Thread: Teacher Goes to Prison Over 5 Students

Originally Posted by Rustgold

Mature for sex at 11-13, not mature to serve country at 16-18... mmmm it doesn't tally correctly; sorry.

When it comes to serving the teacher, some teachers believe there isn't any age limit. The solution to end student abuse might be in home schooling. Too bad 99% of the teachers weren't nerds; the schools would be so much better and safer for the students. Down with classroom predators.

Originally Posted by Rustgold

You've repeatedly made it clear that you support adults getting to them very young, that is as long as it's for sex.

I don't know that I "support" adults getting to them very young" for sex.

Let me put it this way, I was watching a show on TV several nights ago, the show was about Mormons today that break against current Mormon ethics or morals about marriage, and in doing so they live an older Mormon tradition of polygamy. The show interviewed not just a husband with 4 or so wives but it interviewed children that are reared in those households. Now, just about all of the boys and girls said they likely would live in a polygamous relationship when they become adults. And I became very aware while I was watching that show that I don't care who people sleep with or who they marry. True pedophilia excepted.

If a 15 year old and 35 year old want to sleep with one another and do so, I really don't care. Now, I don't know if you want to call that "supporting" polygamy or adults sleeping with teenagers.

Mature for sex at 11-13, not mature to serve country at 16-18... mmmm it doesn't tally correctly; sorry.

In the science of biology a human organism that can reproduce at 11 or 13 would be considered "mature" for sex. The issue would be an amoral one. Likewise with violence or predation perpetrated by 16 and 18 year olds.

But the science of biology is not one and the same with morals or ethics or social conventions. Albeit, the science of biology can help inform our morals or ethics or social conventions.

For me, I find greater harm (and committing least harm is very Buddhist philosophical concept when weighing moral issues) in 16 or 18 year olds acting in the violence of war or even being psychologically or physically impacted or harmed by such war engagements, then an a 13 year old having consensual sex.

Bare in mind I think adults that victimize children sexually flirt with great evil. But this is more shaped by moral views from Christianity/Catholicism. In the New Testament Jesus warns that for any adult that leads a child into corruption, it would be better for that adult they never were born. Harsh words. But I would like to emphasize the concept of "moral corruption" of a child. A very religious concept. At least it carries a lot of religious connotation. This is were the "harm" comes for the child - in my view.

I know a young woman hooked on crack - has the GD six-point star (gang affiliated) tattooed on one of her upper arms. Very old tattoo, so, now its fading. But she admitted to me one drunken afternoon years ago, that she was repeatedly sexually abused by her father growing up. She is very promiscuous (she prostitutes) and that is not uncommon, from my understanding, for people that were sexually abused as children. She is morally corrupted, morally compromised.

It's kind of similar to my views of homosexual marriage being an oxymoron. This is in no small part due to my Catholic and historical understanding of "marriage" - like the term "husband" would denote a male and not a female - but I really don't care if two men marry each other or two women marry each other. So, I don't know if you want to term me as "supporting" gay marriage (which in a certain respect I think I do).