US Republican Politician Solicits Sex

[liam88]

Liam, I have said it was illegal, (although I heard on CNN today that the age of consent in Washington D.C is 16) and I have said it was wrong, but it is not paedophilia.

I'd rather support medical experts' definition of paedophilia than yours.

People can hit puberty any time from 14 to 18......you reckon whether this guy is a pedo or not comes down to whether the lad he was grooming was going through puberty (thus peripubetic) or had completed puberty.

Rubbish he's a 50 odd year old interested in 16 year old boys and acting on it. Paedophilia in practice.

[BohsPartisan]

14 to 18? What??? Puberty is normally anytime between 11 and 14 surely?

[osarusan]

you reckon whether this guy is a pedo or not comes down to whether the lad he was grooming was going through puberty (thus peripubetic) or had completed puberty.

Rubbish he's a 50 odd year old interested in 16 year old boys and acting on it. Paedophilia in practice.

As to the first part of your post, yes, I reckon that whether the lad is pre, peri, or post puberty will define whether he is a paedophile or not. This is after all how paedophilia is defined. Your view that puberty can begin between 14 to 18 is an estimate I've never seen before, and I'd like to see the evidence you have to back it up.

As to the second part, given that by your definition, puberty can happen 14 and 18, and consequently the lad in question could already have reached puberty, how can you so confidently say "paedophilia in practice".

I am assuming that you dont know whether the guy has reached puberty or not yet, so it is wrong to condemn him when you are not sure of the evidence. I also dont know about the young guy in question, but my age range for puberty would fall into a bracket which ends before 16.

Would you consider it paedophilia if a 21 year old was interested in a 16 year old? You keep mentioning the huge age difference, which I know is disturbing, but I dont see how it is relevant to this debate.

[liam88]

Ok first let me correct myself -I meant 11 to 18 not 14 to 18.

Look at this section from wikipedia on the conclusion of puberty:




In a general sense, the conclusion of puberty is reproductive maturity. Criteria for defining the conclusion may differ for different purposes: attainment of the ability to reproduce, achievement of maximal adult height, maximal gonadal size, or adult sex hormone levels. Maximal adult height is achieved at an average age of 14.5 years for American girls and 17.5 years for American boys.


This raises two important issues relevent to the debate:

1. If you take maximal adult height as the conclusion of puberty (a viewpoint of many biological scientists) the average age of the conclusion of puberty from American boys is 17.5 years -thus it can be assumed to a relative degree that the boy in question is peripubescent thus Foley is a paedophile.

2. The very fact that it can be debated when puberty ends means that it is an inprecise science to decide when somebody is a paedophile. Take for example somebody could molest a sixteen year old wose voice had broken and was now fertile but had not reached maximam height. If you took fertility or voice breaking as the conclusion of puberty the offender is question is not a paedophile; if you took maximam height as the conclusion of puberty the offender in question is a paedophile. It is for this very reason that age of consent laws exist. In Washington there are various laws defining age of consent including references to the age difference and immoral communication with a minor (under 18). Foley is treading on very dangerous ground and under the Washignton laws can easily be interpreted as a paedophile.

[pete]

I think this thread was a discussion of the rights/wrongs of the politicians actions & the political fall out. I think the paedophila discussion is pointless as I don't understand what sides ye on & going around in circles...

:confused: