Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(TwinCities.com)   Minnesota considers raising minimum age to 21 for A: Rifle purchases, B: Cigarettes, or C: Sleeping with teachers   ( twincities.com) divider line
    More: Awkward, high school, Human sexual behavior, Sexual intercourse, Minnesota high school, high school student, high school teachers, Attorney James Backstrom, Burnsville High School  
•       •       •

3336 clicks; posted to Main » on 12 Mar 2018 at 11:53 PM (31 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



47 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2018-03-12 11:28:28 PM  
I'm sure that everything else was fixed in Minnesota; so they decided to take a look at this before closing up shop....
 
2018-03-12 11:58:58 PM  

iheartscotch: I'm sure that everything else was fixed in Minnesota; so they decided to take a look at this before closing up shop....


Eddie Van Halen unavailable for comment?

Van Halen - Hot For Teacher
Youtube bMPlPJP2brw
 
2018-03-12 11:59:19 PM  
Minnesota sucks, we knew this.
 
2018-03-12 11:59:57 PM  
Inevitable conclusion of having a republican controlled house, inane legislation.
 
2018-03-13 12:01:47 AM  
Too many boys getting high five injuries?
 
2018-03-13 12:02:26 AM  
There's a trope of 20 something women going back to high school to bang the sort of boys they were ignored by when less mature. You know, because the boys they wanted were banging the mature 25 year old women who came back to bang seniors because so on and so on.
 
2018-03-13 12:09:44 AM  
I for one think that if you're 18 you should be free to take your teacher on a date to the gun range, then have a nice cigarette after taking her home and enjoying nice consensual sex.
 
2018-03-13 12:11:59 AM  
I think they'll find that if the "children" in question are legal adults, the law will not stand.

A teacher having sex with their student can be made a firing offense once there is a clearly laid out policy forbidding it.

However, you can't make it illegal for consenting adults to have sex.
 
2018-03-13 12:14:04 AM  

BullBearMS: I think they'll find that if the "children" in question are legal adults, the law will not stand.

A teacher having sex with their student can be made a firing offense once there is a clearly laid out policy forbidding it.

However, you can't make it illegal for consenting adults to have sex.


You sure about that? I thought incest was illegal in most states, but I'm not a southerner so I haven't looked into it.
 
2018-03-13 12:27:02 AM  

Frank N Stein: BullBearMS: I think they'll find that if the "children" in question are legal adults, the law will not stand.

A teacher having sex with their student can be made a firing offense once there is a clearly laid out policy forbidding it.

However, you can't make it illegal for consenting adults to have sex.

You sure about that? I thought incest was illegal in most states, but I'm not a southerner so I haven't looked into it.


We had a story in the last month or so with some state that tried such a law, only to see the first case based on it tossed out.
 
2018-03-13 12:31:34 AM  
This country sure has a difficult time figuring out how old you need to be to make an adult decision.
 
2018-03-13 12:38:35 AM  

BullBearMS: I think they'll find that if the "children" in question are legal adults, the law will not stand.

A teacher having sex with their student can be made a firing offense once there is a clearly laid out policy forbidding it.

However, you can't make it illegal for consenting adults to have sex.


I'm pretty sure there are laws on the books criminalizing sexual relationships between clients and their therapist or social worker.
 
2018-03-13 12:42:27 AM  
I wonder if the teacher/student sleeping thing has been more an issue with city schools or charter schools - or if it's pretty much equal?
 
2018-03-13 12:43:56 AM  
 
2018-03-13 12:53:05 AM  

BullBearMS: I think they'll find that if the "children" in question are legal adults, the law will not stand.

A teacher having sex with their student can be made a firing offense once there is a clearly laid out policy forbidding it.

However, you can't make it illegal for consenting adults to have sex.


As far as I know it is fairly universal across the US for it to be illegal to have sex with an 18 year old high school student if you teach or coach in the same school/organization that they are a student.

So now you get the slippery slope, if it is legal at a trade school or college, why is it illegal at the high school level.

My personal feelings? It is unprofessional to have sex with a legal aged student under your influence, and ought to be a firing offense, or at least be put on probation. But not a legal offense.
 
2018-03-13 12:59:40 AM  

powhound: My personal feelings? It is unprofessional to have sex with a legal aged student under your influence, and ought to be a firing offense, or at least be put on probation. But not a legal offense.


