• 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!

Utah woman charged after going topless in front of stepkids inside own home faces setback in court

AmNat said:
76-9-702.5. Lewdness involving a child.
(2) A person is guilty of lewdness involving a child if the person under circumstances not amounting to rape of a child, object rape of a child, sodomy upon a child, sexual abuse of a child, aggravated sexual abuse of a child, or an attempt to commit any of those offenses, intentionally or knowingly:
(a) does any of the following in the presence of a child who is under 14 years of age:
(ii) exposes his or her genitals, the female breast below the top of the areola, the buttocks, the anus, or the pubic area:
(A) in a public place; or
(B) in a private place under circumstances the person should know will likely cause affront or alarm or with the intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of the actor or the child;

She basically admitted to doing it willfully to make a point. Not sure what your issue is, unless you think the law shouldn't apply to her for some reason.
Click to expand...

So every woman in Utah who breast feeds her baby is guilty of lewdness and should be charged with a crime and must register as a sex offender?

Awesome.

:roll:
 
Moonglow said:
What may be sweet to one is bitter to another.
Click to expand...

The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.

best-spock-leonard-nimoy-star-trek-episodes-750x480.jpg
 
The laws should always be changed in favor of the general welfare not the general badfare, the general malfare, nor the general warfare (due to the "Hellish conditions on Earth it may engender).

All political power is inherent in the people; and all free governments are founded on their authority for their equal protection and benefit, and they have the right to alter or reform their government as the public welfare may require.
Click to expand...
 
Mycroft said:
What's stupid is hanging drywall while under the influence of alcohol.

What's stupid is a state enacting laws that forbid actions that have no victims.

It sounds like this state law is the Utah equivalent to the Sharia law that forbids a woman showing her nose in public. Except that even that Sharia law allows the woman to show her nose in the privacy of her own home.
Click to expand...

There were victims of this criminal act, the children.

The woman admits she purposefully exposed herself to the children. That is illegal. She did it to indoctrinate the children (eg “groom” them) this is exactly the circumstance the law was intended for.
 
EMNofSeattle said:
There were victims of this criminal act, the children.

The woman admits she purposefully exposed herself to the children. That is illegal. She did it to indoctrinate the children (eg “groom” them) this is exactly the circumstance the law was intended for.
Click to expand...

Groom them to become nudist or Christians?
 
EMNofSeattle said:
There were victims of this criminal act, the children.

The woman admits she purposefully exposed herself to the children. That is illegal. She did it to indoctrinate the children (eg “groom” them) this is exactly the circumstance the law was intended for.
Click to expand...

That is an embarrasing position to take.



Я Баба Яга [emoji328]
 
Dragonfly said:
Utah woman charged after going topless in front of stepkids inside own home faces setback in court | Fox News




In. Her. Own. Home.

What the hell is going on in Utah??? How does this happen? Register as a sex offender????

It's just boobies. For god's sakes they provide life for children. How the hell can they be offensive and lewd???

Is there anybody here who thinks it's reasonable for a court of law to actually pursue this?

No granted, her "reason" for why she did it is ginormously stupid in every way imaginable.
However, it's just some boobs.
Click to expand...

This is so bloody ridiculous, it's hard to believe it's not fake news. Just unbelievable. Why are Americans so uptight about the human body?
 
Scrabaholic said:
This is so bloody ridiculous, it's hard to believe it's not fake news. Just unbelievable. Why are Americans so uptight about the human body?
Click to expand...

My theory goes back to the Puritans; Americans are the world’s biggest prudes in daylight, but in the dark, “Katie bar the door!”


If you have ever traveled to Western Europe compare the public restroom to the US ones......
 
More let me into your bedroom stuff while we complain about too many regulations. The party with no morals keeps trying to impose morals on everyone else.

I guess to republicans a woman's body is sinful?
 
Hatuey said:
That is an embarrasing position to take.



Я Баба Яга [emoji328]
Click to expand...

