On 03/21/06 at 22:19:49, Crpls wrote:I would guess so. I can't imagine he'd have to completely leave wrestling just for fucking another wrestler's sister unless she was a minor.

On 03/21/06 at 22:39:59, AllPowerfulGARTH wrote:Didn't Randy Savage allegedly (or at least try to) boink Stephanie McMahon when she was still underage, way back in the day?

On 03/22/06 at 23:57:54, rey619 wrote:Rumors has it that Homicide's sister was about 15-17.. so it was pretty bad.. but pedophile? Well, it all depends.. in most European countries, the under-age age is 15-16... but I guess you have to be at least 18 in the US, so that would make you a pedophile... technically.

I was 20 at the time and she was 16.

On 03/23/06 at 22:46:52, Anubis wrote:
In my opinion, I think teenagers should all be legal so long as it's completely obvious that they were not manipulated.

On 03/25/06 at 06:23:57, Anubis wrote:
I always come back to a case I heard of one time, and this is the reason I'm so adamantly opposed to statutory rape laws. One time, a young couple, both 17, who lived in a state where the legal age was 18, were together for quite a while and sexually active for months. The guy's birthday came three weeks before the girl's birthday, and the parents didn't approve of the relationship. Once he had his birthday, they turned him in, and because of these stupid laws, he was sentenced to 10 years. 10 years. That ain't right. It's fucking stupid, and I would do anything it takes to fight against stupidity like that. I hate these lawmakers who think they know best and that they know how to protect us. It's nonsense.

On 03/25/06 at 16:26:19, rey619 wrote:Seriously? I would die for a link or something to verify that story, it sounds too incredible even for US standards.

On 03/25/06 at 06:23:57, Anubis wrote:I don't think the sex age should be set based on whether or not a girl is ready for a baby, though. I think it'd be better to teach responsibility and how girls can protect themselves. I've seen all too many "younger girls" be the actual manipulator.

I just think more freedom is better. Advocate birth control and safe sex over laws. There is a huge world of difference between statutory rape and child molestation, but right now the law counts them as pretty much one and the same.

Statutory rape is a product of a conservative legislative branch trying to impose more and more restrictions on society. Honestly, I think a strict age is a bad idea because all people mature at different rates. I've seen 15-year-olds (male and female) who were extremely mature, more than most adults, but I've also seen 30-year-olds who were as immature as a grade-schooler. Strict ages just don't do justice.

I always come back to a case I heard of one time, and this is the reason I'm so adamantly opposed to statutory rape laws. One time, a young couple, both 17, who lived in a state where the legal age was 18, were together for quite a while and sexually active for months. The guy's birthday came three weeks before the girl's birthday, and the parents didn't approve of the relationship. Once he had his birthday, they turned him in, and because of these stupid laws, he was sentenced to 10 years. 10 years. That ain't right. It's fucking stupid, and I would do anything it takes to fight against stupidity like that. I hate these lawmakers who think they know best and that they know how to protect us. It's nonsense.

Now child molestation, those laws are good. Those cross a whole different line altogether. Personally, I believe a person would have to be blind to not see the difference between child molestation and so-called "statutory rape".

I'm just against all the interference for that kind of dumb reason. I think laws should be put into effect using reasoning and judgment. The letter-of-the-law outlook just doesn't work in the real world.

On 03/25/06 at 16:26:19, rey619 wrote:Seriously? I would die for a link or something to verify that story, it sounds too incredible even for US standards.

On 03/25/06 at 21:47:45, Anubis wrote:Yeah, that's not the case. I doubt I'd be able to find a link, it's not recent anymore. All I know is that it was the parents who did the turning in, and it was 18 and 17 with only a few weeks to go.

@91: As to your question, I think we should let people make their own mistakes. Nature has a way of balancing itself out. If parents are responsible and good, the children can turn out just fine regardless of when they went active. Quite honestly, to answer your other question as to who turned out better, I can honestly say "50/50" to that. A lot of times, the girls who waited were so stuck up that they were even more immature than the stoner girls getting laid all the time and labelled sluts.

Basically, there should be no law regarding statutory rape, but rather "legal guidelines". We need those in a country as diverse as this, honestly. Not just for that issue, either, but for many others as well. Sometimes a strict laws hurts more than it helps, as it the case with what I cited. There should be legal guidelines, and then each case should be looked at by merit. Wouldn't be perfect, but it'd be better than things are right now.

