• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Elmo the Pedophile

Prove your allegation against Obama otherwise its a fart in the wind.

It is so cute when people think they can order me to do things.....
 
And you misuse the term child. A child is a child is a child. A 16 year-old should not be considered a child in the eyes of the law. A teen and/or minor, yes, but not a child. And this brings up my first post of this merry-go-round banter. Though Clash is not a pedopile, he showed a lack of judgement in the allegations prove to be true. And as a result, should be fired.

I disagree with that. IMO, a 16-year-old is most certainly still a child. I do think that a 16-year-old should be considered a child in the eyes of the law. Why shouldn't they? As my links state, their brains are still under construction. Teenager-hood is just the last stage of development from child to adult. Just because they may not look like a child anymore, that does not make them adults. Adulthood is a mental and emotional state and has nothing to do with physical attributes or even puberty.
 
A: These are allegations at this point.

B: One guy actions warrant an entire station having it's funding taken away?

C: At this point what Romney would have done is irrelevant.

D: Being sexually involved with 16 year old isn't actually pedophilia. It's creepy and illegal, but it's not pedophilia (which requires being sexually attracted to pre-pubescent children).
 
Two possible scenarios...

Scenario 1: The puppeteer was being blackmailed and paid the guy off.

Scenario 2: The puppeteer was guilty but paid the guy enough money to back off.

I'm pretty certain that money was involved because nobody goes this far and then recants. They would be too invested at this point to back out.
 
Two possible scenarios...

Scenario 1: The puppeteer was being blackmailed and paid the guy off.

Scenario 2: The puppeteer was guilty but paid the guy enough money to back off.

I'm pretty certain that money was involved because nobody goes this far and then recants. They would be too invested at this point to back out.

this pretty much mirrors what I was thinking. There are reports (at least from TMZ) that lawyers met no more than an hour prior to this announcement, as well
 
Sometimes, just being innocent, is the best defense.


Two possible scenarios...

Scenario 1: The puppeteer was being blackmailed and paid the guy off.

Scenario 2: The puppeteer was guilty but paid the guy enough money to back off.

I'm pretty certain that money was involved because nobody goes this far and then recants. They would be too invested at this point to back out.
 
Wow. People like you still exist in this world? I though you all went extinct.

Look up Kevin Clash. He is a disciple of Jim Henson no less and the guy runs Seasame Street now. He helps make the shows different versions work for Arab countries, Israel, and so on. He obviously is crazy rich also. For all we know the accuser was an extra on the show that cooked up the idea for an extra buck.
 
That would depend upon the age and mentality difference between the two. I believe that there are limitations in a lot of places in regards to age gaps.

Oh, and perhaps not a pedophile but certainly an ephebophile to be sexually interested in teens. The deviant part about it is that people who are diagnosed with this disorder limit themselves to ONLY this particular age group. The sexual obsession is more with the "youth" of the victim than it is about the victim him or herself. It IS a LEGITIMATE DSM-IV diagnosis.

There is nothing deviant about it.

It is in our biology to be attracted to youth as that is the most likely way to have a healthy baby.

Are you going to try to argue that point?
 
They are children at a different level of development. Until one is FULLY developed, they are not an adult. Boobs and pubic hair don't make one an adult.

Also, since the vast majority of 16-year-olds are still dependent upon their parents for survival, I would think that would qualify them as still children.

Do you think that a person should have a bettery of psycological tests before they are allowed to engage in sexual activity at any age?

There are a lot of adults that are very childish in what they do and how they handle things.

In reading your posts you don't hink biology has any place in what makes somebody an adult, so what about somebody who is 30 but still lives with their parents and still thinks like a child. Should that person be allowed to engage in sexual activity?
 
Federal law

The Federal government has a legal age of consent of 18. This law applies to any actions that take place between different states or on federal property. This makes it a crime to use any form of communication between states to try to get a minor to have sex with an adult. Even if the minor and adult are in the same state, if the communication leaves the state, it is a crime. For example, if both people live in the same state and use an instant messaging program to communicate. If the server used for the communication is in another state, this is a crime.
It is also a crime for a minor to be taken to a different state to have sex. This could happen if the 16 year old lived in a state that had an age of consent of 18 but travelled to a state where the age limit was 16. If the adult travels to a different state or a different country to have sex with a minor, this is only a federal crime if the minor is under the age of 16. It may still be a local crime if the minor was under the age of consent of the state or nation where the sex happened but it is not a federal crime.

Each US state has its own age of consent. State laws set the age of consent at 16, 17 or 18. The most common age is 16.[2]
age of consent 16 (30): Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Connecticut, District of Columbia, Georgia, Hawaii, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Vermont, Washington, West Virginia
age of consent 17 (9): Colorado, Illinois, Louisiana, Missouri, Nebraska, New Mexico, New York, Texas, Wyoming
age of consent 18 (12): Arizona, California, Delaware, Florida, Idaho, North Dakota, Oregon, Tennessee, Utah, Virginia, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania1

1: In Pennsylvania, the age of consent is 16. If the minor is under the age of 18, the adult can be charged with "Coruption of a Minor". This is a misdemeanor. [3]. If the adult is in a position of power (teacher, clergy, or Police for example), this is a felony[4]. Even though the age of consent is 16, it is still a crime until the age of 18. Becase of this, Pennsylvania is normally listed as if it had an age of consent of 18.

