Heterosexual Teenage Sex is Prosecuted Differently from Homosexual Teenage Sex

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

Dreadsox

ONE love, blood, life
Joined
Aug 24, 2002
Messages
10,885
[Q]When one member of the couple is aged 14 to 16 and the other is older, the act is statutory rape under the Kansas law and the most common penalty is probation if the two are heterosexual. But probation is not available to same-sex teenage couples.

Matthew Limon was one week past his 18th birthday in early 2000 when he performed oral sex on a 14-year-old boy at the center for developmentally disabled young people where they both lived. No violence or coercion was involved.

Had Mr. Limon performed oral sex on a 14-year-old girl, he could have received a prison sentence of about 15 months, and possibly just probation. Instead, he is now about three years into a 17-year sentence in the Ellsworth Correctional Facility. Under his sentence, he was also ordered to register as a sex offender upon his release.[/Q]

Now three years into the sentence:

[Q]ASHINGTON, June 27 ? In one of the first consequences of its landmark ruling on gay rights on Thursday, the Supreme Court today set aside the lengthy prison sentence imposed on a gay Kansas teenager for having had sex with a younger boy.[/Q]

Good for the court!!!!!! I am sorry but this is clearly wrong in my book.http://www.nytimes.com/2003/06/27/politics/27CND-SCOTUS.html?ex=1057377600&en=cfd551cd8c1d05a6&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE
 
I have known about this case for several months now, and it has disappointed me. I'm very much glad that the unfair sentence has been overturned.

This is precisely why it was very much necessary for the Supreme Court to rule as it did. No one should be a second-class citizen on the basis of their sexual orientation.

Melon
 
Dreadsox said:

Matthew Limon was one week past his 18th birthday in early 2000 when he performed oral sex on a 14-year-old boy

at the center for developmentally disabled young people where they both lived.

No violence or coercion was involved.

For these reasons the punishment was too severe.









Damn Homeland Security.
 
Last edited:
Why should same sex relations be connsidered the same as hetrosexuall relationships if they are not the same? that is my question. differenct situations call for different circumstances. i agree with the penalty that was given to him orriginally.
 
megadrum2002 said:
Why should same sex relations be connsidered the same as hetrosexuall relationships if they are not the same?

Why should it matter which genders are involved? Why can't heterosexuals and homosexuals be treated the same? We are all human.
 
How exactly, are they different?

Oh, thats right, different body parts. So with that logic, a murder with a knife needs different treatment to that of a hand gun.

If this thread disolves into the normal "what is wrong/right with homosexuality" debate and it gets out of hand, it will be closed as usual. Please keep it respectful everyone. We're all capable of that I am certain.

**It's not what you say, but how you say it**
 
megadrum2002 said:
Why should same sex relations be connsidered the same as hetrosexuall relationships if they are not the same? that is my question. differenct situations call for different circumstances. i agree with the penalty that was given to him orriginally.

Of course you do.

:rolleyes:

BTW, it is "considered," "heterosexual," "different," and "originally."

Melon:
 
Last edited:
Hold the phone this person should be spending the next 17 years of their life in prison. GAY OR NOT. It is rape!! (in my books) 18 year old and a 14 year old. RAPE!!

A 14 year old doesnt have the mental capacity to know what is right and wrong especailly if they are in a mental institute!

Who gives a shit if they are gay or not, lets focus on the real subject a rapist is be let free and thousands of others are being let free. A 14 year old mentally chalenged child has oral sex preformed on him-RAPE. 17 years sounds like a great sentance.
 
Hold the phone this person should be spending the next 17 years of their life in prison. GAY OR NOT. It is rape!! (in my books) 18 year old and a 14 year old. RAPE!!

Would you say the same thing if a 14 year old boy had sex with his 18 year old girlfriend?
 
YES!! No question. Why should their sexual preference and their sex matter to you?

Last time i checked people around here are looking for equality. Would it make a difference to you if it was a boy-man man-girl woman-boy girl-girl?
 
Though this case wreaks of homophobia, am I the only one who is troubled by the fact that this happened in a 'developmentally disabled persons' center?