I'm not a fan of consensual sexual relationships based on a power imbalance situation. That would include student/teacher, therapist/patient, or employer/employee.

However, making something a firing offense and making something criminal are two entirely different things.
 
2018-03-13 01:02:45 AM  

BullBearMS: powhound: My personal feelings? It is unprofessional to have sex with a legal aged student under your influence, and ought to be a firing offense, or at least be put on probation. But not a legal offense.

I'm not a fan of consensual sexual relationships based on a power imbalance situation. That would include student/teacher, therapist/patient, or employer/employee.

However, making something a firing offense and making something criminal are two entirely different things.


I've heard bits and pieces forbidding therapists from banging their charges for some period after the end of their professional relationship, but I don't remember if that's a law somewhere, or a ethics board thing.
 
2018-03-13 01:07:52 AM  

BullBearMS: powhound: My personal feelings? It is unprofessional to have sex with a legal aged student under your influence, and ought to be a firing offense, or at least be put on probation. But not a legal offense.

I'm not a fan of consensual sexual relationships based on a power imbalance situation. That would include student/teacher, therapist/patient, or employer/employee.

However, making something a firing offense and making something criminal are two entirely different things.


Exactly, if of legal age it absolutely should not be a legal/criminal offense provided it was consensual. And that's kind of my point about the power imbalance. I was talking specifically about schools but the same goes for any professional relationship where one party has power over the other.
 
2018-03-13 01:09:42 AM  
Even in the military they forbid relationships/marriages between members if they are a paygrade or two apart. I forget specifically and it may have changed, but that's a thing in the military. There are fine points involved regarding enlisted and commissioned, etc. But that's the gist of it.
 
2018-03-13 01:12:53 AM  

BullBearMS: rzrwiresunrise: BullBearMS: I think they'll find that if the "children" in question are legal adults, the law will not stand.

A teacher having sex with their student can be made a firing offense once there is a clearly laid out policy forbidding it.

However, you can't make it illegal for consenting adults to have sex.

I'm pretty sure there are laws on the books criminalizing sexual relationships between clients and their therapist or social worker.

You could pull their license, I'm sure, but you can't make consensual sex between legal adults a criminal offense. It's been tried.

The Arkansas Supreme Court struck down a state law on Thursday that banned teachers from having sex with students under age 21, overturning a sexual assault conviction against a former teacher who had a consensual relationship with an 18-year-old student.

In a 4-3 decision, the court vacated the conviction against David Paschal, a former teacher in the Elkins School District in northern Arkansas, because the girl was legally an adult during the relationship.

"Regardless of how we feel about Paschal's conduct, which could correctly be referred to as reprehensible, we cannot abandon our duty to uphold the rule of law when a case presents distasteful facts," Chief Justice Jim Hannah wrote in the decision.

The issue presented to the court hinged on"Paschal's fundamental right to engage in private, consensual, noncommercial acts of sexual intimacy with an adult. We hold that it does," the majority said.


That's great for AR and the South's reputation for acceptance of inappropriate sexual behavior, but MN statute 609.344(1)(h) makes it 3rd degree sexual misconduct for a psychotherapist, clergy member, correctional worker or provider of special transportation services to have sex with a client-even with consent-, so it's no great stretch for them to apply the same rationale to teachers having sex with students even of majority age.

Besides, if a 20yo is still in high school...? There are issues there no teacher should be exploiting for their own sexual gratification.
 
2018-03-13 01:16:28 AM  
Last year, an 18-year-old Burnsville High School student reported having sexual relations with a male teacher, Backstrom said. His office investigated but could not press charges.

So the 18yr old student, who had the relations with said teacher, also reported the teacher? Apparently didn't realize 18 means they are an adult?

Maybe the cops could get the teacher for preying on the mentally disabled.
 
2018-03-13 01:20:48 AM  

rzrwiresunrise: MN statute 609.344(1)(h) makes it 3rd degree sexual misconduct for a psychotherapist, clergy member, correctional worker or provider of special transportation services to have sex with a client-even with consent-


After the Lawrence v. Texas Supreme Court case, any lawyer worth his or her salt could have that tossed out.
 
