Text 9825, 39 rader
Skriven 2008-01-15 18:06:10 av David Drummond (3:640/305)
   Kommentar till text 9802 av Michiel van der Vlist (2:280/5555)
Ärende: Myths
=============
Michiel van der Vlist -> David Drummond wrote:

 LW>>> is a minor) with the intent to commit lewd acts.  So when a guy
 LW>>> shows up at the house he *THINKS* is occupied by a minor, with
 LW>>> the intention of satisfying feelings of a lustful nature, that is
 LW>>> considered child molestation.

 DD>> Does this same law allow for a bloke who thinks the girl is older than
 DD>> the age of consent (when she isn't) the same leeway?

 MvdV> Obviously not. As shown by the case that Ward came up with; the Belgian
 MvdV> boy who met wit a US girl who he believed to be 16, because she told him
 MvdV> so and who was actually 13.

So - he intended to have sex with a girl over the age of consent and got busted
anyway (assuming 16yo is the age of consent in the area of the event as it is
in many states of Oz)?

I find it interesting that a girl who is a year or two under the age of consent
can make a rational decision that she is hungry and needs to eat, or thirsty
and needs to drink, or bloated and needs to shit, tired and needs to sleep, but
she cannot decide that she has an itch between her big toes and needs to
fuck...

What happened to her rights? It wasn't so long ago they were marrying them off
and breeding with them, in the USA and in other parts of the world.

It this "age of consent" a magical number at which a girl (or boy for those
inclined) is suddenly blessed with enormous insight as to what her natural
urges mean and require?

-- 

regards

David

---
 * Origin: If we'd been meant to get about naked, we'd be born that way.