Methinks there is perhaps more to this than meets the eye.

Ant.
 
bonoman said:
YES!! No question. Why should their sexual preference and their sex matter to you?

Last time i checked people around here are looking for equality. Would it make a difference to you if it was a boy-man man-girl woman-boy girl-girl?

No, it doesn't matter to me at all. I'm just not under the impression that this is really rape. Now I understand the reasons for statuatory rape laws, but what two consenting persons do shouldn't be treated the same as rape. I knew several people while growing up who could have technically been tried for statuatory rape, both men and women.

I just think you're jumping the gun a little by calling him a rapist.

It would really depend on the disability these individuals have in order to really bring in that factor. I know several individuals with mental disabilities that are in sexual relationships.
 
No. But what I'm saying is that I know 14 year olds are sexually active today, I'm not going to pretend they aren't. But calling an 18 year-old a rapist because he had consentual sexual activity with a 14 year-old is a little harsh. !7 years sounds even more harsh.
 
Anthony said:
Though this case wreaks of homophobia, am I the only one who is troubled by the fact that this happened in a 'developmentally disabled persons' center?

Methinks there is perhaps more to this than meets the eye.

Ant.

Yes, it happened in a developmentally disabled persons center where they *both* lived. I think that if they really were both mentally disturbed people, and it was consentual, I don't even know why this went on trial.

Melon
 
That is what I do find troubling, Melon. What I would like to know is what precisely was the mental capacity of the once alleged rapist, and also that of the victim. My point is thus, I don't know how they do it in America, but in Britain it would have been hard-pressed for anyone to try this as a 'rape case' if both were at the same 'mental capacity'.

Its more confusing and troubling than its apparent homophobic surface implies.

Ant.
 
Ok....rape is a touchy subject to me sorry if i was harsh without knowing all the facts. But like Ant said, they could both be in the mental hospital but have totally different mental capacities.

And what makes this even more disturbing is that this person, the alleged rapist, was convicted and sentanced to 17 yrs if they are mentally sufficent to know right and wrong. That makes me think this person had the mental capacity.
 
Regardless, the point of this thread, IMO, is not to justify statutory rape, but the hypocrisy of having two different standards for heterosexual and homosexual offenses, whereas he would be out of prison by now, if he had performed this on a 14 year-old girl.

Melon
 
But isnt the real point why isnt others going to jail for the same offense. It goes both ways.

Melon you said you have followed this case can you show some light on how mentally handicapped these two were. You are trying to over simplify this case into a hetero-homosexual issue when it might be deeper then that. Bring the entire story to the table so we can look at the pressing facts not just that it was a man--boy sexual incident.
 
The state of Kansas had determined that statutory rape by someone around the person's age (i.e., 14 + 18) is less offensive than statutory rape by someone grossly older (i.e., 14 + 30). Where this law has clearly gotten into trouble is that it only covered heterosexual acts, whereas homosexual acts of a similar nature were far more severely punished. That's where the problems came in and that's why I'm glad the Supreme Court threw it out.

As for more underlying dilemmas, I agree that they may certainly be there. Unfortunately, I can only theorize their mental competancies. He may have been able to get by a "not guilty by reason of insanity" or not. After Reagan's would-be assassin, John Hinkley, Jr., was able to use that reasoning, the government purposely made it far more difficult to use that defense. If that is what prevented Limon from using that defense (and, again, I don't know), I don't see how Hinkley really "got off." He's still in a mental institution and there is no inclination that he'll ever be let free.

Melon
 
melon said:
Regardless, the point of this thread, IMO, is not to justify statutory rape, but the hypocrisy of having two different standards for heterosexual and homosexual offenses, whereas he would be out of prison by now, if he had performed this on a 14 year-old girl.

Melon

That was EXACTLY the point. The court should be BLIND as to the participants gender. The sentenceing should be the same if it was 18M/14/F and 18M/14M. That is the point. THe sentencing because of the GENDER was discriminatory.

Personally, I think the sentencing should be adjusted on the Heterosexual side, but that is because I have a daughter.
 
Back
Top Bottom