Teacher Arrested For Sexual Relationshp With Student

[mortify]

I was at my lunch break, enjoying a meal at the diner, when a news piece flashed about a teacher being arrested. A 23 year old New York substitute teacher (female), was arrested for having a sexual relationship with a 15 year old girl. A lot of these cases have been coming up, and although many are disturbed by them, I began to wonder why. I know why I personally am disturbed by them, because I have a moral reference point, and possess an objective sense of right and wrong, but for my peers who hold a subjective view? How can they condemn a consensual sexual relationship? The only thing that stands in the way is the law on consent, which in New York is 17, but doesn't this seem like an arbitrary law to the subjectvie moralist? How can anyone define when humans at large are capable of developing consent? It then dawned on me, if the moral trend continues, then even these types of relationships will be made acceptable. Homosexuality was once considered a mental disorder, and acts of sodomy could land you in jail. Now our contemporaries look back at what we did fifty to sixty years ago, and they are horrified. Perhaps twenty years from now, they will look at this teacher being arrested, and say how intollerant we were.

Yes, twenty years sounds just about right.

[url="http://www.myfoxny.com/dpp/news/teacher-arrested-for-sex-with-student-20120309-lgf"]http://www.myfoxny.com/dpp/news/teacher-arrested-for-sex-with-student-20120309-lgf[/url]

[Nola Seminarian]

it will be interesting to see the can of worms opened by this post.

[cmotherofpirl]

Mort is right, we will be seen as barbarians for not allowing sex in the street by anyone , anytime, anywhere.

[Ed Normile]

You wonder why? I would assume its the fact that the child, and yes a 15 year old is a child, is in a sexual relationship with a person who has power over her. This power could mean the teacher used this as leverage for the sex, either way it was illegal and improper. Twenty years from now beastiality could be considered normal by the masses, but that does not make it right or pleasing to God.

You ever notice that the media never covers the fact that sexual abuse on minors is far more prevelant in the school system than it was ever in the Church, I wonder why that is...

ed

[4588686]

1-Most 15 year olds are not emotionally ready for sex.
2-The teacher is in a position of authority over him.

[mortify]

Hi Hasan,

I'm going to take on the role of a moral subjectivist and play some devil's advocate with your statements.

[quote name='Hasan' timestamp='1331523500' post='2399380']
1-Most 15 year olds are not emotionally ready for sex.[/quote]

I don't see an objective foundation in your "emotionally ready" comment. If two teens understand the risks involved with sexual activity (unwanted pregnancy, disease, etc), and take the necessary precautions (contraceptives), and they decide to have consensual sex, then who is to stop them? A significfant amount of 15 year olds are already having sex (CDC reports 23.2% of 15 year old girls reporting "yes" to vaginal intercourse, and 11% reported they experienced same sex activity. Source: [url="http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhsr/nhsr036.pdf"]http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhsr/nhsr036.pdf[/url]) I don't see your above comment surviving as a rational basis for sexual restrictions.

[quote]2-The teacher is in a position of authority over him.
[/quote]

This was a same sex relationship, the student was female. But either way, I don't see the above as reason against a sexual relationship, for the simple reason that it would render any such relationshp wrong. It would be wrong for an employee to sleep with their boss, for example. And although something like that might be frawned upon, can anyone say it's really wrong? I don't think so.

Going back to the actual case, it was reported that the teacher actually posted on her facebook that she found her true love. If that is the case, how can anyone deny the love between two human beings, especially if they entered into that relationshp consensually?

[4588686]

[quote name='mortify' timestamp='1331608509' post='2399986']
Hi Hasan,

I'm going to take on the role of a moral subjectivist and play some devil's advocate with your statements.



I don't see an objective foundation in your "emotionally ready" comment. If two teens understand the risks involved with sexual activity (unwanted pregnancy, disease, etc), and take the necessary precautions (contraceptives), and they decide to have consensual sex, then who is to stop them? A significfant amount of 15 year olds are already having sex (CDC reports 23.2% of 15 year old girls reporting "yes" to vaginal intercourse, and 11% reported they experienced same sex activity. Source: [url="http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhsr/nhsr036.pdf"]http://www.cdc.gov/n...hsr/nhsr036.pdf[/url]) I don't see your above comment surviving as a rational basis for sexual restrictions. [/QUOTE]

There's a big difference experiencing that with someone your own age and an adult. It is murky. A 15 year old isn't a child but they are still not really emotionally formed. You can find plenty of exceptions but we make laws based on generalities. Is it arbitrary to make the age of consent 18? Of course. But we as a society have decided that sexuality is a major part of an individuals identity and we want to protect emotionally vulnerable kids from predatory adults.