Some states have exceptions to the law for people below the age of consent if their partner's age is within a specific range. This range is often between 2 and 4 years. Some states allow minors who are below the age of consent to consent to sex with their spouses if they are married, but not to anyone else.
You missed a caveat on Texas: There is no age of consent if it is between an employee of a school and a student of that school, a student in another school in the same district, or in some cases a student from outside the district (and potentially outside the State, IIRC). That is right, Texas has managed to figure out how to, again, put someone in jail for sex between 2 consenting adults. *sigh*
 
You missed a caveat on Texas: There is no age of consent if it is between an employee of a school and a student of that school, a student in another school in the same district, or in some cases a student from outside the district (and potentially outside the State, IIRC). That is right, Texas has managed to figure out how to, again, put someone in jail for sex between 2 consenting adults. *sigh*

How are they stopping 2 consenting adults? I don't understand your post. You state that there is NO age of consent and then you state that they are putting people in jail for consensual sex between 2 adults. :confused: I don't know if you made a typo or what, but you contradict yourself in this post.
 
Do you think that a person should have a bettery of psycological tests before they are allowed to engage in sexual activity at any age?

There are a lot of adults that are very childish in what they do and how they handle things.

In reading your posts you don't hink biology has any place in what makes somebody an adult, so what about somebody who is 30 but still lives with their parents and still thinks like a child. Should that person be allowed to engage in sexual activity?

We're talking about KIDS here. Not adults. Adults brains are as developed and as functional as they are going to be. They are done growing.
 
There is nothing deviant about it.

It is in our biology to be attracted to youth as that is the most likely way to have a healthy baby.

Are you going to try to argue that point?

Take it up with the American Psychiatric Association. Sexual attraction to teenagers (where one is ONLY sexually attracted to teens) is a legitimate DSM-IV diagnosis.
 
How are they stopping 2 consenting adults? I don't understand your post. You state that there is NO age of consent and then you state that they are putting people in jail for consensual sex between 2 adults. :confused: I don't know if you made a typo or what, but you contradict yourself in this post.
The age of the student is not relevant as for as the law is concern is what I meant by “no age of consent”. Even if the student is an adult it is a [serious jail time] crime.
 
The age of the student is not relevant as for as the law is concern is what I meant by “no age of consent”. Even if the student is an adult it is a [serious jail time] crime.

That is probably a case of a teacher being an "authority figure" over a student with potential to abuse power over that student. That is just plain ethics.
 
Take it up with the American Psychiatric Association. Sexual attraction to teenagers (where one is ONLY sexually attracted to teens) is a legitimate DSM-IV diagnosis.
First, ephebophilia is NOT listed in the DSM-IV. Nor is it an ONLY, rather it is a matter of whether it is the PRIMARY preference (though could be ONLY).

Further even if it was it is important to keep mind that the DSM IV also lists things like my son’s autism and the irrational fear of the color white (leukophobia).
 
Last edited:
That is probably a case of a teacher being an "authority figure" over a student with potential to abuse power over that student. That is just plain ethics.
It is getting up in the personal lives of consenting adults, is what it is. Statutory rape laws already have provisions for prosecuting for coercion through abuse of position of power.
 
You missed a caveat on Texas: There is no age of consent if it is between an employee of a school and a student of that school, a student in another school in the same district, or in some cases a student from outside the district (and potentially outside the State, IIRC). That is right, Texas has managed to figure out how to, again, put someone in jail for sex between 2 consenting adults. *sigh*

If I am reading you right, I'm not seeing the issue with the above.
 
If I am reading you right, I'm not seeing the issue with the above.
21 year-old and a 19 year-old have consensual sex, 21 year-old goes to jail for 5 years.

You see no issue with that?
 
21 year-old and a 19 year-old have consensual sex, 21 year-old goes to jail for 5 years.

You see no issue with that?

Wrong. Here is age of consent law for Texas and how it is applied. Perhaps you should do research before making such claims.

Texas -- Age of Consent

Penal Code Sec. 21.11. Indecency With a Child.

(a) A person commits an offense if, with a child younger than 17 years
and not his spouse, whether the child is of the same or opposite sex, he:

(1) engages in sexual contact with the child; or
(2) exposes his anus or any part of his genitals,
knowing the child is present, with intent to arouse or gratify
the sexual desire of any person.
(b) It is an affirmative defense to prosecution under this section that
the actor:
(1) was not more than three years older than the victim
and of the opposite sex; and

(2) did not use duress, force, or a threat against the victim
at the time of the offense.

(c) An offense under Subsection (a)(1) is a felony of the second degree
and an offense under Subsection (a)(2) is a felony of the third degree.
 
More . . .

Sexual Assault (Section 22.011)
(EDITOR NOTE: This would be Texas' "Statutory Rape" law)

A person commits sexual assault against a child when the person

penetrates the anus or female sexual organ of a child by any means.
penetrates the mouth of a child with the actor's sexual organ.
causes the child's sexual organ to contact or penetrate the mouth, anus, or sexual organ of
another person, including the actor.
causes the anus of a child to contact the mouth, anus, or sexual organ of another person,
including the actor.
causes the mouth of a child to contact the anus or sexual organ of another person, including the
actor.

Sexual assault is a felony of the second degree. The offense becomes aggravated assault when the
child is younger than 14 years of age, in which case it is a felony of the first degree.

A person who has committed any of the acts outlined above has positive grounds for a defense if that
person is less than three years older than the victim, the victim is over 14 years of age, and no force
was threatened or employed against the victim.


Enticing a Child (Section 25.04)

A person commits an offense if, with the intent to interfere with the lawful custody of a child younger
than 18 years, he knowingly entices, persuades, and takes the child from the custody of the parent or
guardian or person acting as a parent or guardian. This offense is a Class B misdemeanor.
 
Back
Top Bottom