2018-03-13 01:38:24 AM  

BullBearMS: rzrwiresunrise: MN statute 609.344(1)(h) makes it 3rd degree sexual misconduct for a psychotherapist, clergy member, correctional worker or provider of special transportation services to have sex with a client-even with consent-

After the Lawrence v. Texas Supreme Court case, any lawyer worth his or her salt could have that tossed out.


Yeah, ALL the lawyers in MN must be worthless.

media.giphy.comView Full Size
 
2018-03-13 01:55:02 AM  

rzrwiresunrise: BullBearMS: rzrwiresunrise: MN statute 609.344(1)(h) makes it 3rd degree sexual misconduct for a psychotherapist, clergy member, correctional worker or provider of special transportation services to have sex with a client-even with consent-

After the Lawrence v. Texas Supreme Court case, any lawyer worth his or her salt could have that tossed out.

Yeah, ALL the lawyers in MN must be worthless.

[media.giphy.com image 245x285]


Because all laws immediately disappear from the books when a Supreme Court decision invalidates them?

Lawrence v. Texas holds that private consensual sex gets the protection of the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection clause.

That's kind of the end of it, invalid law still on the books or not.
 
2018-03-13 02:03:45 AM  

BullBearMS: Because all laws immediately disappear from the books when a Supreme Court decision invalidates them?


Because I'm sure there have been MN lawyers who have tried this very argument.

BullBearMS: Lawrence v. Texas holds that private consensual sex gets the protection of the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection clause.


I'm sure the state has no compelling interest here.

BullBearMS: That's kind of the end of it, invalid law still on the books or not.


LOL I bet you win a lot of arguments against yourself.
 
2018-03-13 02:07:28 AM  

rzrwiresunrise: I'm sure there have been MN lawyers who have tried this very argument.


[Citation Needed]
 
2018-03-13 02:27:12 AM  

BullBearMS: rzrwiresunrise: I'm sure there have been MN lawyers who have tried this very argument.

[Citation Needed]


I'm betting you could make a killing putting on a seminar teaching all those MN defense attorneys the one argument they never thought of that would have gotten their client off for sleeping with their 18yo student. Because no lawyer in the history of lawyering has ever thought of challenging the constitutionality of a law as a defense. You might even be able to teach the state to set up a process that would allow defendants to, say, appeal convictions on the grounds that a law is unconstitutional.

Look, I'm not saying that an argument can't be made that the law MN is considering would violate the Equal Protection Clause, but to dismiss it out of hand when there is a valid compelling state interest in protecting not only the person in the subordinate position in a power relationship, but also the integrity of a profession for which it issues a license seems a tad unsophisticated. Lawrence v. Texas isn't some panacea that cures all instances that seem to run afoul of equal protection.
 
2018-03-13 02:30:51 AM  

BullBearMS: However, you can't make it illegal for consenting adults to have sex.


Prostitutes and Johns everywhere rejoice.
 
2018-03-13 03:18:39 AM  

rzrwiresunrise: BullBearMS: rzrwiresunrise: I'm sure there have been MN lawyers who have tried this very argument.

[Citation Needed]

I'm betting you could make a killing putting on a seminar teaching all those MN defense attorneys the one argument they never thought of that would have gotten their client off for sleeping with their 18yo student. Because no lawyer in the history of lawyering has ever thought of challenging the constitutionality of a law as a defense. You might even be able to teach the state to set up a process that would allow defendants to, say, appeal convictions on the grounds that a law is unconstitutional.

Look, I'm not saying that an argument can't be made that the law MN is considering would violate the Equal Protection Clause, but to dismiss it out of hand when there is a valid compelling state interest in protecting not only the person in the subordinate position in a power relationship, but also the integrity of a profession for which it issues a license seems a tad unsophisticated. Lawrence v. Texas isn't some panacea that cures all instances that seem to run afoul of equal protection.


Again, all you need to do is provide a citation that backs up the argument you're making.

I've already cited a state Supreme Court decision that explicitly mentions Lawrence v. Texas as a rationale for overturning just such a law.
 
2018-03-13 03:23:35 AM  

impaler: BullBearMS: However, you can't make it illegal for consenting adults to have sex.

Prostitutes and Johns everywhere rejoice.


Prostitutes and Johns aren't prosecuted for the consensual sex between adults part.
 
