Reporting of Sex Between 15 year olds-"lewd fondling"

[Pure]

I'm sure this Kansas law will warm the heart of Amicus, a lover of liberty as defined by the law enforcement authorities.

Trial Opens in Challenge to Law Over Teenage Sex


By JODI RUDOREN
Published: January 31, 2006

WICHITA, Kan., Jan. 30

— A federal trial opened here Monday over whether a Kansas law prohibiting virtually all sexual activity by people under age 16 means health care professionals and educators must report such behavior to state authorities, which some say would stop many teenagers from seeking contraception or treatment for sexually transmitted diseases.


Ann Williamson/The Capitol Journal, via Associated Press
Phill Kline, the Kansas attorney general, is expected to testify.
The class-action lawsuit stems from a 2003 opinion by the Kansas attorney general, Phill Kline, a conservative Republican who has developed a national reputation for fighting abortion and whose pursuit of abortion clinic records is also being challenged in court.

Mr. Kline's interpretation of the law focused mainly on the reporting duty of abortion providers, arguing that any pregnant, unmarried minor had by definition been the victim of rape or abuse. But it included a broad mandate for reporting whenever "compelling evidence of sexual interaction is present."

Bonnie Scott Jones, a lawyer for the Center for Reproductive Rights in New York, which is representing the plaintiffs, said in her opening statement that Mr. Kline's "dragnet approach" to amassing information on under-age sex violated minors' privacy rights and the Constitution's equal protection clause, and that it "seriously endangers the health and well-being of adolescents."

"Sexual abuse is not synonymous with consensual sexual activity," Ms. Jones said to the judge deciding the case, J. Thomas Marten of Federal District Court. "Consensual sexual activity is not inherently injurious. It is a normal part of adolescent development."

Steve Alexander, an assistant attorney general defending the suit, said the Kansas statute meant that those younger than 16 could not consent to sex, and that those violating the law forfeited any privacy rights.

"Illegal sexual activity by minors can lead to S.T.D.'s, unwanted pregnancies, abortion, depression, mental illness," Mr. Alexander said. "To pretend otherwise is foolish." He said the case was in essence a challenge to the law barring consensual sex between young people of a similar age, which he called "a policy argument that plaintiffs would be better served making in the Legislature."

Kansas is one of 12 states where sex under a certain age — 16, 17 or 18 — is illegal regardless of the age difference between partners, according to a 2004 report prepared by the Lewin Group, a consulting firm, for the federal Department of Health and Human Services. Laws on reporting child sexual abuse also vary, but a third of states require reporting only when statutory rape involves a parent or guardian, the report found.

Dr. Robert W. Blum, a Johns Hopkins University professor and an expert in pediatrics and adolescent medicine, who was the plaintiffs' lead witness, testified Monday that only one state, California, had previously tried to require reporting of all under-age sex, and that it reversed course after a year in the early 1990's because the authorities were flooded with "irrelevant and obstructive" reports.

Among the plaintiffs' arguments is that blanket reporting of sexual activity would be futile because the Kansas Department of Social and Rehabilitation Services has a policy against investigating cases of consensual teenage sex.

Pressed on cross-examination, Dr. Blum said he did consider all sex by children 12 or younger to be "problematic" and worthy of reporting, but he said, "That's distinctly different than a 14-, 15- or 16-year-old in a romantic relationship."

Nationally, studies suggest that about 30 percent of teenagers under 16 have had intercourse, and an additional 20 percent have experimented with oral sex or genital fondling.

A federal appeals court on Friday overturned a temporary injunction blocking enactment of Mr. Kline's ruling but provided a two-week window, approximately the expected length of the trial, before the reporting would be required.

Among the issues debated Monday was the very definition of sexual activity. Anal and vaginal intercourse and oral sex are mentioned in the law, as is "lewd fondling or touching" done with "the intent to arouse," which Ms. Jones said could cover even intense French kissing.

Mr. Kline, who is expected to testify Friday, declined to discuss the case. In an e-mail statement, he avoided the central controversy over consensual sex between teenagers of a similar age.

