Congressman Foley resigns - Page 8 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 10-04-2006, 01:18 AM   #106
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,667
Local Time: 07:52 PM
^ Did Drudge not tell you an operator acting on his own got fired for this?

I guess not...
__________________

__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 10-04-2006, 06:46 AM   #107
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 11:52 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by deep




He declined to identify the clergyman or the church,


Now he is protecting a paedophile?

If this Priest molested him
and this is suggested as an excuse or explanation

how many more Foley time bombs are there out there?

Should not this Priest be turned in and stopped
and those that he molested have an opportunity for healing and get counseling?

Is not that the right thing to do?
Is it plausible that the Priest is now dead? A lot of victims stay quiet I don't see how he should be held to a different standard, he is not the perpetrator.
__________________

__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 10-04-2006, 08:19 AM   #108
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,979
Local Time: 08:52 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by AEON

What if the affair was consensual? In some cultures - past and present - this would be a perfectly acceptable relationship. Why do you feel our society should be different?
Do you honestly believe that in present day in the US (which I assume we're discussing since that's where it happened) that it is considered perfectly acceptable for a 52 year old to have a consensual affair with a 16 year old? Where is that exactly, because I must be living under a rock or something. I guess you could be referring to a Warren Jeffs type situation, and that is hardly consensual on the part of those girls. Quite the opposite. The polar opposite.

I honestly wonder if you are implying that this type of scenario is prevalent in the gay community.
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 10-04-2006, 08:24 AM   #109
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 08:52 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by MrsSpringsteen
I honestly wonder if you are implying that this type of scenario is prevalent in the gay community.
In some circles of conservative nonsense, "homosexual" and "pedophile" are synonyms.

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 10-04-2006, 08:29 AM   #110
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 11:52 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by MrsSpringsteen


Do you honestly believe that in present day in the US (which I assume we're discussing since that's where it happened) that it is considered perfectly acceptable for a 52 year old to have a consensual affair with a 16 year old? Where is that exactly, because I must be living under a rock or something. I guess you could be referring to a Warren Jeffs type situation, and that is hardly consensual on the part of those girls. Quite the opposite. The polar opposite.
I don't see how it is terribly different than a 29 year old and a 55 year old.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 10-04-2006, 08:33 AM   #111
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 08:52 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by MrsSpringsteen
Do you honestly believe that in present day in the US (which I assume we're discussing since that's where it happened) that it is considered perfectly acceptable for a 52 year old to have a consensual affair with a 16 year old?
If the 16 year-old is defined as an adult, according to the age of consent laws, then whatever those two people want to do is none of my business.

When they say that "justice is blind," I interpret that to mean that emotional reactions should not factor into judgment, no matter how inappropriate I would personally feel about a 52 year old and a 16 year old.

However, I think this is all besides the point, because nothing that Foley did was consensual, apparently. I don't even know why this dimension was added to this discussion originally, except to be homophobic.

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 10-04-2006, 08:41 AM   #112
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,979
Local Time: 08:52 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer
I don't see how it is terribly different than a 29 year old and a 55 year old.
Really? Well I do. Even if a 16 year old is the age of consent, in most cases (I can't say all because there could always be exceptions, and there are plenty of very immature 29 year olds) a 29 year old would be far more emotionally mature and equipped to handle a relationship, the age difference, and everything else. I can't imagine any parent, even the most permissive of parents, being ok with their 16 year old having a relationship with a 52 year old. Some might even have some qualms about the 29 year old, but of course they would have no say in it. Even if 16 is the age of consent, most parents would still believe they have a say in that. And wouldn't want their 16 year old even IM ing with a 52 year old in that way, let alone one in that position of authority and in such a sexually graphic way.

I guess I'm just terribly old fashioned in thinking that, and in thinking that in all ways that matter a 16 year old is still a child. Even though so many cultural aspects attempt to tell us otherwise.

I wonder if any parent here would be ok with that, show of hands?
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 10-04-2006, 08:47 AM   #113
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,979
Local Time: 08:52 PM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...301001_pf.html

"While Foley's attorney said the congressman never had "inappropriate sexual contact with a minor," that may not matter, said Kendall Coffey, a former U.S. attorney in Florida.

He said Foley could face criminal charges under state or federal laws for "grooming" minors for sexual contact.

"There are going to be experts who look at these e-mails and say those are the unmistakable fingerprints of a predator, but others will call them fantasies. It's a question of intent," the former prosecutor said."
__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 10-04-2006, 08:49 AM   #114
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
AEON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 4,052
Local Time: 06:52 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon


I don't even know why this dimension was added to this discussion originally, except to be homophobic.

Melon
Melon - you and homophobia is like McCarthy and communisim - you see it everywhere.

The "dimension" of discussing why people had a problem with this news story was simply to demonstrate how random our moral outrage can be.

