Confessed rapist gets 45 days. Judge "14 year old victim wasn't as innocent due to sexual history.

originally posted by: iosolomon
Actually, the Bible says that I CAN generalize a whole society because of YOUR ELECTED officials. But as you said, this isn't a theology discussion. So don't tell me how I can and cannot interpret the Bible. My interpretation is correct, and you would be foolish not to listen to me.

Can you post some sources to back that up? What is the specific passage in the Bible that allows for generalizing a whole society based on the elected officials actions?

Wait...didn't you say the bible is fiction? Yes! You did....

Hey, we all know the Bible is fiction, but whether it be so or not, I still hold all Americans to that same standard, myself included.

Alas, this is a discussion about the sentence on a rape, not about the bible or Americans being sheep.
Nice derail.

a reply to: iosolomon

Your posts come off as extremely insulting and ignorant. Rape is rape, regardless of who the victim is and the sentence should be the same whether it was a porn star or a virgin who got raped. Why is a porn stars security and well-being worth less than that of a virgin? They're not worth as much as a person because they're a porn star?

Just because someone has had sexual partners before doesn't mean it's not a big deal to go around raping them, as you make it seem.

I suggest you take a good look at yourself in the mirror, because you sure sound like a rapist. Rape is not OK regardless of who the victim is and rape isn't less of a rape because it was done to someone who was promiscious.

As far as the bible, it has nothing to do with this, same as any either piece of fiction written by humans.

a reply to: iosolomon

Never once told you how to interpret the bible.

My interpretation is correct, and you would be foolish not to listen to me.

So I am the foolish one if I choose to disagree with your line of thinking? That is a very born again statement, please do not tell me what I should and should not be thinking. As to my parenting:

If your children raped someone, that is your fault as a parent for failing them

That is a very uncalled for way to insult my parenting. I do everything that I can for my children. I can only guide them through life I cannot make all of their decisions for them. You can lead a horse to water but you cant make him drink.
There is no reason to go around insulting people because of their societal background and it is the epitome of ignorance to judge all on the actions of one, yourself included. Im done arguing, I agree to disagree.

originally posted by: PhoenixOD
There is not a lot of details about the case in the source article. Its hard to make a judgement without being in possession of all the facts presented at the trial.

Was it an attack or are we talking about statutory rape?

What difference does it make? You don't have sex with a 14 year old and get probation. Personal interpretations of the law need to be inadmissible whether during a trial or during the sentencing phase.......if they're not already. There is no grey area here.....the judge was in the wrong and needs to be disbarred. Period. If enough people write the Texas supreme court, which is the avenue you need to take, and the attorney who was defending the girl, it can happen. It's happened many times in the past needs to happen now.

a reply to: Jennyfrenzy

I don't mean to turn this into a theological discussion. Do you think God is going to spell things out for you? No. You would not be worthy of Heaven if you could not think. You have to actually think.

What type of world could have existed that God destroys it with a flood? Would everyone be bad or wicked or corrupt? How could that be possible? Wouldn't there have to be at least one good person who is just getting screwed over? And what about the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah? Why would God just destroy everyone in those cities? Again, was every single person in those cities wicked?

You are responsible for what your country. If you do not understand, then I would recommend reading the Book of Ecclesiastes. It's very short.

And I guess you missed my sarcasm with calling the Bible fiction... I would expect this type of intelligence from Americans, the Brits, the French, the Canadians, and the South Koreans. Are you one of those groups?

But this really isn't a theological lesson. PM if you want to discuss this, or start a thread for a theology lesson. The conspiracy theory: I am God.

originally posted by: PhoenixOD
There is not a lot of details about the case in the source article. Its hard to make a judgement without being in possession of all the facts presented at the trial.

Was it an attack or are we talking about statutory rape?

What difference does it make? You don't have sex with a 14 year old and get probation. If the letter of the law makes that an option, the letter of the law needs to be changed because that ruling is bullsh*t. Personal interpretations of the law need to be inadmissible whether during a trial or during the sentencing phase.......if they're not already. There is no grey area here.....the judge was in the wrong and needs to be disbarred. Period. If enough people write the Texas supreme court, which is the avenue you need to take, and the attorney who was defending the girl, it can happen. It's happened many times in the past and it needs to happen now.

Wouldn't there have to be at least one good person who is just getting screwed over? And what about the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah? Why would God just destroy everyone in those cities? Again, was every single person in those cities wicked

a reply to: iosolomon

actually the two witnesses that were sent by god were there to determine if there was anyone worth saving hence Lot and his wife and children.

a reply to: iosolomon

Again, god or the bible has absolutely nothing to do with this. On top of sounding like a rapist, you also sound like a racist, insulting entire nations intelligence. If you're not trolling you may want to examine your life.

I'm fairly certain the bible also has things in it such as, let the one who is without sin throw the first stone, judge not lest ye be judged and do unto others as you would have them do unto you? I guess you just ignore those parts.

a reply to: iosolomon

I did NOT say that anyone should be raped. Did I say that? Show me where I said.

OK, I will...as soon as you point out to me where I said you said anyone should be raped. I never said that, I said you feel some rape isn't as bad as others, which is nonsense.

originally posted by: DilligafMisfit
So I am the foolish one if I choose to disagree with your line of thinking? That is a very born again statement, please do not tell me what I should and should not be thinking.

