Skail: angryjd: Well if there is a moral behind this story, it is:

DON'T RAPE PEOPLE!!!!!!

But livestock is still okay?


/hotlinked

Or they could take the biblical route and pay the father of the girl fifty shekels of silver and then marry her.

A 15-year old male is clearly biologically old enough to bear children, it is our culture that says a 19-year old female having sex with said male is illegal.

It was unlawful sexual conduct, not unlawful forced sexual conduct.

The rapist/victim tags are a bit harsh for this situation. I am sure the guy still wanted to have sex with her and by my count you're roughly 11-13 when our public school system explains to students what happens when a penis wreaks havoc on a vagina.

That being said, the woman is still an idiot. I hope for the guy's sake that McDonald's is hiring...

Oh man, I sure wish I had been "raped" by a 19-year-old when I was 15!

Oh wait, this isn't the thread where we all talk about how lucky he was and how messed up the sex laws are?

Haven't we been lobbying for an Ohio tag for some time now?

Shouldn't this be reason enough?

Gwendolyn: I had an employee who was 19 with a 5 year old daughter. The father of the kid was 27 and lived in HUD housing. He sued her and won for child support. She was working two jobs, going to college, and had her daughter 3 days on 3 days off in the dumbest custody agreement I've ever seen. He hadn't worked in 2 years but applied for welfare as a single father and they came after her for support. She had to give that jackass $400 a month and he hardly ever actually got the kid.

Also he had it put into the court order that she wasn't allowed to move anywhere with his permission and until the child was 18 she wasn't allowed to move outside the county or she'd forfeit custody. When her mom found out she was trying to get an abortion she locked her daughter inside the house until she was too far along to get one. then once the baby came out it was "Well it's your responsibility now. I'm not helping you raise it."

Most farked up situation I'd ever seen in my life.

man. that is seriously farked up.

Skail: angryjd: Well if there is a moral behind this story, it is:

DON'T RAPE PEOPLE!!!!!!

But livestock is still okay?

Livestock is fine.

Would you be so kind as to pay the shipping on my box?

kronicfeld: The legislature writes the laws. If they want to carve out a magic exception for this, that's their prerogative.

You have absolutely no opinion whatsoever on what the legislature does and does not write into law? Great. Just to make sure you're no hypocrite, you should be stripped of your voting rights though. Just pay your taxes and obey the powers that be. Thanks!

Dreamless: Oh wait, this isn't the thread where we all talk about how lucky he was and how messed up the sex laws are?

Nope, since it involves child support, Weaver95, prominent "mens' rights activist", will automatically paint him as a poor rape victim.

FTA:It makes no difference that it is an adult female charged with unlawful sexual conduct with a minor boy rather than the more common instance of an adult male charged with unlawful sexual conduct with a minor girl.

Cue the "I lol'd" pic.

Can't believe nobody has mentioned this yet.

Bathia_Mapes: t doesn't make sense, nor is it fair or right that the court system is forcing a 15-year old, a minor child, to pay child support to a person accused of statutory rape.

The Logic is kinda like this :

baby exists.

all biological and financial interests and strangers who built up an expectation of support are on the hook forever to support the child, no matter how farked up their situation.

So , if you are the person who incubated the child, the person who impregnated that person, the donor of materials involved with the creator, or the person who subsequently built a relationship with the child expecting that you're a parent.... the court can tap all of you to contribute to the child's upbringing ... except the person with custody, who gets all the money from all the other parties.

conventional Daddy? Check.
conventional Mummy? Check.
Egg-mummy via non-egg-making uterus? Check.
Sperm donor daddy via intercourse? Check.
Sperm-donor daddy via tissue and finger? Check.
Lied-to man with unfaithful woman? Check.
woman raping sexually mature boy? Check.
boy raping sexually mature girl? well... you can't sue a corpse... but Check.

The only parties who don't have to pay are : Jerking-off-in-a-room-into-a-cup sperm donor.
Paid-a-gazillion-dollar contractual surrogate.

The baby needs crap. Adults exist. The Courts will always enslave adults to the 'welfare of children'. even kids you have never seen, held or even had any part of creating.

Gwendolyn: I had an employee who was 19 with a 5 year old daughter. The father of the kid was 27 and lived in HUD housing. He sued her and won for child support. She was working two jobs, going to college, and had her daughter 3 days on 3 days off in the dumbest custody agreement I've ever seen. He hadn't worked in 2 years but applied for welfare as a single father and they came after her for support. She had to give that jackass $400 a month and he hardly ever actually got the kid.