You yourself just said that as long as an incident like this is "legal" - you wouldn't consider it your business. How far would you take this idea? What if they passed a law that endorsed murder for those that state labeled as "undesirable?" What if they legalized sex between adults and five year olds? My point is - the legal system seems like very shaky ground to anchor your moral choices.
__________________
AEON is offline  
Old 10-04-2006, 08:57 AM   #115
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
AEON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 4,052
Local Time: 06:52 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511
in all seriousness, i don't consult a single book to figure out what i think is right or wrong. i would point to values instilled by your parents and the community you grew up in (it certainly does take a village), combined with the laws under which you have grown up and the education you have received, the books you have read, the experiences you have acquired, all topped off by a certain innate sense of right and wrong, what might be called one's conscience, that are often derived from a sense of empathy, the ability to place yourself in the shoes of another.

for me, it's never been from one place.
Thanks for this thoughtful answer Irvine. I am pretty much on the same page with you.

Of course - the the next place this discussion would probably go is here: if morality is determined by parents, community, local laws, books, and an innate sense of right and wrong - then should a society do what it can to insure that all children are having these values instilled by these resources? Otherwise, we may have one community within the society that may feel random cannibalism is okay because their parents say so, their community says so, their local laws say so, and the books they read say so.
__________________
AEON is offline  
Old 10-04-2006, 08:57 AM   #116
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 11:52 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by MrsSpringsteen


Really? Well I do. Even if a 16 year old is the age of consent, in most cases (I can't say all because there could always be exceptions, and there are plenty of very immature 29 year olds) a 29 year old would be far more emotionally mature and equipped to handle a relationship, the age difference, and everything else. I can't imagine any parent, even the most permissive of parents, being ok with their 16 year old having a relationship with a 52 year old. Some might even have some qualms about the 29 year old, but of course they would have no say in it. Even if 16 is the age of consent, most parents would still believe they have a say in that. And wouldn't want their 16 year old even IM ing with a 52 year old in that way, let alone one in that position of authority and in such a sexually graphic way.

I guess I'm just terribly old fashioned in thinking that, and in thinking that in all ways that matter a 16 year old is still a child. Even though so many cultural aspects attempt to tell us otherwise.

I wonder if any parent here would be ok with that, show of hands?
oops, I meant 19 y.o; same age difference as the other case.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 10-04-2006, 09:11 AM   #117
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 08:52 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by AEON
Melon - you and homophobia is like McCarthy and communism - you see it everywhere.
Twenty state DOMAs, plus eight on the November ballot, don't lie. Using those DOMAs to try to deny even basic rights to same-sex couples, don't lie.

Bringing up the issue of same-sex marriage in a thread about pedophilia and sexual harrassment? That's beyond acceptable.

So you're right. I do see it everywhere, because I call a spade a spade.

On the other hand, the constant Christian persecution complex in this county is getting quite hilarious, because there's absolutely no evidence of it--unless you consider it "a right" to demean, slander and bully unpopular minorities.

Quote:
You yourself just said that as long as an incident like this is "legal" - you wouldn't consider it your business. How far would you take this idea? What if they passed a law that endorsed murder for those that state labeled as "undesirable?" What if they legalized sex between adults and five year olds? My point is - the legal system seems like very shaky ground to anchor your moral choices.
Most of these "age of consent" laws were written around very conservative concepts. Do you think it was "liberals" who passed the Georgia law that allowed 14 year olds to get married--and even younger if they were pregnant?

Hell, it's only in the last 30 years that "marital rape" could occur. Prior to that, it was just part of the "wifely duties."

But *all* of this is besides the point. You're purposely trying to make this specific situation complicated, when it is fairly straightforward, legally and morally. Allow me to emphasize the point that most of us here have been trying to make, without avail:

Foley was not having a consensual affair. He was sending illegal sexual messages to people who are undeniably minors by any stretch of the imagination (e.g., 13 and 15 year olds), in addition to sending illegal sexually harrassing messages to a subordinate. Whether that "subordinate" was male, female, 17 years old, or 50 years old, it is still inappropriate, unethical, and illegal to engage in that kind of behavior in the position that Foley was in. As such, he deserves the wrath that he's getting.

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 10-04-2006, 09:16 AM   #118
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 08:52 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon


Foley was not having a consensual affair. He was sending illegal sexual messages to people who are undeniably minors by any stretch of the imagination (e.g., 13 and 15 year olds), in addition to sending illegal sexually harrassing messages to a subordinate. Whether that "subordinate" was male, female, 17 years old, or 50 years old, it is still inappropriate, unethical, and illegal to engage in that kind of behavior in the position that Foley was in. As such, he deserves the wrath that he's getting.

Melon
I think that about sums it up, and rather loudly, I may add.
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 10-04-2006, 09:17 AM   #119
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 08:52 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon

On the other hand, the constant Christian persecution complex in this county is getting quite hilarious, because there's absolutely no evidence of it--unless you consider it "a right" to demean, slander and bully unpopular minorities.
Persecution to the point of people being endangered? No, but there is certainly anti-Christian bias in the media and even n the education system.
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 10-04-2006, 09:19 AM   #120
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,979
Local Time: 08:52 PM
Did you have to quote those huge letters again?

But the huge letters are correct, and same sex marriage has absolutely nothing to do with this situation.
__________________

__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:52 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com