![]() |
€uromeinke, FEJ. and Ghoulish Delight RULE!!! NA abides. |
![]() |
#11 | |
Kink of Swank
|
Quote:
And I don't see anything wrong (or rationally criminal) in dirty internet talk with teenagers of either gender. But where to you draw the age line? 15? 11? 9? At some point, and I don't know where, it becomes much more wrong to me. So, I guess the arbitrary "adult" line of 18 makes some sense. Besides, the criminal element is, I believe, trying to set up meetings for sexual purposes ... which I feel is wrong with anyone lacking full maturity and judgment skills. That would make the age limit 25, by the way. So I actually agree with the criminal statue that outlaws luring teens via the internet to sexual rendez vous in the real world. Of course, I'd rather it only be a crime if the meeting takes place, but I understand it's the luring itself that is criminal. (However, can luring take place if no one is actually lured? Is that like a tree falling in the woods?) I haven't read the emails myself ... so I can't form a coherent opinion on how much luring there was vs. how much gayspeak. * * * * * Oh, and to counter something posted earlier ... at least according to various reports I've heard, incoming pages were warned to stay away from Foley because he got a little too friendly, not because he was simply homosexual. I don't find it credible that pages are warned about every gay member of the House. Last edited by innerSpaceman : 10-04-2006 at 08:14 AM. |
|
![]() |
Submit to Quotes
![]() |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|