Also he had it put into the court order that she wasn't allowed to move anywhere with his permission and until the child was 18 she wasn't allowed to move outside the county or she'd forfeit custody. When her mom found out she was trying to get an abortion she locked her daughter inside the house until she was too far along to get one. then once the baby came out it was "Well it's your responsibility now. I'm not helping you raise it."

Most farked up situation I'd ever seen in my life.

Wow, syntax

Fuyugai: I don't see anywhere in the article where it mentions rape, so it seems as if he wanted to do it. Why should he not pay?

He is a child, a rape victim and he is being raped again by the courts. Won't someone think of the children and burn this pedophile predator woman at the stake already?

/This message bears the Nancy Grace Seal of Approval.

How old is 15, really?

kronicfeld: Weaver95: so you're ok with a rape victim paying child support to his rapist?

Also, he's paying support TO HIS CHILD, not "to his rapist."

this this this!!

I think the point Weaver is trying to make is this.

According to criminal law, this is a case of statuatory rape, thus creating both a criminal (the woman) and a victim (the boy).

Whether he "consented" (in the sense she didn't tie him down and forcibly have sex with her) or not is not the point: the point is, according to the justice system, he's the victim of this case of statuatory rape, and thus shouldn't be allowed to collect child support (or other money) from the victim of her crime.

It may be "common sense" that he'd have to pay, since it's likely he DID consent to some extent (even if the law refuses the ability to acknowledge that), but since neither criminal law not family law seems to care for "common sense" judgments, she SHOULDN'T be able to collect child support, purely on the principle of the matter.

Whether she's convicted or not isn't an issue, and if anything, it should mean deferring the child support judgment until after the trial if it hasn't already occured.

The Angry Hand of God: Would you be so kind as to pay the shipping on my box?

I love that macro...

MikeMc: Skail: angryjd: Well if there is a moral behind this story, it is:

DON'T RAPE PEOPLE!!!!!!

But livestock is still okay?

Livestock is fine.

Bestiality: Still legal in Florida

Katie98_KT: kronicfeld: Weaver95: so you're ok with a rape victim paying child support to his rapist?

Also, he's paying support TO HIS CHILD, not "to his rapist."

this this this!!

Who is the check going to?

I see both points going on in the thread. However, in defense of the 'victim', according to the article, he sued to get custody of his child and lost. The family court decided to put the baby in the custody of the mother despite the pending statutory rape charges and despite the fact that the step father, who lives in the home with her, has a history of domestic violence and pulled a gun on the woman's sister.

So, I wouldn't say that he is shirking his responsibility. Quite the opposite.

Lancet Jades: I think the point Weaver is trying to make is this.

According to criminal law, this is a case of statuatory rape, thus creating both a criminal (the woman) and a victim (the boy).

Whether he "consented" (in the sense she didn't tie him down and forcibly have sex with her) or not is not the point: the point is, according to the justice system, he's the victim of this case of statuatory rape, and thus shouldn't be allowed to collect child support (or other money) from the victim of her crime.

It may be "common sense" that he'd have to pay, since it's likely he DID consent to some extent (even if the law refuses the ability to acknowledge that), but since neither criminal law not family law seems to care for "common sense" judgments, she SHOULDN'T be able to collect child support, purely on the principle of the matter.

Whether she's convicted or not isn't an issue, and if anything, it should mean deferring the child support judgment until after the trial if it hasn't already occured.

Well explained.

Xyphoid: Wouldn't of happened if the rapist was a man and the victim was a woman.

... because this is about paying child support while the mother has custody. If the victim was a woman and she still had custody, then she wouldn't be paying child support.
Please at least try to retain some connection to the article.

fark this country and it's equal opportunity bullshiat.

So, you hate this country? Why don't you move to Iran, then, jackass? Put your money where your mouth is.

Women came along and asked for equal rights, when in reality all they wanted were all the best rights (equal pay, voting, jobs, doing what they want) but none of the others (responsibility, free-for-all on a sinking ship, paying for dates, the draft)

[Citation needed]

Oh yeah, that's right, I mentioned the DRAFT. If you aren't part of the draft in the USA, then you shouldn't be able to vote. Don't like it? Grow a dick or get some goddamn responsibility and petition your senator/congressman to push for women on the draft.