Actually, I will tell you what you should be thinking. Better me than the fools you currently listen to.

That is a very uncalled for way to insult my parenting.

If you children rape someone, then you ARE a bad parent. Do you honestly disagree with that? The children who grow up to be rapists WERE failed by their parents. You can disagree all you want, but that is fact.

Somebody needs to do the judge. Rudely!

a reply to: MagesticEsoteric
Figuratively or literally, doens't much matter to me.

I sat on a jury on a case like this once, and the defendant, the rapist, got a similarly light sentence from a similarly female judge...because he was charming and the woman he raped was "loose." That judge was totally fooled and totally out of line Bet this one might have been too.

a reply to: Pimpish

You said, "Rape is not OK regardless of who the victim is and rape isn't less of a rape because it was done to someone who was promiscious."

I agree. Rape is NOT ok. Why would you say that unless you were implying I said rape was okay?

Rape, like murder, is less of a crime depending on the situation and circumstances. I don't understand why people are so confused with how the Law should work. The punishment should fit the crime. It would be foolish to punish the rapist who beats his or her victim the same as the rapist whose victim kinda wanted it.

It is starting to make perfect sense to me why your country used weapons of mass destruction. My goodness, I hope the Asians wipe America off the face of the earth. You really are a disgrace to yourself.

originally posted by: iosolomon

Dude, are people on this website really this dumb? The punishment should fit the crime. The rape of a slut is LESS traumatic to that victim than the rape of a virgin. If you don't agree with that, then there is no hope for you.

I did NOT say that anyone should be raped. Did I say that? Show me where I said.

Holy friggin s*** you people really need to READ.

Then the slut needs less counseling than the virgin. Fair enough? When a person is charged with rape and then tried for it, they are being tried for the ACT of rape.....not WHO they raped. Extenuating circumstances includes what exactly was done during the rape, not who the victim was. Extenuating circumstances helps determine the sentence. Is this clear enough for you?

And no, not everyone on this site is stupid.......just some of them.

a reply to: iosolomon

I'm guessing you're well on your way to being banned.

The punishment should fit the crime. It would be foolish to punish the rapist who beats his or her victim the same as the rapist whose victim kinda wanted it.

If the victim wants it it's not rape, unless it's statutory, which I agree should be punished differently. But no means no whether it's a "slut" or a virgin, and raping the "slut" isn't any less of a crime than raping a virgin.

If you want to throw beating in there too, that's a whole separate crime, assault, in which case the person who raped and beat their victim would be charged with rape and assault instead of just rape. So in a way I guess you're right as far as that goes, but the victim's promiscuity still doesn't come into play.

ETA:

I agree. Rape is NOT ok. Why would you say that unless you were implying I said rape was okay?

Reading comprehension helps, the next line that you quoted might clear that up for you, where I actually mention what you said, as opposed to just reading the first line and posting something out of context.

I'm done arguing with you, you're clearly either a troll or just an amazingly ignorant person. Either way I don't have anymore time to waste on you.

a reply to: iosolomon

All I'll say about this is it is way over the line. You need to stop with the threats and name calling.

It is starting to make perfect sense to me why your country used weapons of mass destruction. My goodness, I hope the Asians wipe America off the face of the earth. You really are a disgrace to yourself.

a reply to: iosolomon
Show me where it is a woman's fault (or man's for that matter). Please by all means back that statement up with some truth. Ill be sure to hold my breath. and you really need to stop with the whole "its my fault if my children become rapist's" crap. Like I stated before I can teach them, but they make there own decisions. Further more:

Actually, I will tell you what you should be thinking. Better me than the fools you currently listen to.

How very egotistical of you to think you are better than me in telling me how to think. You accuse me "AS AN AMERICAN" of being a sheeple yet you WILL TELL ME WHAT I SHOULD BE THINKING? listen here BIG BROTHER

originally posted by: DeepImpactX

And no, not everyone on this site is stupid.......just some of them.

Yes, I am pretty foolish myself. I just get irked when people are more foolish than me. I don't want to be misconstrued as being on a high-horse or arrogant.

Yes. I agree with you. It is not WHO they raped. But the circumstances surrounding the rape should determine the sentence, which includes the rapist's knowledge of the victim's sexual history. In other words, when a woman says that she is raped, and she initiated some form of foreplay, like the woman in this case most likely did, but decides that she doesn't want to go all the way...well...that needs to be taken into consideration.

I am NOT condoning the rapist. I am saying that she did not resist, she did not cry out, she did not reiterate herself that "NO" means "NO." Had she repeated herself, 'NO means NO' or expressed anguish, then it would deserve a harsher punishment since the rapist would have less of an excuse for how he misunderstood "no."

Again, she said "No," and the rapist was prosecuted and convicted for that. But how harsh his sentence should be, you need to consider all the facts.

originally posted by: Jennyfrenzy
All I'll say about this is it is way over the line. You need to stop with the threats and name calling.

Whoa, now, I don't believe I made any threats. Merely wishing for America to be destroyed by the Asians is NOT a threat. Please be more careful with what you label threat.

Name-calling? Nah, I'll call you sheep or disgraces, because that's what you are. Why should I use euphemisms so that you can feel better about yourself?