• 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

And more . . .

Question What do Texas laws say regarding statutory rape?
(From the University of Texas)

For whatever reason, the offense traditionally known as "statutory rape" is not
prosecuted very often when the child victim is older than 14 years of age and the sex is
consensual. However, the laws prohibiting any form of sex with children under the age of
17 are still on the books, and it is within a prosecutor's discretion as to whether or not he
or she wishes to pursue such charges against an individual. A cynical person might
argue that such decisions are usually politically motivated.

Section 22.011 (a) (2) of the Texas Penal Code provides that a person who has sexual
relations with a child younger than 17 years of age is guilty of Sexual Assault. Under this
section of the Penal Code, "sexual relations" may include conventional sexual
intercourse, oral sex, anal sex and/or oral-anal sex.

The most important thing to note about this criminal statute is that it does not actually
require any assault to take place. Thus, an adult who has consensual sex with a child
under 17 years of age is guilty of Sexual Assault, even if the child was the one who
initiated the sexual encounter. In addition, it is not a defense to prosecution that the adult
mistakenly believed that the child was 17 years of age or older.

This statute does not apply if the adult and child engaging in sexual conduct are legally
married. Also, if an adult who has sexual relations with a child can show that the child
was 14 years of age or older at the time of the encounter, and that the adult is no more
than three years older than the child, he or she cannot be convicted under this statute.

Generally, an offense under this statute is a felony of the second degree, punishable by
two to twenty years in prison and a fine of up to $10,000.00. If, however, the child victim
is under the age of 14, the offense is enhanced to a felony of the first degree, punishable
by imprisonment for life or for a term of not more than 99 years or less than five years,
and a fine not to exceed $50,000.00.

FROM: (University of Texas at Austin - Office of the Dean of Students - Legal Services for Students)
Permanent archive to prevent loss.
 
Section 21.12

…(3) engages in conduct described by Section 33.021, with a person described by Subdivision (1), or a person the employee knows is a person described by Subdivision (2)(A) or (B), regardless of the age of that person…
 
Dwight said:
Section 21.12

…(3) engages in conduct described by Section 33.021, with a person described by Subdivision (1), or a person the employee knows is a person described by Subdivision (2)(A) or (B), regardless of the age of that person…
Click to expand...

Every state has those provisions as it is improper and unethical for an educator to have a sexual relationship with a student. The reasons for this are quite obvious. This is not anything unusual or rare.
 
ChrisL said:
Every state has those provisions …
Click to expand...
Umm. It is indeed unusual for it to be a criminal statute, (EDIT: specifically) the ‘age does not matter’ part, and it is a fairly recent development even here. Enacted less than 10 years ago.

Further it need not be a teacher, or have any contact at all with the student, or ever set foot in the school that the student attends for that matter. EDIT: And the student need not know of the employee’s position.
 
Last edited:
Dwight said:
Umm. It is indeed unusual for it to be a criminal statute, (EDIT: specifically) the ‘age does not matter’ part, and it is a fairly recent development even here. Enacted less than 10 years ago.

Further it need not be a teacher, or have any contact at all with the student, or ever set foot in the school that the student attends for that matter. EDIT: And the student need not know of the employee’s position.
Click to expand...

That is not what it says in the link. Why do you feel that a teacher having sex with a student is okay?
 
24 states have a statute against student/teacher sex of any kind. Okay, so maybe not every state has that particular ban, but as 24 states have these laws, I wouldn't say they are unusual or rare.
 
Dwight said:
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?
Click to expand...

1) What are the chances of someone actually being convicted in those circumstances?

2) I believe special rules should be put into place when concerning teachers and their students. So some possible exception that goes against the spirit of the law really doesn't change that
 
ChrisL said:
24 states have a statute against student/teacher sex of any kind. Okay, so maybe not every state has that particular ban, but as 24 states have these laws, I wouldn't say they are unusual or rare.
Click to expand...
Adult <-> adult? What is that list? Unique no. Unusual, yes. And thankfully getting rarer.
 
Dr. Chuckles said:
1) What are the chances of someone actually being convicted in those circumstances?
Click to expand...
If they are found out? Somewhere close to exactly the % at which it can be proven in court that it happened, because it will be prosecuted and the law is very clear and cut.
 
ChrisL said:
Why do you want teachers to be able to have sex with students anyway?
Click to expand...
What I want is for adults to have their choice.
 
Dwight said:
What I want is for adults to have their choice.
Click to expand...

Don't you consider the complications that could arise with a teacher/student sexual relationship? Such as favoritism, or if the relationship sours, the teacher is not so "nice" to the student anymore, among other ethical problems. Don't you consider anything else besides the fact that they are adults.
 
ChrisL said:
That is not what it says in the link.
Click to expand...
That is the implication of the text, re-read. Employee in the same school district. No requirement to ever be on the same school property.
 
Dwight said:
That is the implication of the text, re-read. Employee in the same school district. No requirement to ever be on the same school property.
Click to expand...

Why do you want it to be okay for teachers to have sex with students?

I would like for you to answer this.