@HugeRockStar: Tipper Gore is an anomoly, not a typical liberal. Same with Hillary Clinton. Those two specifically are bad news, bad to the bone. I despise them both. Most of the time, it's conservative fruitloops like Pat Robertson who push for these kind of laws. I should know, I was a conservative for many years. Now we've deviated from Reagan's ideals and swayed over to Bush's, which is bad and the reason I'm switching parties this year at last. Honestly, the reason Reagan was probably so level-headed was because he used to be a Democrat himself, so he was more open (no, he wasn't perfect, and I disliked several of his views, but overall, he did good). Anyway, point is, conservatives are normally the ones pushing for this kind of censorship crap. There are crazy people on both sides to be sure, but right now the Republicans are worse. Ask me again in ten years and we'll see if that's changed, ya?

On 03/25/06 at 21:47:45, Anubis wrote:
@91: As to your question, I think we should let people make their own mistakes. Nature has a way of balancing itself out.

Anubis:

@91: As to your question, I think we should let people make their own mistakes.  Nature has a way of balancing itself out.

On 03/25/06 at 21:56:42, HugeRockStar760 wrote:
And I totally disagree. Conservatives, by nature, want less government in our lives.

On 03/26/06 at 03:41:59, John Proulx wrote:

So you'd agree with the statement that, as it stands today, we have no true conservatives in power in the United States? I mean, really, the government has gotten deeper into our lives and has expanded at a faster rate (even without the defense spending, the Medicare prescription drug program is the biggest expansion of government since FDR, and then there's No Child Left Behind, the Supreme Court ruling on local governments taking property, the Iraq war, the DHS...the list is nearly endless) with the Republicans in charge over the past six years than any Democratic administration could ever dream.

On 03/25/06 at 23:38:10, Psymin1 wrote:That is absurd when you're talking about playing with the lives of innocent children. A girl has a baby at 13, and her parents don't allow her to have an abortion, or she can't afford it, whatever, so she's forced to have the baby. This 13 year old girl is forced to live with this child, and try to raise it, etc. She can't care for it, and the baby get sick and dies, and you're gonna say "oh well, at least it's mother learned a lesson."?? That is ridiculous.

On 03/25/06 at 23:38:10, Psymin1 wrote:Now, lemme say that I am 150% pro-choice, and VERY liberal, but I don't agree with killing a child after it's born just to teach someone a lesson. That seems insane to me!

I agree with you on all that.  None of that makes statutory rape legislation a good idea.  A 13-year-old girl is just as like to get pregnant by a 13-year-old boy (which is perfectly legal) as by an older man.  Actually, she's more likely to get pregnant by the kid, because the man is likely more capable of taking precaution.

So while I agree with everything you said, it doesn't point to statutory rape laws as a good idea or helpful in the least.  At least the man can be forced to support the kid.  The same can't be said about the young boy now can it.

I'm not saying we should encourage sex, I'm saying we should teach instead of punish.  It's important that I get that across, especially since you and I get along pretty good, Psymin.  I'm cool with you, and I don't wanna give the wrong impression.

On 03/26/06 at 04:44:01, HugeRockStar760 wrote:

Well, it's hard to label all Republicans as not being true conservatives. However, Bush really has strayed away from what a conservative is. With that said, I'm more comfortable with Bush in charge than with John Kerry. I like the fact Bush sticks with a position, even if it's not popular (due mostly to the liberal media not giving any positives aka brainwashing).

On 03/26/06 at 04:44:01, HugeRockStar760 wrote:
The Iraq war was the right thing to do. However, on hindsight, it seems like Iran would've been the better choice. Although, the wmds are in Syria, so its not like Iraq was being truthful.

On 03/26/06 at 04:44:01, HugeRockStar760 wrote:
And like I said, a lot of the spending is on military, which is fine with me. I'm more comfortable with spending on military than on a lot of the liberal programs which were unnecessary.

On 03/27/06 at 01:33:30, John Proulx wrote:

You do realize there's no liberal media any more, right? Individuals in the media on average may be liberal, but non-partisan studies have shown that, for quite some time now, overall media coverage has leaned conservative.