"Plaintiffs are arguing that the constitution does not allow the state to require people to report child rape," the statement said. "We differ. Prosecuting and investigating child rapists depends on such laws, and if the plaintiffs believe that adult-child sex should be legal they need to take that debate to the Legislature rather than initiate litigation."

Similarly, Mr. Kline said last year that prosecuting rapists was his goal in seeking access to the medical files of women and girls who had had late-term abortions, which led to a separate lawsuit awaiting a decision by the State Supreme Court.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Ah kansas. Our attempt to create a state that makes Iran look socially progressive.

 

[Selena_Kitt]

and fair Juliet just 13...

and, oh wait, the virgin Mary, too... :x

 

[impressive]

lewd fondling

As opposed to ... what? Non-lewd fondling?

 

[Guest]

I'm sure this Kansas law will warm the heart of Amicus, a lover of liberty as defined by the law enforcement authorities.

Pure, this might prove an interesting discussion thread but I wonder why you felt the need to invoke Amicus from the start. Do excuse me if you enjoy arguing with him, but if you were attempting to make a judgment on the topic of the article I daresay there exists better fodder for wit than our nutter Friend.

Perdita

 

[Salvor-Hardon]

As opposed to ... what? Non-lewd fondling?

right, cause I can fondle a melon at the market and its not lewd, I'm just testing for ripeness.

Ok it is lewd, and I'm trying to hit on the hottie over by the cucumbers.....

Damn fondling.

 

[elsol]

So if two fifteen-year olds have sex... male & female... which one do you charge with rape?

Sincerely,
ElSol

 

[Purple Sage]

So if two fifteen-year olds have sex... male & female... which one do you charge with rape?

Sincerely,
ElSol

Both, obviously. All fifteen-year olds should be jailed anyway: if they aren't doing it, they're sure as hell thinking about doing it. Planning to do it. Conniving to do it. I know this sounds a little broad, but it is the actual approach to adult pedophiles- if X thinks that Y is fifteen, and says (s)he wants to have sex with Y, this is prosecutable. Even if Y does not exist- ie, is a 50 year old cop on a computer.

I have seen up close the damage that child molestation/rape can cause- including when it's perpetrated by other minors- and I really, really want to see effective measures for protecting children. I don't happen to think this approach is very helpful.

 

[amicus]

Some people, one in particular are beneath contempt on this forum as they employ personal attacks and subjective assaults from purely emotional urges and wouldn't recognize a rational thought if it bit her one the ass.

Secondly, Mexico is well known for supplying children for the international sex trade as Mexicans in general seem to expresses a disdain for individual human life.

Pure, some people are actually parents of minor, teenaged children and they care about them and their development.

While I do not recall having expressed a definitive position on the sexual activities of young people aged 12 to 18, it is a subject worthy of consideration from an objective point of view.

"...By JODI RUDOREN
Published: January 31, 2006

WICHITA, Kan., Jan. 30

— A federal trial opened here Monday over whether a Kansas law prohibiting virtually all sexual activity by people under age 16 means health care professionals and educators must report such behavior to state authorities, which some say would stop many teenagers from seeking contraception or treatment for sexually transmitted diseases...."

As Pure often does, for the sake of discussion or argument one assumes, is to throw out a topic without expressing a firm position. Fishing, I guess, for agreement or opposition.

There is no 'point of beginning' to discuss sexual habits and customs for those in their teen-aged years. As someone pointed out, Romeo and Juliette and someone on another forum pointed out marriage laws that permit 12 year olds to marry with parental consent.

I, for one, am not comfortable with the promiscuos liberal left overall attitude concerning sexual behavior between not just minors, but with people of all ages and gender.

The world is slowly throwing off the burden of religiously imposed morality concerning sexual activity but, unfortunately, the rational ethos of such activity within a culture has not been seriously considered.

Liberals are somewhat comparable to a person reaching majority, age 21, who goes out and tries every alcoholic drink in a club just because they are finally 'legal' and can.