What’s embaressing is you think some comelately woman who is not the Child’s mother should be able to freely indoctrinate another woman’s children into this nonsense.

She exposed herself, she did it to send a sexual message to the children, there is also an admission she was intoxicated so who knows what kind of abuse actually took place that’s not being admitted to. The law was duly passed by the people of the State of Utah, and if this witch would sober up and go to a law library she could’ve freely read the statute.

She deserves to be convicted, but since liberals don’t believe in rule of law and only what makes them feel good, you are arguing you know better then the entire legislative and judicial apparatus of that state
 
Hatuey said:
That is an embarrasing position to take.
Click to expand...

The 'tell' in this case is the woman is facing jail, and 10 years registering as a sex offender, and the husband and father, who was there and didn't object to anything, of course he's got nothing to worry about.... It's the privileges of patriarchy.
 
ludin said:
3 women just lost a case in new england over the same thing.
I do not think that this is a sex abuse case.

i also think she is arguing the wrong thing. this is a violation of privacy.
although i have to question why she was hanging dry wall or whatever it was without a shirt on.

she could have kept her bra on, or they could have brought work shirts then who cares.
however i do not see this as a sexual abuse case.

it sounds like the guy's ex-wife is just creating trouble to create trouble.
Click to expand...
Maybe because she’s a good mother, if my kids were being groomed by a drunken lady exposing herself to them in a location they can’t escape from to get help I would be raising holy hell about it.
 
JasperL said:
The 'tell' in this case is the woman is facing jail, and 10 years registering as a sex offender, and the husband and father, who was there and didn't object to anything, of course he's got nothing to worry about.... It's the privileges of patriarchy.
Click to expand...
He is not alleged to have exposed himself.

There is a specific legal code, she violated it.

And apparently the kids were effected by this because their actual mother heard about it. I think there’s plenty to the story not being reported by the fake news

Maybe that sex predator registration will help her make the right decision not to take upon herself to indoctrinate other women’s children with her feminist nonsense
 
EMNofSeattle said:
What’s embaressing is you think some comelately woman who is not the Child’s mother should be able to freely indoctrinate another woman’s children into this nonsense.

She exposed herself, she did it to send a sexual message to the children, there is also an admission she was intoxicated so who knows what kind of abuse actually took place that’s not being admitted to. The law was duly passed by the people of the State of Utah, and if this witch would sober up and go to a law library she could’ve freely read the statute.

She deserves to be convicted, but since liberals don’t believe in rule of law and only what makes them feel good, you are arguing you know better then the entire legislative and judicial apparatus of that state
Click to expand...

You're doubling down on your embarrasing position and expecting to convince people that this woman is some sort of pedophile. The incel ideas are strong in your post.


Я Баба Яга [emoji328]
 
Scrabaholic said:
This is so bloody ridiculous, it's hard to believe it's not fake news. Just unbelievable. Why are Americans so uptight about the human body?
Click to expand...

Blah blah blah.

Not an argument!
 
Rexedgar said:
My theory goes back to the Puritans; Americans are the world’s biggest prudes in daylight, but in the dark, “Katie bar the door!”


If you have ever traveled to Western Europe compare the public restroom to the US ones......
Click to expand...

Notice how Europe has far less problems with sex crimes?
 
Hatuey said:
You're doubling down on your embarrasing position and expecting to convince people that this woman is some sort of pedophile. The incel ideas are strong in your post.


Я Баба Яга [emoji328]
Click to expand...

I didn’t see she was a pedophile. I said she was abusing the children. This is objectively true because their mother considered it abuse and reported it to the authorities who charged her fairly under the law .
 
JasperL said:
The 'tell' in this case is the woman is facing jail, and 10 years registering as a sex offender, and the husband and father, who was there and didn't object to anything, of course he's got nothing to worry about.... It's the privileges of patriarchy.
Click to expand...
Every year, millions of men walk shirtless around the beaches of the US. Nobody ever accuses them of exposing themselves to kids.

Its this kind of stuff that breeds incel groups.

Я Баба Яга [emoji328]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom