A question about morality...forgive me if this has already been discussed

[Imagine My Surprise]

I am a 50 year old gay man living in Louisville, KY. (I lived for many years in LA and NYC where the age of consent is 18). However, the age of consent in KY is 16. That also happens to be the age my mother was when I was born. (I know, an underscore of KY stereotypes.)

Anyway, my question is: What is the age of consent in FLA? Judging from the fallout, I can only assume it is 18. Which would make Foley actions illegal in his state. I assume the age of consent in DC is also 18.

Now, no one is happier to see the downfall of a pompous, hypocritical Republican asshole than I.

But having sex with a 16 year old male is NOT a "moral offense" where I live. Nor do I personally consider it a moral offense, otherwise.

I just wish there could be a distinction between "inappropriate" (which I would totally concur!) and "immoral". Illegal is one thing, IF the age of consent was 18 in the states involved. But immoral? I think not.

[NMDemDist2]

1. it would easily be construed as sexual harrassment and IIRC the

boy was 15 when the incidents started

Congressional pages' are high school children

[Imagine My Surprise]

7. Thank for the clarifying that, without resorting to name-calling...

I did not know that he was younger than sixteen and a high school student when this began. Thank you again.

[NMDemDist2]

19. why would I name call a reasonable question? in spite of some evidence

to the contrary not all DUers are hate spewing idiots :evilgrin:

as an old white straight woman, the only flame wars I ever seem to get into are about GLBT rights and calling that dessicated twit Coulter "Mann"

:hi:

[CBGLuthier]

2. good luck my brother

as far as many on DU are concerned you are a sick pedophile as they can not understand the difference between being attracted to a non-adult but sexually mature person versus an actual child.

Expect to be spit upon by these fools before you know it.

[Lerkfish]

6. so far, the only inflammatory post in the thread is yours.

everyone else is calmly discussing the issue.

[Imagine My Surprise]

9. Thanks...which proves that a so-called "DU-er" can be as big a bigot...

as anyone else. Thanks for calm words.

[babylonsister]

15. Who the hell are you speaking for? Not myself and the majority

of DUers. Why are you misconstruing this?

[Lerkfish]

3. if nothing else, its predatory and internet stalking, harrassment

and contributing to the deliquency of a minor.

if over the internet, federal rules apply (many of which foley himself pushed through) and the recent gonzales justification for total information awareness was to prosecute internet offenders.


Foley used his position of relative authority to stalk young men. Many people have called it pedophilia, which at least in these instances (at least the ones I know about), its not.


the larger issue is why the republican hierarchy covered it up for over a year.

[Imagine My Surprise]

12. Thank you for making that point. I did not know of specific rules Foley...

tried to get passed. Thank you again.

[tsuki]

4. 18 in FL, 16 in DC. But the main point is that parents send their

children to DC to learn about the workings of a democracy. These children are placed under the care and guidance of Congress, to be cared for as their parents would. What has transpired is that the Congressman attempted to seduce, what appears now to be several, pages. And, with full knowledge of the Republican leadership, it would seem.

This is very different to me than being an age of consent matter.

[Imagine My Surprise]

14. Another very good point...thank you...

[tsuki]

26. To me it is all about the trust, and the betrayal of that trust. Well,

the hypocrisy of the Republican stance on sexual orientation disgusts me also.

[TwentyFive]

27. Well said! Foley was supposed to mentor - not prey.

This brings up some other issues.

First: If Foley is turned on by teenagers, the leadership had a responsibility to get him help and get him out of Congress. They failed miserably, and should suffer consequences at the polls.

Second: I blame the Christofascists Republicans for abusing gays. They create a culture that forces gays (especially republican gays) underground. If there was no stigma about being gay, then perhaps he could have developed a relationship with somebody a bit...ahem...more mature.

Third: Perhaps they should look into ending the page program. I think republican congressman are the last people that should be mentoring teenagers.

[tsuki]

32. M$M has been beating the drum for the past five years--

Republicans are strong on security, Democrats are weak.

The Republicans couldn't even protect the pages. How can they protect the country?

[TahitiNut]

5. Well, we have troops in the Middle East that age.

Is someone old enough to kill (or be killed) before they're old enough to consent to sexual activity?

Further, does "phone sex" qualify as a sexual activity?

Seems to me that we should "draw the line" consistently and then stick to it. Doing otherwise is, imho, intellectually and ethically dishonest.

If I were to condemn people for merely doing something that *I* wouldn't do, I'd probably be a Republican.

I'm not.