What draft? This is one of the stupidest arguments I've ever heard, and it's getting pretty widespread lately. There is no draft, Sparky, and there won't be. The second there is, you can start whining about how you may be called up, but until then, you should probably STFU. It just makes you seem petty and weak.

Weaver95: So you're really ok with a rapist getting money from the rape victim...? Remember the bit that's important here - the 'convicted rapist' bit.

Weaver95: I think it's just wonderful that a rape victim can be forced to pay his rapist.

Are you completely retarded? You keep using the word rape when it was STATUTORY RAPE. They mean two completely different things.

If you think for half a second the 15 year old boy in question wasn't 100% willing then you've never met one or have never been one.

The REAL victim in this case is the girl and the baby.

The Boy,15 or not is still the father. that's how it works. deal with it and stop whining.

BTW, Weaver95: so....rape victims can consent to their rape...?

In this case yes.very much so.

I'm sorry, son, but you just got owned.

pics or didnt happen

Welcome to Ohio.

All this argument is just Christian ideology wanting to punish people for having sex.

He wasn't legal, she was, she as a person of age, is legally responsible for the relationship. If they were both under or both over, it would be different. I don't know why the ADULT doesn't have to take responsibility for her actions and the CHILD should.

If you don't believe he was a child, then get the age dropped. That's the only way to get over this consent issue. Legally, she is responsible for the decision. Just because he has a penis doesn't make this his fault. Especially if she's being convicted for unlawful sex, it's already on record.

Theaetetus: Xyphoid: Wouldn't of happened if the rapist was a man and the victim was a woman.

... because this is about paying child support while the mother has custody. If the victim was a woman and she still had custody, then she wouldn't be paying child support.
Please at least try to retain some connection to the article.

fark this country and it's equal opportunity bullshiat.

So, you hate this country? Why don't you move to Iran, then, jackass? Put your money where your mouth is.

Women came along and asked for equal rights, when in reality all they wanted were all the best rights (equal pay, voting, jobs, doing what they want) but none of the others (responsibility, free-for-all on a sinking ship, paying for dates, the draft)

[Citation needed]

Oh yeah, that's right, I mentioned the DRAFT. If you aren't part of the draft in the USA, then you shouldn't be able to vote. Don't like it? Grow a dick or get some goddamn responsibility and petition your senator/congressman to push for women on the draft.

What draft? This is one of the stupidest arguments I've ever heard, and it's getting pretty widespread lately. There is no draft, Sparky, and there won't be. The second there is, you can start whining about how you may be called up, but until then, you should probably STFU. It just makes you seem petty and weak.

Well... some of us do have to register on our 18th birthday
/just sayin'

kronicfeld: Weaver95: From what I understand of family court, that is exactly what they're supposed to do.

You understand sh*t then. Bear in mind you're talking to a family law attorney.

Lancet Jades: I think the point Weaver is trying to make is this.

According to criminal law, this is a case of statuatory rape, thus creating both a criminal (the woman) and a victim (the boy).

Whether he "consented" (in the sense she didn't tie him down and forcibly have sex with her) or not is not the point: the point is, according to the justice system, he's the victim of this case of statuatory rape, and thus shouldn't be allowed to collect child support (or other money) from the victim of her crime.

But what Weaver (and you) are missing is that she doesn't get any child support. The child gets child support. This has nothing to do with criminal law. It's not a reward for criminal behavior - in fact, the only relation to criminal behavior is a negative one: if she's convicted, she'll lose custody, and then he won't have to pay.

flip_flop: What if the guy was 19 and the girl was 15? Would the outcome be the same? I think not.

Well the guy would be paying child support in both situations.

niiiiiiiice.

/wait, what?

Skail: do think it depends a lot more on the circumstances of the "crime." If it was statutory rape and not forcible, then there's a decent likelihood that the sex was consensual, the minor's parents found out, and they filed the criminal charges. Despite the 19-year-old committing a "crime," the fifteen-year-old in this instance should bear at least some responsibility for an act in which he may have willingly participated.

When I was 15, I would have farked the shiate out of any girl under 25 who offered herself. I would have done them all day and all night until I wore the bed out and knocked her up sky-high. Frankly, any woman who enjoins a minor to sleep with her should be on the hook forever. If a kid can 'buy' a house and then walk away from those responsibilities, I think he should be able to do the same here.