[QUOTE] This was a same sex relationship, the student was female. But either way, I don't see the above as reason against a sexual relationship, for the simple reason that it would render any such relationshp wrong. It would be wrong for an employee to sleep with their boss, for example. And although something like that might be frawned upon, can anyone say it's really wrong? I don't think so.[/QUOTE]

It's somewhat different since we have truancy laws, you can;t just change your class in HS, and the individual involved in a minor. Is it transcendentally wrong for a boss and employee to have sex? No. But we do want protections against employers who would use economic leverage to coerce sex. I don't see anything wrong with that. Most Americans have some interest in providing such protections.

[QUOTE] Going back to the actual case, it was reported that the teacher actually posted on her facebook that she found her true love. If that is the case, how can anyone deny the love between two human beings, especially if they entered into that relationshp consensually?
[/quote]


Wait two years.

[Luigi]

[quote name='Hasan' timestamp='1331611787' post='2400002']
There's a big difference experiencing that with someone your own age and an adult. It is murky. A 15 year old isn't a child but they are still not really emotionally formed. You can find plenty of exceptions but we make laws based on generalities. Is it arbitrary to make the age of consent 18? Of course. But we as a society have decided that sexuality is a major part of an individuals identity and we want to protect emotionally vulnerable kids from predatory adults.
[/quote]

I know a guy - probably 19 years old - who's in an active, consensual sexual relationship with a 15-year-old guy.

Permissible or impermissible? Why?



BTW, an older... what shall we say, mentor?... of the 19-year-old tried to explain the legal dangers of this relationship to the 19-year-old. He'd never heard of the law. He'd never heard the term "jail bait." They just know they want to do this, and so they think they should be able to. And they're not hurting anyone, so what's the big deal? (Their logic, not mine.)

[mme_hardy]

"[color=#282828]The only thing that stands in the way is the law on consent, which in New York is 17, but doesn't this seem like an arbitrary law to the subjectvie moralist? " [/color]

[color=#282828]There are also laws that say a 15-year-old can't sign a binding contract (a contract with a minor is automatically invalid) and can't work more than N hours a day and can't drive a car. T[/color][font=Segoe UI][color=#282828]he subjectivist defense of all of these laws is that protecting children is an important part of why society exists: there is a value to all of society for children to be kept safe and educated until they are old enough to contribute themselves. I think most of us would see a difference between a 13-year-old "playing doctor" with another 13-year-old and a 13-year-old playing doctor with a 30-year-old. In the first case, a scolding (at least) would be involved. In the second case, the older person ought to take responsiblity for both his/her own welfare and the welfare of the child. Most of us have a sliding scale that differentiates between adolescents experimenting with each other (whether or not we approve of that) and adults experimenting with adolescents.[/color][/font]

[color=#282828]You can define any change in culture as "a slippery slope", but you have to make sure that there's actually a line connecting the first to the second. The formula I have always heard about any sex act is "between consenting adults"; no matter how outrageous the act, nobody outside NAMBLA (a tiny, tiny organization) is saying an adult ought to be able to do [naughty act] with a 15-year-old.[/color]

Edited March 13, 2012 by mme_hardy

[mortify]

[quote name='Hasan' timestamp='1331611787' post='2400002']
There's a big difference experiencing that with someone your own age and an adult. It is murky. A 15 year old isn't a child but they are still not really emotionally formed.[/quote]

Again, arguing as a devil's advocate, such relationships can actually make a person more emotionally mature. In fact, in certain Greek societies it was perfectly normal for an older man to take a boy under their wing, and show them the ropes, so to speak. Such pederastry was fundemental for the young person's development into manhood. So again, this is all rather subjective, isn't it?

[quote]You can find plenty of exceptions but we make laws based on generalities. Is it arbitrary to make the age of consent 18? Of course. But we as a society have decided that sexuality is a major part of an individuals identity and we want to protect emotionally vulnerable kids from predatory adults. [/quote]

What I'm getting at is the foundation of these laws. The Christian ethos that formed our current society dictates that such relationships are wrong and harmful. However the Christian ethos is dissapearing, and something closer to a Pagan Athens is being resurrected. And as noted above, Athenian pederastry was seen as normal and even good for society.