2018-03-13 04:25:48 AM  
Won't this just incentivize students dropping out, either of their own' initiative, or that of the creeps banging them?
 
2018-03-13 04:56:43 AM  

BummerDuck: Last year, an 18-year-old Burnsville High School student reported having sexual relations with a male teacher, Backstrom said. His office investigated but could not press charges.

So the 18yr old student, who had the relations with said teacher, also reported the teacher? Apparently didn't realize 18 means they are an adult?

Maybe the cops could get the teacher for preying on the mentally disabled.


Likely scenario: Student sleeps with (dumb) teacher in exchange for easy A, gets the "D" and still gets a C-, tries to rat teacher out for misconduct as revenge.

Either didn't realize 18 y/os aren't covered under the state statute, or just wanted the teacher fired.
 
2018-03-13 05:09:19 AM  

powhound: BullBearMS: powhound: My personal feelings? It is unprofessional to have sex with a legal aged student under your influence, and ought to be a firing offense, or at least be put on probation. But not a legal offense.

I'm not a fan of consensual sexual relationships based on a power imbalance situation. That would include student/teacher, therapist/patient, or employer/employee.

However, making something a firing offense and making something criminal are two entirely different things.

Exactly, if of legal age it absolutely should not be a legal/criminal offense provided it was consensual. And that's kind of my point about the power imbalance. I was talking specifically about schools but the same goes for any professional relationship where one party has power over the other.


Yeah, but the question becomes just how consensual was it really? If the power imbalance played a part in the student's decision to go along with it....
 
2018-03-13 07:25:45 AM  

oldsbone: powhound: BullBearMS: powhound: My personal feelings? It is unprofessional to have sex with a legal aged student under your influence, and ought to be a firing offense, or at least be put on probation. But not a legal offense.

I'm not a fan of consensual sexual relationships based on a power imbalance situation. That would include student/teacher, therapist/patient, or employer/employee.

However, making something a firing offense and making something criminal are two entirely different things.

Exactly, if of legal age it absolutely should not be a legal/criminal offense provided it was consensual. And that's kind of my point about the power imbalance. I was talking specifically about schools but the same goes for any professional relationship where one party has power over the other.

Yeah, but the question becomes just how consensual was it really? If the power imbalance played a part in the student's decision to go along with it....


There's less imbalance than you think. The student, especially if they want to do a little creative lying, is in a position to do a lot more damage to the teacher than vice-versa.
 
2018-03-13 07:59:30 AM  
Good.  That takes a bunch of suitable young men out of the selection process and puts me ever so slightly closer to the hawt young teachers with crazy eyes.  I mean, it's like moving Pluto 5 feet closer to Earth, but it is closer.
 
2018-03-13 08:41:09 AM  
We need to quick kink shaming over power imbalances here. The sub hold all the power in a relationship anyway. The dom just looks like they are in control.
 
2018-03-13 08:41:36 AM  
A simple fix really....

Amendment XXVIII
     The age of Majority within the United States shall be determined by the age that a person may be compelled into involuntary service on behalf of the nation. Such persons shall then be deemed to be full citizens with all the rights, freedoms, and responsibilities thereof. Congress, and the States, shall make no law abridging the free exercise of these enumerated rights.

...if you can be called up to go to war, you're an adult.

/ just a random thought - not looking to get flamed.
 
2018-03-13 08:41:41 AM  
Edit : *quit kink shaming
 
2018-03-13 08:58:04 AM  
Are we really at the point where we're not OK with two people over the age of 18 having consensual sex?  Really?
 
2018-03-13 09:08:12 AM  

BullBearMS: rzrwiresunrise: BullBearMS: I think they'll find that if the "children" in question are legal adults, the law will not stand.

A teacher having sex with their student can be made a firing offense once there is a clearly laid out policy forbidding it.

However, you can't make it illegal for consenting adults to have sex.

I'm pretty sure there are laws on the books criminalizing sexual relationships between clients and their therapist or social worker.

You could pull their license, I'm sure, but you can't make consensual sex between legal adults a criminal offense. It's been tried.

The Arkansas Supreme Court struck down a state law on Thursday that banned teachers from having sex with students under age 21, overturning a sexual assault conviction against a former teacher who had a consensual relationship with an 18-year-old student.

