 is the age of majority, the age to enter into binding contracts, the age to vote, the age to serve in the military, etc.

    Finally, does it make any sense that someone can have sex with a 16 or 17 year old minor, but not consensually take or receive (from them) a nude picture? Prior to 18 it is a federal crime of child pornography, minimum 15 years, maximum 30 years in prison.

    If you had/have a 16 or 17 year old daughter, which would you find worse... that she sent a 35 year old a topless picture? Or that he is actually having sex with her?
    I asked my question because it hasn't been that long since people were getting married in this country at 16. Teens have been having sex as long as there have been people.

    I would hesitate to make the change you propose. What happens when a 16 year old lies about their age?
     

    JTScribe

    Chicago Typewriter
    Rating - 100%
    10   0   0
    Dec 24, 2012
    3,738
    113
    Bartholomew County
    What does the age of the elder person have anything to do with the younger person being able to consent?

    liberals have told us kids can get birth control and std treatment without telling parents. They are totally fine with kids having sex :dunno:

    to pretend they are against it is absurdity

    Yup. Leftists are cool with younger teenagers getting an abortion without parental consent. This is incredibly hypocritical.
     

    miguel

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    12   0   0
    Oct 24, 2008
    6,614
    113
    16T
    Older than 21. Plus, they must have the written consent of the father, brothers or a senior male family member. (hierarchy in that order)

    Patriarchy.

    And no, I didn't forget the purple.
     

    Route 45

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    92   0   0
    Dec 5, 2015
    14,884
    113
    Indy
    Older than 21. Plus, they must have the written consent of the father, brothers or a senior male family member. (hierarchy in that order)

    Patriarchy.

    And no, I didn't forget the purple.

    Twenty-one? Seriously? There are reasonable arguments to be made about changing the age to 18, but to me, there is something very creepy about a man thinking that he gets to make the decision on who a grown woman (18 and older) can sleep with. So you own your sister's/daughter's body until you see fit?

    I have bad news for you. They are letting them drive in Saudi Arabia now.
     

    SheepDog4Life

    Natural Gray Man
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    7   0   0
    May 14, 2016
    5,286
    113
    SW IN
    I went out on my first date with my now wife, 25 years ago. She was 17 and I was 19. Worked out well for us....

    I do agree that any law needs to be realistic about "young adults" who are very close in age. As a father with daughters, I would have no problem with a 17-year old daughter of mine dating a 19 year old. And, I believe that among married couples, a 2 year age difference is the norm, average and mean.

    If he was, say, 21, then I would be very, very suspicious of his "intentions" with my child. If he was 10 years, or more, older... there would be problems as in most circumstances that would indicate, IMO, a predator-prey relationship.

    I asked my question because it hasn't been that long since people were getting married in this country at 16. Teens have been having sex as long as there have been people.

    I would hesitate to make the change you propose. What happens when a 16 year old lies about their age?

    I'm sure there are scenarios where this could occur between two people who "know each other", though my initial reaction is that it is one of the perils of seeking casual sex with young girls, and that caveat emptor would be appropriate.

    Older than 21. Plus, they must have the written consent of the father, brothers or a senior male family member. (hierarchy in that order)

    Patriarchy.

    And no, I didn't forget the purple.

    While I agree with parental control of children, I don't agree with the patriarchal scheme you mention other than both parents, including the father, have a say in the well being of their 16 or 17 year old child.

    Your post did make be think, though, about 21 years of age being a line of demarcation... as in once a young man turns 21, 16- and 17-year old girls are off limits. That age, 21, also coincides with the conferring of the last adult privilege/responsibility, the ability to purchase and consume alcohol.

    So, perhaps if you are 21, the minimum age for a consenting partner is 18?

    ETA: Forgot to answer this...

    I asked my question because it hasn't been that long since people were getting married in this country at 16. Teens have been having sex as long as there have been people.

    I think it has been quite a few generations since 15 and 16 year olds marrying, and starting their lives independent of their parents, has been anything like a norm. Even when I was growing up, getting married prior to 18, prior to graduating HS, was considered a very, very bad idea. Even in my father's generation, he's 80, it was exceptional.

    And, as long as there have been people, parents and society have tried to come up with ways to prevent those children from having sex before they were mature enough to deal with the consequences... most poignantly, pregnancy without a long-term commitment ending with a young girl/woman raising a child alone.

    Today, we see the horrible societal cost of pregnancy due to casual "relationships".
     
    Last edited:

    spec4

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Jun 19, 2010
    3,775
    27
    NWI
    When I was in high school I knew a 16 year old girl who was "going steady" (old term) with a guy who was 21. He had a nice '56 Ford convertible. She told me they had been in bed together but never did "the act". In retrospect, had she been my daughter I'd be very concerned about this setup.

    At age 17 I was very interested in the opposite sex, but nowhere near ready for an intimate relationship.
     

    Libertarian01

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    3   0   0
    Jan 12, 2009
    6,006
    113
    Fort Wayne
    I believe that the primary difference of a large age gap has to do with a difference of power. The older person is more experienced, has more money, and is generally more sure of themselves than a younger person. There are exceptions, of course, but that is the broad brush.

    A 35 year old will be more established, have more money, and have 17 years of experience over an 18 year old. When a girl who is 16 dates someone within 3 or 4 years of her age the distribution of power is much more balanced. Both have generally the same amount of life experience, possibly financial parity, etc. While it is true that someone from a wealthy family could have far more experience and resources than a middle class or poor family, that difference in and of itself could create a significant imbalance of power, but other factors remain on parity.

    Add to this difference in power the issue of increased authority, such as a school teacher, a police officer, a district attorney, etc. Then the balance is skewed exponentially.

    Younger people are already at a disadvantage of knowing how to deal with conflict, understanding their rights, knowing who to go to for help, etc. They are vulnerable simply due to a lack of life experience. However, when a 19 year old dates a 16 year old the power difference, while there, is significantly less than a 15 or 20 year age gap.

    I believe Roy Moore was a sexual predator. He was very intelligent and understood exactly what kind of power he wielded by being a district attorney and knew how to use that to charm and later, intimidate. He isn't unique, there is nothing special about him. He is simply one of the many cockroaches that survived and thrived using and abusing a system designed to protect those in power, as all power systems do. The Catholic church protected priests, the democratic party protects democrats, the republican party protects republicans, the blue line exists, fraternities protect their own, nobody likes a rat, etc etc etc.

    There are three (3) basic differences today. Number one is that our society is more understanding, educated, and sympathetic to the victims of abuse (sexual, power, and otherwise.) Number two is that our society is far less tolerant of the abuse of power. And number three is that the fall of Harvey Weinstein has symbolized that no matter how powerful a person is they can be brought low. This is a tremendous morale boost to those who have remained silent, knowing that no longer will they be ignored by society when they speak against someone of power and influence.

    The times, they are a changin'.

    Regards,

    Doug
     

    BugI02

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 4, 2013
    31,886
    149
    Columbus, OH
    But it is only a matter of time until those so inclined realize that an accusation of sexual malfeasance never has to be proven, is difficult if not impossible to disprove, and can be used to derail the career of almost any politician

    The genie is out of that bottle
     

    KLB

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    5   0   0
    Sep 12, 2011
    23,007
    77
    Porter County
    But it is only a matter of time until those so inclined realize that an accusation of sexual malfeasance never has to be proven, is difficult if not impossible to disprove, and can be used to derail the career of almost any politician

    The genie is out of that bottle
    So true. All you need is someone that is willing to go out and do the rounds lying. I'm sure there are plenty of people that would love the attention they would get.
     
    Top Bottom