Don't you consider the complications that could arise with a teacher/student sexual relationship? Such as favoritism, or if the relationship sours, the teacher is not so "nice" to the student anymore, among other ethical problems. Don't you consider anything else besides the fact that they are adults.
Click to expand...
 
Dwight said:
If they are found out? Somewhere close to exactly the % at which it can be proven in court that it happened, because it will be prosecuted and the law is very clear and cut.
Click to expand...


but what jury would convict under those circumstances? It just doesn't seem like it's going to happen
 
Dr. Chuckles said:
but what jury would convict under those circumstances? It just doesn’t seem like it’s going to happen
Click to expand...
It is tougher but it happens with relatively small age gaps (I don’t have exact ages). Of course, Texas being Texas, there appears to be some gender bias to the verdicts. Plus, that there are charges at all, with the defense costs, and potential the consequences and every time something goes to trial being a crapshoot?

There was already a generic statute on the books to cover rape via abuse of position. The person that wrote this bill and brought it to the Legislature even weighed in publicly on a recent case and said that her intention had NOT been to include 18 year-olds, that was an amendment that was made once it got to the floor.

Classic overreach.
 
Dwight said:
It is tougher but it happens with relatively small age gaps (I don’t have exact ages). Of course, Texas being Texas, there appears to be some gender bias to the verdicts. Plus, that there are charges at all, with the defense costs, and potential the consequences and every time something goes to trial being a crapshoot?

There was already a generic statute on the books to cover rape via abuse of position. The person that wrote this bill and brought it to the Legislature even weighed in publicly on a recent case and said that her intention had NOT been to include 18 year-olds, that was an amendment that was made once it got to the floor.

Classic overreach.
Click to expand...

I agree that there seems to be some issues with it, but as I said before, I have no issue with holding teachers to strict standards (even when discussing two adults), in relation to their students.

So i'm honestly unsure of how to handle the situation
 
Dwight said:
Already asked and answered.
Click to expand...

Nope. No you didn't, and I would appreciate it if you would address them. Here they are AGAIN since you seem to keep missing them.

Don't you consider the complications that could arise with a teacher/student sexual relationship? Such as favoritism, or if the relationship sours, the teacher is not so "nice" to the student anymore, among other ethical problems. Don't you consider anything else besides the fact that they are adults?
Click to expand...
 
Dwight said:
It is tougher but it happens with relatively small age gaps (I don’t have exact ages). Of course, Texas being Texas, there appears to be some gender bias to the verdicts. Plus, that there are charges at all, with the defense costs, and potential the consequences and every time something goes to trial being a crapshoot?

There was already a generic statute on the books to cover rape via abuse of position. The person that wrote this bill and brought it to the Legislature even weighed in publicly on a recent case and said that her intention had NOT been to include 18 year-olds, that was an amendment that was made once it got to the floor.

Classic overreach.
Click to expand...

I don't think it's overreaching at all. Teachers should not have sexual relationships with students, whether a student initiates it or the teacher initiates it. It is unethical for many different reasons. I would like to see those teachers prosecuted to the full extent of the law for abusing their authority. Also, they should be fired immediately if allegations are proven and NEVER allowed to be a teacher again.
 
ChrisL said:
I don't think it's overreaching at all. Teachers should not have sexual relationships with students, whether a student initiates it or the teacher initiates it. It is unethical for many different reasons. I would like to see those teachers prosecuted to the full extent of the law for abusing their authority. Also, they should be fired immediately if allegations are proven and NEVER allowed to be a teacher again.
Click to expand...
As already covered, it isn’t just teachers and there is absolutely no requirement to show abuse of authority. Abuse of authority for coercion is already covered by other law. If that is the case the State may already bring prosecution.

Fire them? *shrug* Jail for a number of years? Very clearly absurd do-gooder Puritanism run amuck.
 
Last edited:
ChrisL said:
Nope. No you didn't, and I would appreciate it if you would address them. Here they are AGAIN since you seem to keep missing them.
Click to expand...
I answered the question. You just don’t happen to like it, or you are to slow to put it together. This law inserts the State into a decision between two consenting adults over a matter that concerns no one else. No state interest to override individual rights.
 
ChrisL said:
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.
Click to expand...

People that have a vested interest in labeling things don't hold my interest.

Nothing is going th change human instinct.
 
Dwight said:
As already covered, it isn’t just teachers and there is absolutely no requirement to show abuse of authority. Abuse of authority for coercion is already covered by other law. If that is the case the State may already bring prosecution.

Fire them? *shrug* Jail for a number of years? Very clearly absurd do-gooder Puritanism run amuck.
Click to expand...

Okay, I could agree with that. If the "student" is 18 or over, the teacher should just be fired. I guess there is no reason for jail time since the student is of or over age of consent. But the teacher should still be fired because it is ethically wrong for teachers to have that kind of relationship with students.

Like I said, and like you failed to address, that particular teacher could surely use his/her authority over that student. Also, the student could possibly blackmail the teacher. A teacher/student sexual relationship is not only not a good idea but can have lots of unintended consequences.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom