View Single Post
Old 03-18-2008, 03:04 PM   #54
G DiPierro
Location: Ohio
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 365
United_States
Offline
Re: Very Disturbing news about Clint George

Quote:
Jennifer Yabut wrote: View Post
They appear to be his own words...yes. Also notice how he implied that the touching was "consensual"...
The Montana statute defines "sexual abuse" as any non-consensual "sexual contact," with the proviso that any such contact with a person under the age of 16 will be deemed to be without consent. Had the girl been a couple of years older, his actions would not be a crime. However, they still might considered morally reprehensible or an abuse of power.

I wonder if the reaction be the same, though, if she had been 16? Would it even have come to the attention of this forum were not for the fact that he broke the law? Or is there such a clear and significant difference in development between 13 and 16 (which could be closer to a 2 year difference than 3, depending on where the person's birthday falls) that that would have been acceptable?

If you think 16 is equally deplorable, although legal, then where do you draw the line? 18? 21? 30? It seems to me that if you frame the issue in black-and-white terms then you have to pick an arbitrary point where you go from one to the other.

Last edited by G DiPierro : 03-18-2008 at 03:11 PM. Reason: added link
  Reply With Quote