With the sexual freedom rising from post world war two societal changes, the weakening of organized religion and the absence of a rational, logical approach to human morality, the humanist ethic of 'anything goes' has been running rampant for over half a century.

Many on this forum and within the extreme left cadre, think that is just fine, the kinkier the better.

Others do not feel that way.

Many of you are not old enough to recall the conflict of the 1960's when a great left wing push was made to include 'sex education' as mandatory education in public schools. It was and remains in some areas, a very controversial subject.

I prefer to begin with the basic, and that is, as a parent of a 12 to 18 year old, what preferences do you have concerning their sexual activity and do you want it enforced by the schools and the courts?

Do you teach siblings anything concerning brother and sister incest or exploration and experimentation within the home?

Do you supply your sons and daughters with condoms and birth control chemicals early on and if so at what age and do you include moral supervision or instructions?

While sexual promiscuity, vis a vie the 'liberal, humanist' approach has created social problems of early pregnancy, sexually transmitted diseases, contraception, abortion, trauma, date rape drugs, a whole host of social 'concerns' the issue remains a basic one, concerning your and your children as individuals.

So rather than throw the question out as if it were a socialist approach to a whole society, where the arbiter is the 'greater good for society', why not step outside the left wing box and for once in your life consider the individual, personal viewpoint and maybe, just maybe, seek an universal answer to questions that involve all human beings.

amicus....(shall we now listen to perdita whine again?)

 

[cloudy]

Secondly, Mexico is well known for supplying children for the international sex trade as Mexicans in general seem to expresses a disdain for individual human life.

What the hell is wrong with you????

You express more disdain for ANY life other than yours than anyone I've ever come into contact with, no matter what color, what sexual orientation, what age.

You should be ashamed of yourself. I'm ashamed for you.

 

[impressive]

I, for one, am not comfortable with the promiscuos liberal left overall attitude concerning sexual behavior between not just minors, but with people of all ages and gender.

*snort*

Okay, that's funnier than the Teddy Kennedy two-piece picture.

 

[amicus]

Aww, cloudy...maybe you should educate your self concerning the child sex trade in Mexican border towns and in Mexican resort areas that draw international traffic.

It was once and still is a mecca of child sex traffic in the far east, Singapore, Hong Kong, Malaysia and the Philippines, but Mexico is right up there with the worst.

If you search and find that no such child sex trade exists, I will gladly admit the error and apologize profoundly.

It does not mollify the issue that many adult Americans participate in this trade and import children for brothels across the country.

It is ugly yes, but I only pointed it out. Why not shoot the messenger?

amicus...

 

[Selena_Kitt]

With the sexual freedom rising from post world war two societal changes, the weakening of organized religion and the absence of a rational, logical approach to human morality, the humanist ethic of 'anything goes' has been running rampant for over half a century.

ooooo-KAY...

a. thought you were an athiest? why would the absence of organized religion bother you in the least?

b. you are saying this on a bulletin board located (had you noticed??) on a PORN site... you are complaining about the degradation of human morality on what could be considered a sure sign of said decline in human morals... if one subscribed that that idea, anyway...

 

[Pure]

OK, ami, one for one

I thought it might be obvious, but you say I don't take a stand on the article's topic. So here is mine. In return, I have a simple request: that you answer you own question, reproduced below.

I think the Kansas law is a ridiculous intrusion of the state to the 'liberty' of minors. [[ AS the article points out, Kansas is one of the few states, and judicial areas where age differential does not matter re teen sex.]][delete]

ADDED: The article apparently errs, since Kansas has a Romeo and Juliet law, see new posting. But I think that's not quite enough latitude.

For young teens, I don't think the law should impute nonconsent, absent outside evidence, when the age differential is say, 2 years or less.
Older teens should not have different status than adults, regarding sex and consent, except possibly where their teachers, coaches, and doctors, etc. are involved.

ami: I prefer to begin with the basic, and that is, as a parent of a 12 to 18 year old, what preferences do you have concerning their sexual activity and do you want it enforced by the schools and the courts?

Please answer concisely, esp. regarding whether, and what kind of teen-to-teen sex, if any, you want criminalized.

