US Republican Politician Solicits Sex

**ken foree** · 04/10/2006, 6:05 PM

Originally Posted by pete

Watching the CBS news last night they made it look like some sort of gay conspiracy saying he was a closet homosexual & that his actions had been covered up by gay staffers. I think they were trying to deflect attention from the House Speaker who appointed him to that position & apparently knew about his online activity a year ago.

i actually think it's a karl rove design. ABC news confirmed that someone on the republican side of the aisle revealed the transcripts about foley to them. in turn, the GOP now gets to further conflate homosexuality (obviously a Democrat cause) and pedophilia, just in time for congressional elections around the corner. already the news media are spinning it this way, with banners and 'talking point' graphics posing the "homosexuality = pedophilia??" non-question. sickening really. rove pulled a similar "ace" out of his sleeve before the 2004 national elections where he managed to get gay marriage bills on the ballot in something like 20 states. this, in turn, mobilized 3 million christian conservative voters and this was about the size of the popular vote difference between bush and kerry.

**First** · 06/10/2006, 12:16 PM

Originally Posted by osarusan

I know that legally 18 is the age of consent.

At what age would you consider a teenager to be sexually aware and able to make their own decisions?

The image in the media is that Foley was 'preying' on this innocent young flower of youth.

Excerpts of messages, which show the young guy replying in kind to Foley's remarks, definitely contradict this.

Osarusan , I have a 17 year old daughter and if I caught a 27 year old sniffing around I would not be responsible for my actions.

**BohsPartisan** · 06/10/2006, 12:44 PM

Originally Posted by First

Osarusan , I have a 17 year old daughter and if I caught a 27 year old sniffing around I would not be responsible for my actions.

Thats understandable as a parent but think back to when you were 17 and I'm sure you got up to lots of things you wouldn't like to think of your daughter getting up to. Of course I am making the assumption you had a life when you were 17.

**First** · 06/10/2006, 2:27 PM

Originally Posted by BohsPartisan

Thats understandable as a parent but think back to when you were 17 and I'm sure you got up to lots of things you wouldn't like to think of your daughter getting up to. Of course I am making the assumption you had a life when you were 17.

Bohs, I had a great youth , wild and varied, and I know that my daughter is enjoying herself, within reason, as she should when she is young, the point I am making is that she is doing this with her own age group.

Older blokes who see girls of an age like my daughter as fair game really are a bunch of sad *******s who were more than likely left behind when they should have been having their day in the sun so to speak.
I make a point of reminding my daughter of this fact often.

**osarusan** · 06/10/2006, 2:38 PM

Originally Posted by First

Osarusan , I have a 17 year old daughter and if I caught a 27 year old sniffing around I would not be responsible for my actions.

Originally Posted by First

Older blokes who see girls of an age like my daughter as fair game really are a bunch of sad *******s who were more than likely left behind when they should have been having their day in the sun so to speak.
I make a point of reminding my daughter of this fact often.

Will you please read what I've posted before you criticise it.

I've said the guy was wrong, I've said he deserves to lose his job, I've said that he was/is morally wrong, but I don't think he is a paedophile.

That's all I've said.

I'm sure that you would be angry if a 27 year old was 'sniffing around' your daughter, but it isnt relevant to what I posted.

**BohsPartisan** · 06/10/2006, 2:39 PM

Theres a difference though between a bloke who goes exclusively for women that are much younger and someone who is interested in a particular individual regardless of an age gap. Most 17 year olds have a decent amount of cop on and as long as everything is consentual then its ok in my book.

**First** · 06/10/2006, 3:16 PM

[QUOTE=osarusan;547972]Will you please read what I've posted before you criticise it.

I've said the guy was wrong, I've said he deserves to lose his job, I've said that he was/is morally wrong, but I don't think he is a paedophile.

That's all I've said.

I apologise I took you out of context but as the legal age in America is 18 , where to you draw the line.

**osarusan** · 06/10/2006, 3:56 PM

Originally Posted by First

I apologise I took you out of context but as the legal age in America is 18 , where to you draw the line.

No worries, it's just I've got a lost of stick for this.

Where do you draw the line? I don't know, but in a previous post I said that we have to ask when a young woman (or man, for that matter) becomes sexually aware. Also I posted the Ages of Consent link from Wikipedia, which showed that Spain's age of consent is 13. Now, that is sick.

While clearly he is legally wrong, I wonder how the age of consent was arrived at and if it is accurate. With people naturally maturing at different rates, no age will always be correct, and I guess it is better to err on the side of caution.

**liam88** · 06/10/2006, 4:16 PM

In affect though it is paedophilia (although not by a dictionary definition). Osarusan you say lots of men find teenagers attractive but there is a definitive difference between looking at a teenager thinking "he/she is attractive but I am 52 and he/she is 16" and actually acting on it. He is sick -end of story. He is grooming someone below the legal age of consent and at a rediculousy huge age gap. I don't see how any 52 year old sending illicit messages to a 16 year old can ever be viewed as anything other the paedohpilia and an illegal and sick action.

**osarusan** · 06/10/2006, 4:42 PM

Originally Posted by liam88

In affect though it is paedophilia (although not by a dictionary definition). Osarusan you say lots of men find teenagers attractive but there is a definitive difference between looking at a teenager thinking "he/she is attractive but I am 52 and he/she is 16" and actually acting on it. He is sick -end of story. He is grooming someone below the legal age of consent and at a rediculousy huge age gap. I don't see how any 52 year old sending illicit messages to a 16 year old can ever be viewed as anything other the paedohpilia and an illegal and sick action.

From Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paedophilia

Pedophilia or paedophilia (see spelling differences) is the paraphilia of being sexually attracted primarily or exclusively to prepubescent or peripubescent children. Persons with this attraction are called pedophiles.

In contrast to the generally accepted medical definition, the term pedophile is also used colloquially to denote significantly older adults who are sexually attracted to adolescents below the local age of consent,[1] as well as those who have sexually abused a child.

Prepubescent or peripubescent children. Not 16 year olds.

Please note the second paragraph, which in effect reads, "some people think it means being interested in underage people, but they are basically wrong."

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.

**liam88** · 06/10/2006, 10:47 PM

Originally Posted by osarusan

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** · 06/10/2006, 11:44 PM

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

**osarusan** · 07/10/2006, 12:24 AM

Originally Posted by liam88

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** · 07/10/2006, 1:10 PM

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:

Originally Posted by wikipedia

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** · 07/10/2006, 2:19 PM

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...