In a 4-3 decision, the court vacated the conviction against David Paschal, a former teacher in the Elkins School District in northern Arkansas, because the girl was legally an adult during the relationship.

"Regardless of how we feel about Paschal's conduct, which could correctly be referred to as reprehensible, we cannot abandon our duty to uphold the rule of law when a case presents distasteful facts," Chief Justice Jim Hannah wrote in the decision.

The issue presented to the court hinged on"Paschal's fundamental right to engage in private, consensual, noncommercial acts of sexual intimacy with an adult. We hold that it does," the majority said.


The key here is consent and coercion. How can an individual freely consent to something where the other party holds considerable power over their future? Just like inmates cannot freely consent to relationships with guards can pupils freely consent without any implicit or explicit coercion? 

It's a tough call and each individual case will have to be looked at the merits. A blanket ban of teachers having relationships with any 18 who is attending any school is massive overreach. Outlawing teachers at the same school on the other hand isn't.
 
2018-03-13 11:06:43 AM  
Anyone remember when Americans of all political stripes wanted to keep government out of the bedroom?

Because I'm not that old.
 
2018-03-13 11:10:18 AM  

Mr. Magi: A simple fix really....

Amendment XXVIII
     The age of Majority within the United States shall be determined by the age that a person may be compelled into involuntary service on behalf of the nation. Such persons shall then be deemed to be full citizens with all the rights, freedoms, and responsibilities thereof. Congress, and the States, shall make no law abridging the free exercise of these enumerated rights.

...if you can be called up to go to war, you're an adult.

/ just a random thought - not looking to get flamed.


Given that we haven't had a draft since 1973, there may be a slight problem with your plan.
 
2018-03-13 12:21:43 PM  
I implore everyone to stop using the stupid euphemism "sleeping with." I think we can all handle the more accurate phrase, "having sex with."
 
2018-03-13 12:30:18 PM  
In Canada you can get charged with 'sexual interference'...  (tho kids cited in this particular article were under 18)
 
2018-03-13 12:31:15 PM  

20/20: I implore everyone to stop using the stupid euphemism "sleeping with." I think we can all handle the more accurate phrase, "having sex with."


IF it makes you happy, I'm pretty sure that by the end of the current administration, "farking" (in its original sense) will be an acceptable term on broadcast news.
 
2018-03-13 10:22:15 PM  

g.fro: Mr. Magi: A simple fix really....

Amendment XXVIII
     The age of Majority within the United States shall be determined by the age that a person may be compelled into involuntary service on behalf of the nation. Such persons shall then be deemed to be full citizens with all the rights, freedoms, and responsibilities thereof. Congress, and the States, shall make no law abridging the free exercise of these enumerated rights.

...if you can be called up to go to war, you're an adult.

/ just a random thought - not looking to get flamed.

Given that we haven't had a draft since 1973, there may be a slight problem with your plan.

The Amendment never mentions the draft, I did.
https://www.sss.gov/
If Congress authorizes a draft then Selective Service has the list. It's the law that men register, or be denied benefits everyone else has without registration. Thus involuntary service to the nation.
 
2018-03-13 10:58:01 PM  

Mr. Magi: g.fro: Mr. Magi: A simple fix really....

Amendment XXVIII
     The age of Majority within the United States shall be determined by the age that a person may be compelled into involuntary service on behalf of the nation. Such persons shall then be deemed to be full citizens with all the rights, freedoms, and responsibilities thereof. Congress, and the States, shall make no law abridging the free exercise of these enumerated rights.

...if you can be called up to go to war, you're an adult.

/ just a random thought - not looking to get flamed.

Given that we haven't had a draft since 1973, there may be a slight problem with your plan.
The Amendment never mentions the draft, I did.
https://www.sss.gov/
If Congress authorizes a draft then Selective Service has the list. It's the law that men register, or be denied benefits everyone else has without registration. Thus involuntary service to the nation.


No it's farking not. Having to register or Selective Service so you can get your federal student aid is not service, involuntary or otherwise, to the nation. We do not have conscription in this country and, short of events which will probably mean this nation is already finished, never will again. Every time we have had a draft, it was done without already having men registered; the current SSS is a vestige and a joke. Since we do not have conscription, your plan would not work. BTW, the draft in WWII did not include 18 year-olds.
 
Displayed 47 of 47 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter



Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report