 

[cloudy]

Aww, cloudy...maybe you should educate your self concerning the child sex trade in Mexican border towns and in Mexican resort areas that draw international traffic.

It was once and still is a mecca of child sex traffic in the far east, Singapore, Hong Kong, Malaysia and the Philippines, but Mexico is right up there with the worst.

If you search and find that no such child sex trade exists, I will gladly admit the error and apologize profoundly.

It does not mollify the issue that many adult Americans participate in this trade and import children for brothels across the country.

It is ugly yes, but I only pointed it out. Why not shoot the messenger?

amicus...

I didn't say that it doesn't exist. I was objecting to "Mexicans in general seem to expresses a disdain for individual human life."

That reminds me of eugenics, and how all people of color (that is, those who aren't white, of course), are inferior.

Any rational opinion you express is thrown out like the baby with the bath water when you dirty it with a statement like that above.

 

[amicus]

Hello again, Selena....

Yes, I am an atheist and I do not decry the absence of religion, merely note it.

I do think however, that on the wider scale of humanity, whatever the size of the group, that a well defined code of ethics and morality is essential.

That, in this country, has been codified into law, which for a majority, for a long time was sufficient to provide a sense of moral direction for the individual and the nation as a while.

That whole body of moral behavior as been challenged and changed in the past half century.

Although I think I know the reasons behind it, a backlash, or repercussion is now taking place in terms of promiscuity, abstinence, gay life styles and the entire feminist abortion issue.

Pure and many others ridicule the religous right in such issues as teen sex and the usual suspects join in with a circle jerk of laughter. I am usually hanging around somewhere to present the opposite viewpoint, which on a porn site, as you point out, does not make me very popular.

I can live with that.


amicus...

 

[Pure]

hi el!

So if two fifteen-year olds have sex... male & female... which one do you charge with rape?

Sincerely,
ElSol

I suppose the Kansas answer is that potentially both could be charged with indecent liberties with a minor.

Note that the original article errs in not recognizing Kansas' 'Romeo and Juliet' exception.

ADDED: the relevant laws are:

21-3503. Indecent liberties with a child.

(a) Indecent liberties with a child is engaging in any of the following acts with a child who is 14 or more years of age but less than 16 years of age:
(1) Any lewd fondling or touching of the person of either the child or the offender, done or submitted to with the intent to arouse or to satisfy the sexual desires of either the child or the offender, or both; or
(2) soliciting the child to engage in any lewd fondling or touching of the person of another with the intent to arouse or satisfy the sexual desires of the child, the offender or another.
(b) It shall be a defense to a prosecution of indecent liberties with a child as described in subsection (a)(1) that the child was married to the accused at the time of the offense. (c) Indecent liberties with a child is a severity level 5, person felony.

Unlawful voluntary sexual relations (commonly known as the Romeo and Juliet law), defined as engaging in voluntary sexual intercourse with a child who is 14 years of age but less than 16 years of age and the offender is less than 19 years of age and less than four years of age older than the child and the child and the offender are the only parties involved and are members of the opposite sex. This crime is classified as a severity level 8, person felony.(14)

Kansas atty general's official opinion that is behind the lawsuit is at
http://www.kscourts.org/ksag/opinions/2003/2003-017.htm#txt14

 

[Selena_Kitt]

I suppose the Kansas answer is that potentially both could be charged with exploitation or abuse of a minor. I'm speculating, but perhaps (also) they try to establish who is the initiator, and, perhaps, concentrate their legal fire on him or her!

and if you throw them both in the river, and they drown...?

Although I think I know the reasons behind it, a backlash, or repercussion is now taking place in terms of promiscuity, abstinence, gay life styles and the entire feminist abortion issue.

so what would you propose? What does Ami's ideal moral code look like, in a perfect world? Would you go back to the laws that were in place at the turn of the twentieth century?

 

[amicus]

I thought it might be obvious, but you say I don't take a stand on the article's topic. So here is mine. In return, I have a simple request: that you answer you own question, reproduced below.