This is not about his earning now, it's about putting a boat anchor around whatever his future earnings are.

you know... she could give the baby up for adoption.

... and that's the stinging thing. It's not that this guy is being tapped to pay for his baby. He's being tapped to pay for his baby to stay with a woman who clearly has bad judgment. It's not like he can offer to pay the amount, but only if the kid goes into foster care or an orphanage. THAT would be morally defensible to me.

Theaetetus: What draft? This is one of the stupidest arguments I've ever heard, and it's getting pretty widespread lately. There is no draft, Sparky, and there won't be. The second there is, you can start whining about how you may be called up, but until then, you should probably STFU. It just makes you seem petty and weak.

Agreed. I am sick of men saying "we can go to war but we cannot _______ " STFU already. You AREN'T going to war unless you choose. So until your spoiled ass quits working at Hollister and gears up in Camo, you have no right to even insinuate your draft status has any meaning.

I would feel differently if the mother in this case one of these fully adult teachers who has sex with a student.

In this case, I have a really hard time labeling the older of two partners in a pretty average teenage relationship a "rapist," so the whole "he is being forced to pay child support even though he was raped" argument seems pretty contrived.

MNguy: Well... some of us do have to register on our 18th birthday
/just sayin'

... and?

Tell you what. You hold your breath until there's another draft, and when there is, I will apologize most profusely for belittling your point.

Not that it really was rape in the first place...

Bathia_Mapes: It doesn't make sense, nor is it fair or right that the court system is forcing a 15-year old, a minor child, to pay child support to a person accused of statutory rape.

In Ohio nothing makes sense

matt2891: I see both points going on in the thread. However, in defense of the 'victim', according to the article, he sued to get custody of his child and lost. The family court decided to put the baby in the custody of the mother despite the pending statutory rape charges and despite the fact that the step father, who lives in the home with her, has a history of domestic violence and pulled a gun on the woman's sister.

So, I wouldn't say that he is shirking his responsibility. Quite the opposite.

Classy.

Also, remember that, even though his payments are only $50/mo, they're not going to stay that low. They're only low because he's a teenager and has no real income or ability to do so. When he gets a real job, they will be adjusted upwards.

In short: wear a condom. Even if she's raping you.

cmunic8r99: PlasticMoby: Are you completely retarded? You keep using the word rape when it was STATUTORY RAPE. They mean two completely different things.

which one doesn't get you on the sex offender registry?

I KNOW I KNOW the peeing in the bushes one!

ArbitraryConstant: Weaver95: so you're ok with punishing the victim...? I just wanted to be clear on this one.

I think you're taking liberties with your semantics here.

The whole reasoning behind statutory rape is that minors can't meaningfully offer consent. That doesn't mean the kid didn't consent, just that the woman had no business accepting his consent. But to whatever extent he can consent, he's responsible. If she'd been 15 and he got the same slap on the wrist, nobody would be complaining.

Well, same sex, older woman, how does that diminish his responsibility?

The "extent" to which he can consent is zero. That's why this is called rape, statutory or otherwise. This is also why you can't enter into a contract with a minor. Rape should automatically absolve the victim of financial responsibility if that victim so chooses. It should also be the victim's right to give up the baby for adoption without any further financial burden on him the same way a female rape victim has the right to do. He wasn't extended any of these options. The family court judge, like you, has a distorted grasp of reality incompatible with the rest of society.

If I was the parents of this kid, I'd be petitioning the Attorney General of the state for a review of that judge's credentials and capabilities, if not outright impeachment.

Now, I think that warm spot under the bridge is getting a bit cold. Back you go, before your family misses you.

/ Being a man = Source of $$$ for a court
// All of you men should acquire citizenship in non-extradition countries while you still have the chance

Oh, and Xyphoid? If registration for the draft is to be required, what of the people who for one reason or another can't serve (physical/mental impairments, homosexuality, etc.). Are you basically saying that these people aren't deserving of a voice and a vote in politics?

rubi_con_man: When I was 15, I would have farked the shiate out of any girl under 25 who offered herself

Under 25? @ 15 I would have humped any girl under 25, over 25, one-eyed, hunch backed, bucktoothed, etc...

/I was am a horny bastard
//hunchbacked too much even for me

Kniggit: / Being a man = Source of $$$ for a court
// All of you men should acquire citizenship in non-extradition countries while you still have the chance

No. Waste of time and effort.

It's far simpler to move your money into a bank account that won't be found.