So a GBer says statutory rape isn't rape and no one bats an eyelash.

[LJ_Reloaded]

Some points you make are legitimate ones, but, your link to the case of a woman 'raping' a man is about a teenager, under the age of consent, who got lucky with his neighbour. He's not liable for child support payments until he scores a job. Comparing that to say, a woman who gives birth to a child conceived as the result of a rape is not reallllly the same.

(bold/underline emphasis mine)
So having sex with an underaged kid isn't rape? Because he "got lucky".

Sounds a lot like what Judge G. Todd Baugh said, doesn't it?

The judge claimed Moralez was “as much in control of the situation” as her 49-year-old teacher. He added the girl was “older than her chronological age.”

When are we going to outgrow this outdated nonsense?

 

[subdued_passion]

Consensual sex with girl below 18 no offence: court.


"I am afraid, if that interpretation is allowed, it would mean that the human body of every individual under 18 years is the property of state and no individual below 18 years can be allowed to have the pleasures associated with one's body.

-Additional Sessions Judge Dharmesh Sharma

 

[Sean Renaud]

Well after hell freezes over. Hell, you have a better chance of the Republicans running a Muslim for president than of people outgrowing that "outdated myth".

 

[FGB]

Well after hell freezes over. Hell, you have a better chance of the Republicans running a Muslim for president than of people outgrowing that "outdated myth".

Dude!

We didn't run this last Mother Fucker!

We do need to protect our young people now, as to where the line needs to be drawn or the rules changed... that is a hell of an argument!

 

[Squibbs]

I blinked a few times reading that.

 

[Tryharder62]

PEOPLE, give them time to grow up-male and female. I'm 47 and I'm not sure I am old enough yet. LOL?