I think the Kansas law is a ridiculous intrusion of the state to the 'liberty' of minors. AS the article points out, Kansas is one of the few states, and judicial areas where age differential does not matter re teen sex.
For young teens, I don't think the law should impute nonconsent, absent outside evidence, when the age differential is say, 2 years or less.
Older teens should not have different status than adults, regarding sex and consent, except possibly where their teachers, coaches, and doctors, etc. are involved.

ami: I prefer to begin with the basic, and that is, as a parent of a 12 to 18 year old, what preferences do you have concerning their sexual activity and do you want it enforced by the schools and the courts?

Please answer concisely, esp. regarding whether, and what kind of teen-to-teen sex, if any, you want criminalized.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

That is part of the problem that you seem to ignore, "... 'liberty' of minors..." That is why they are called 'minors', they have no liberty in terms of societal norms, they are not permitted to smoke or drink or marry or even drive an automobile or vote until they reach a certain age.

Our society, at many levels, local, county, state and federal have these laws on the books because citizens pressured their representatives and voted or were voted for by proxy on these issues.

You said you think 'older teens' should be treated as adults, well, change the law then. I think it has been changed, I still do am not comfortable with an immature teen being treated as an adult in criminal court and sentenced to the death penalty or life in prison.

The question you posed me: "Please answer concisely, esp. regarding whether, and what kind of teen-to-teen sex, if any, you want criminalized.[/..."

That is hard for me to answer. I have somewhat of a double standard both in terms of gender and intelligence and general law does not make such distinctions.

I think young girls should be protected. Although many portray my views as sexist, I think women and young girls can be seduced and taken advantage of. I think with a few drinks or a little pot in their system, their rational or moral inhibitions can be compromised.

I also think that because a pubescent girl can become pregnant, a condition that will change her entire life that extraordinary means of protecting her from males is of great importance.

I do not go as far as Muslim countries do, and I think I need not expand on that, but I do think that parents and the wider society have an obligation to protect the innocent.

You also included the caveat, "...except possibly where their teachers, coaches, and doctors, etc. are ..." I would add to that Priests and employers, both male and female.

To me, the whole subject is a really confusing area. When a girl is permitted to marry at age 12 to 16, as is the case in some states, or was, just recently in our history, what does that import to the general behavior of children that age?

Does that State approved marriage license really say anything about the ability of a child to deal with sexual intercourse, pregnancy, motherhood and raising a child?

We do not and have never lived in a perfect society, rather a continuosly evolving one. The pendulum for the past half century has reached apogee in terms of liberal interpretation and has begun to reverse course.

I didn't make it happen, I can only observe and attempt clarity in my observations.

amicus....

 

[BlackSnake]

My frigin' opinion.

Both girls and boys need to be at least 13 to content to sexual incourse. If anyone how disagree with that, please talk to someone who was 13 before. Some girls and boys learn and experiment with sex with their friends. 13 is not too young.

 

[CharleyH]

I'm sure this Kansas law will warm the heart of Amicus, a lover of liberty as defined by the law enforcement authorities.

Trial Opens in Challenge to Law Over Teenage Sex


By JODI RUDOREN
Published: January 31, 2006

WICHITA, Kan., Jan. 30

— A federal trial opened here Monday over whether a Kansas law prohibiting virtually all sexual activity by people under age 16 means health care professionals and educators must report such behavior to state authorities, which some say would stop many teenagers from seeking contraception or treatment for sexually transmitted diseases.

I am not a proponent of child porn, but GIVE ME A FUCKING BREAK. What? No one and none of us had sex under 16? Especially girls - cuz guys just cant get it at that age. Where are freedoms going? Not just under 18, but all sex is being regulated to the ... are we in a Victorian era? Good god this is abhorred to me. One might ask if there were better health education courses would there be fewer transmittable diseases? Good god! To report sexual behavour? Well, that immediately nixes the informed theory and ups the incidence of transmittable diseases. Good god!

Edit to add: (did not read the whole article, well did reluctantly but I was so pissed off from the start)

Is this a new America prohibition era?