[quote]It's somewhat different since we have truancy laws, you can;t just change your class in HS, and the individual involved in a minor. Is it transcendentally wrong for a boss and employee to have sex? No. But we do want protections against employers who would use economic leverage to coerce sex. I don't see anything wrong with that. Most Americans have some interest in providing such protections.
[/quote]

Most Americans at [i]t[i]h[/i]is [/i]point in time, but then again, most Americans were for jailing practicing homosexuals. Who knows what the future holds? In a few decades [i]you[/i] may become the conservative.

That's the irony of all of this... progressives have this false sense that we can introduce enough change to shift things towards their perspective, and then freeze things into place. It's not going to happen. Permit same sex marriage, and you'll have to permit polygammy. If there are laws that permit euthenasia, than laws banning suicide will have to be lifted.

The trend here is an increasing individuization of society, which will ultimately undermine it.

[quote]
Wait two years.
[/quote]
Waiting until marriage didn't work, you think asking them to wait two years will?

Edited March 15, 2012 by mortify

[mortify]

[quote name='mme_hardy' timestamp='1331653751' post='2400101']
[color=#282828]The formula I have always heard about any sex act is "between consenting adults"; no matter how outrageous the act, nobody outside NAMBLA (a tiny, tiny organization) is saying an adult ought to be able to do [naughty act] with a 15-year-old.[/color]
[/quote]

All things start small, as did the gay rights groups. The disturbing thing about NAMBLA is that they use the same arguments homosexual activisits use, and if you accept one, there is no rational basis for rejecting the other. The fragile formula of "consensting adults" can easily change to "consenting [i]persons[/i]."

[CatherineM]

There is also the perspective that if 13 year olds can be tried as adults for criminal offenses, they can argue that they are old enough to consent to other adult activities.

[4588686]

[quote name='CatherineM' timestamp='1331832184' post='2401205']
There is also the perspective that if 13 year olds can be tried as adults for criminal offenses, they can argue that they are old enough to consent to other adult activities.
[/quote]

I think this is an excellent point.

[mme_hardy]

I think 13-year-olds shouldn't be tried as adults. I think that trend is motivated by vengeance rather than justice. It's based on the idea that a young child can be "unsalvageable", and that imprisoning children alongside adults is appropriate.

The problem with slippery-slope arguments taken to excess, is that you can take a small group as proof of forthcoming peril. NAMBLA exists. Pro-bestiality organizations exist. There are people all over the U.S.advocating for unusual sexual and political positions: which ones will actually get big enough to have influence is another matter. The existence of any pressure group doesn't make it a trend. It's easy to look at the social changes of the last 60 years and say, for instance, "Look how contraception spread from being something shameful to being something taken for granted!" What that doesn't take account of is other attempts at social change that failed and died out along the way. The success of one social movement does not mean that all social movements will succeed: remember communes?

There's a simple distinction between homosexuality and child molestation: we protect children in ways we don't protect adults, and in particular we severely restrict a child's ability to make permanent decisions. When a thirty-year-old woman marries a thirty-year-old man, we give her the benefit of the doubt and assume it's an informed decision. The same goes for a thirty-year-old woman partnering with another thirty-year-old woman. No matter what you think of the decision, it's not babyish, it's not necessarily something she was pressured into, and nobody's saying "She'll grow out of it". We don't think about decisions made by adults in the same way as we think about decisions made by teenagers or children.

A similar argument goes for animals: animals cannot consent. So why can we kill them but not have sex with them? Good question. The only answer is that our society, as a whole, treats animals as a different class from people, with different rights. If you look for somebody who's trying to change that, PETA has a great deal more influence than any pro-bestiality organization. Does the existence of PETA mean that we're all going to go vegan? Not necessarily.

So, why can I support homosexuality but not bestiality or child molestation? Because they're different. An adult human is not the same as a child or a beast.

[the171]

There was a case like this at my school two months ago. Volleyball coach (female) had a sexual relationship with two girls. (15 & 16) One of the girls are in my graduating class and a few of my classes. No matter how much to adolescent says that they consent, they cannot truly consent. They are not fully formed spiritually, emotionally, mentally, physically. Contraceptives and all that croutons do not prepare someone for a sexual relationship. It actually screws it up. These girls, even if they said that they consented, are so screwed up now. I am disgusted that this woman (that my older brother attended high school with) would take advantage of the emotional state of my peers. Just disgusted.