So, I won't.

[uppityperson]

10. we have 16 yr olds in Iraq? Who.

[Imagine My Surprise]

16. I could not have said it better myself. Thank you.

[SmokingJacket]

8. My husband told me that there's special legislation in FL

-- ironically helped through by Foley -- that makes it a felony to solicit a minor over the internet -- that is, anyone under 18. (My apologies if I'm misunderstanding second-hand information.)

A congressional page is basically an employee of a congressman, so Foley was totally taking advantage of his power over the kids. THAT is immoral, not the sex itself, imho.

I mean, I can imagine a perfectly loving, consensual relationship between a 16 yr old and an older person -- my grandmother was married at 16.

But he exploited those kids' awe of power and desire to please their superiors. Wrong, wrong, wrong, and he deserves to lose his job, and his pals shouldn't have covered it up.

[Imagine My Surprise]

17. Your response is much appreciated and wise

[uppityperson]

11. It is the age and power differential that make it wrong.

That is the problem and why most states have laws addressing this issue. For instance, a 16 and 17 can have consensual legal sex. A 16 and an 18 yr old, perhaps, but a 16 and a 21 yr old may be illegal due to age differential.

[HockeyMom]

29. 3-5 year age differentials

most states also have specifics on age differentials when it concerns a minor. Although the age of consent may be 18 (here in NY for both genders), how many would prosecute a case of two consenting High Schoolers, even if one was 18 and the other was a couple of years younger? Very few.

My daughter dated a boy in HS and through her first year of college who was 2 and a half years younger. When she was almost 19 and in college, he was still 16 and in HS.

They would have half the kids in HS and college in jail. Now, a with 15 year old and an 55 year old, THAT is another story. It is the FORTY year difference in age that matters, not 3-5 years.

They can rant all they want about Monica and Clinton. She was OVER 21 and an adult. No question about that. That makes the difference.

[uppityperson]

30. Yup, some laws they can't prosecute everyone. More like guidelines.

[moc]

13. It's the age difference.

Even if the age of consent is 16, a 50+ yo cannot make sexual advances on a 16yo because the 16yo is a minor.

[Imagevision]

18. Immoral when the kid writes, "Sick" 13 times regardless of age

[Imagine My Surprise]

20. What if I wrote "sick" 13 times about someone's religion?

[uppityperson]

21. bit different than someone talking sex to you and writing "sick"

[TygrBright]

22. The element of moral repugnance in older/younger sex...

...for many people is the 'exploitation' dynamic. There is a presumed weight of experience, power (either psychological or actual hierarchical,) and influence with the older person, and the younger the young person and the wider the age gap, the greater that presumed weight can be.

Most will acknowledge that there are cases when younger people are far more experienced, etc., than an older partner, but even then some squickiness about exploitation enters into it. Our culture has many sick, sick, preoccupations with sex, but one healthy trend that has emerged is a bias toward equity between partners. Most of us believe that partners in consensual sex should have the same or a similar capacity to understand the emotional, psychological, and physical implications of sex, and should have the same or similar capacity to give fully informed consent to sexual interactions.

In the case of very young people who are emotionally and psychologically considerably less mature than those who have completed the final post-adolescent adult cognitive developmental brain changes, their ability to give fully informed consent is generally NOT comparable to a much older partner's. While the law and our culture both recognize the practical realities of differences between partners, and the advantages in a more experienced partner helping a less experienced partner mature and explore, that's balanced by a healthy disgust for predatory interactions in which one partner exploits the other's inexperience, lack of maturity, etc.

The law cannot speak to every case and wisely, does not attempt to do so. It provides a basic minimum set of objective standards regarding the "age of consent" and lets society and individuals judge specific interactions. I do think sometimes we go overboard with the presumption that age difference, in and of itself, is necessarily an evil. But it's a healthier presumption for the young people than the presumption that there's no potential for evil at all.

jesuitically,
Bright

[Imagine My Surprise]

23. Well put, thank you.

[uppityperson]

25. Thank you for this.

Appreciate the succinct explanation. Thank you.

[rucky]

24. How does it compare to a hummer in the Oval Office...

from a 20-year-old?

That oughta be the litmus test of GOP morality standards, seeing they saw it as impeachable and all.

[madmom]

28. from what I understand, the law that foley helped write and get

passed specifically state "any one under 18" so this being a federal law does it out weigh the others?

[BlooInBloo]

31. If you had a 16yo daughter who was the object of interest of a 53 yo man

... would you consider anything immoral about *that*?