 

[Pure]

please clarify

ami said, responding to a question about criminalizing teen-teen sex,

ami: The question you posed me: "Please answer concisely, esp. regarding whether, and what kind of teen-to-teen sex, if any, you want criminalized.[/..."

That is hard for me to answer. I have somewhat of a double standard both in terms of gender and intelligence and general law does not make such distinctions.

I think young girls should be protected. Although many portray my views as sexist, I think women and young girls can be seduced and taken advantage of. I think with a few drinks or a little pot in their system, their rational or moral inhibitions can be compromised.

Is is fair, then to say that you support a law like Kansas 21-503 (Indecent liberties with a child), included in my posting above, provided it is applied only for female victims?

Would you then allow the 'Romeo and Juliet' exception or not (i.e. disregard certain cases where the two are of similar age,)?

{Please note that I had to alter my posting (to which you respond) a bit, after finding the Kansas laws in question.}

 

[amicus]

cloudy]I didn't say that it doesn't exist. I was objecting to "Mexicans in general seem to expresses a disdain for individual human life."

That reminds me of eugenics, and how all people of color (that is, those who aren't white, of course), are inferior.

Any rational opinion you express is thrown out like the baby with the bath water when you dirty it with a statement like that above.

[/I]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Cloudy, I really do not respond in order to argue with you.

I thought it was common knowledge to accept ethnic and racial differences in people.

If you think I 'dirty' a statement by acknowledging that different ethnic, racial and even national characteristics can be generally applied to a population as a whole then so be it.

However, I do seriously think that genetics, the history of our races or ethnic groups is a part of who we are.

If you travel and look around, you will find that almost every culture on earth worships and admires their differences and special characteristics. They celebrate with old customs and folklore and proudly display heritage and ancestry.

To deny that being Spanish is different from Being English or German or Chinese, or Native American is, I think to be blind to the world we live in.

Accuse me of being a bigot or a racist if you wish, I know that not all Mexicans are involved in child sex scandals, I know that not all blacks or native americans are not what ever the general perception is.

But to deny that all ethnic and racial groups have any similarites at all, just does not compute to me.


amicus...

 

[CharleyH]

[/I]

But to deny that all ethnic and racial groups have any similarites at all, just does not compute to me.
amicus...

Well, I did not read Cloudy's post yet, but to grow up in North American for example? We all have similarities no matter what ethnic or religious or an other group.

Hm, I again agree with Ami.

 

[amicus]

ami said, responding to a question about criminalizing teen-teen sex,

ami: The question you posed me: "Please answer concisely, esp. regarding whether, and what kind of teen-to-teen sex, if any, you want criminalized.[/..."

That is hard for me to answer. I have somewhat of a double standard both in terms of gender and intelligence and general law does not make such distinctions.

I think young girls should be protected. Although many portray my views as sexist, I think women and young girls can be seduced and taken advantage of. I think with a few drinks or a little pot in their system, their rational or moral inhibitions can be compromised.

Is is fair, then to say that you support a law like Kansas 21-503 (Indecent liberties with a child), included in my posting above, provided it is applied only for female victims?

Would you then allow the 'Romeo and Juliet' exception or not (i.e. disregard certain cases where the two are of similar age,)?
{Please note that I had to alter my posting (to which you respond) a bit, after finding the Kansas laws in question.}

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I don't write laws, Pure, and I have an intense dislike for politics, the art of compromise.

I do, however, acknowledge that when laws are made, they are very general and wide reaching.

I would like to imagine that each incident could be viewed as an individual event.

The poetic side of me wants to believe that a modern day Romeo and Juliette might indeed exist and be "The Princess Bride" example of 'true love'.

In my world view, I would like to accomodate that possibility.

But as you know, society imposes blanket laws that do not take into consideration the individual circumstances of the incident.

I think children, both male and female, should be protected during that age of innocence. I do not think that is so difficult to understand.

Just how one accomplishes that and serves justice and the individuals involved, is a matter of law...and it took only a few course of pre law to convince me I was not cut out to be a member of that profession.

amicus...