California is legalizing pedophilia

[Magical Realist]

A decreased penalty in response to similar decreased penalties on hetero sex with "close in age" minors. No cause and effect here between acceptance of gay sex and the acceptance of pedophilia. Not being on the sex offender registery isn't an acceptance of pedophilia. It's still a crime in both cases.

[Syne]

A decreased penalty in response to similar decreased penalties on hetero sex with "close in age" minors. No cause and effect here between acceptance of gay sex and the acceptance of pedophilia. Not being on the sex offender registery isn't an acceptance of pedophilia. It's still a crime in both cases.

Not "close in age", 14 (minor) and 24 (adult). Ten years difference.

And no, it was not caused by hetero sex laws. It's necessary cause was acceptance of gay sex.

Not being registered as a sex offender is more accepting than before.

[Secular Sanity]

Can't be out of step with a discussion I started. But I can understand why you'd be reticent to divulge whether you're cool with sex with minors. Don't want to leave a digital paper trail.

Whoa, that's really fucked up. We all know that you're known for groundless accusations and false claims but let's just hope this isn't full blown projection.

Not "close in age", 14 (minor) and 24 (adult). Ten years difference.

Like I said earlier, it’s still illegal and they will be prosecuted. 

(SB 145 does not apply to intercourse of any kind with minors who are age 14 or younger. For those crimes, mandatory sex offender registration will continue to be the case for all forms of intercourse.) SOURCE

Like Wiener said, even if you think the 10-year gap is too wide, that may be a legitimate discussion, but that’s separate from having equal treatment for LGBTQ people.

[Syne]

Can't be out of step with a discussion I started. But I can understand why you'd be reticent to divulge whether you're cool with sex with minors. Don't want to leave a digital paper trail.

Whoa, that's really fucked up. We all know that you're known for groundless accusations and false claims but let's just hope this isn't full blown projection.

Oh, quit clutching your pearls. I asked two or three times, and a simple "no" would have been the end of it. Why on earth would someone be so reluctant to disavow sex with minors? I have no idea. Is it trolling? Some bizarre debate tactic? I have no idea why someone would want to be cagey about their stance on that.

I don't remember you answering either. So why not?

Not "close in age", 14 (minor) and 24 (adult). Ten years difference.

Like I said earlier, it’s still illegal and they will be prosecuted.

And I've agreed with you several times now.

The discretion for sex offender registration only applies to 15-17-year-olds.

(SB 145 does not apply to intercourse of any kind with minors who are age 14 or younger. For those crimes, mandatory sex offender registration will continue to be the case for all forms of intercourse.) SOURCE

And why did you leave out this part:

To be clear, this judicial discretion for sex offender registration is *already* the law for vaginal intercourse between a 15-17 year old and someone up to 10 years older.

Is a 25 year old having sex with a 15 year old all that much better?

[Secular Sanity]

Can't be out of step with a discussion I started. But I can understand why you'd be reticent to divulge whether you're cool with sex with minors. Don't want to leave a digital paper trail.

Whoa, that's really fucked up. We all know that you're known for groundless accusations and false claims but let's just hope this isn't full blown projection.

Oh, quit clutching your pearls. I asked two or three times, and a simple "no" would have been the end of it. Why on earth would someone be so reluctant to disavow sex with minors? I have no idea. Is it trolling? Some bizarre debate tactic? I have no idea why someone would want to be cagey about their stance on that.

I don't remember you answering either. So why not? 

I don't think that anyone under the age of 18 should be having sex. Do they? Yep. Do minors ever pose as adults? Yep.

Why on earth would someone ask such a loaded question? Why on earth would they come up the "digitial paper trail"? Yeah, that's creepy. Makes me think that you know your way around.

And why did you leave out this part:
To be clear, this judicial discretion for sex offender registration is *already* the law for vaginal intercourse between a 15-17 year old and someone up to 10 years older.


Is a 25 year old having sex with a 15 year old all that much better?

Like I said, it's a legitimate discussion, but it is separate from equal treatment.

Don't let your disdain of homosexuals make you a fool.

[Syne]

Oh, quit clutching your pearls. I asked two or three times, and a simple "no" would have been the end of it. Why on earth would someone be so reluctant to disavow sex with minors? I have no idea. Is it trolling? Some bizarre debate tactic? I have no idea why someone would want to be cagey about their stance on that.

I don't remember you answering either. So why not? 

I don't think that anyone under the age of 18 should be having sex. Do they? Yep. Do minors ever pose as adults? Yep.

You still seem to be avoiding the main issue. Is a ten year age difference too much, especially between a 15 and 25 year old?
Teens having sex, especially with other teens (or those covered by Romeo and Juliet law, 3 years difference in California), is largely irrelevant to this issue. And as a 25 year old adult, it would be your responsibility to make sure you're not buying lies from a 15 year old. Teens lie all the time. You can't blame the victim of statutory rape.

Why on earth would someone ask such a loaded question? Why on earth would they come up the "digitial paper trail"? Yeah, that's creepy. Makes me think that you know your way around.

What, know my way around how perverts and pedos are caught? Hey, just because you don't care enough to learn the simplest thing about how such people are caught, that's on you.

And why did you leave out this part:
To be clear, this judicial discretion for sex offender registration is *already* the law for vaginal intercourse between a 15-17 year old and someone up to 10 years older.


Is a 25 year old having sex with a 15 year old all that much better?

Like I said, it's a legitimate discussion, but it is separate from equal treatment.

Don't let your disdain of homosexuals make you a fool.

It's not a separate discussion. The Cali law for vaginal sex is wrong, and doubling down on that to appease the LGBT is doubly wrong.

You seem willing to gloss over that 10 year age difference as long as it's presented under the veneer of equality. I'm saying the original 10 year age difference was wrong and there is no supposed "equality" to such wrongdoing. That's like saying if a white man can get away with murder then so should a black man. Murder, rape, and hebephilia are wrong no matter who does them.

You seem to have been duped by arguments of "equality" into defending the indefensible. And you can tell it's indefensible because you have yet to defend that 10 year age difference.

[Secular Sanity]

You could have started a discussion about the ten-year gap, but you didn’t, did you? 

Sounds an awful lot like the supposed slippery slope of "accepting gays will lead to accepting pedophilia" has proven completely true.

Nope. You went straight for the jugular. Why, because you didn’t do what you expect everyone else to do…fact-checking.

So not only has California allowed what many other states would call vaginal pedophilia (technically hebephilia) since 1944, likely contributing to thousands of Hollywood #MeToo stories, now it similarly condones gay pedophilia. Who in their right mind thinks it's okay for a 24 year old having any kind of sex with a 14 year old not warranting being put on the sex offender registry?

Unlike some states, California doesn't allow sex with anyone under the age of 18. We were the first state to enact a sex offender registration law. We’re only one in four states that require lifetime registration. Judges can still force them to register, if they so choose. It’s been that way for awhile and we haven’t heard any complaints from victims or district attorneys.

And now, it’s all about your ego, isn't it? What can Syne do or say to get out of this little pickle? Oh, I know. He’ll start playing the ole narcissistic shame and blame game.

Like I said, don't let your disdain of homosexuals make you a fool.

[Syne]

You could have started a discussion about the ten-year gap, but you didn’t, did you? 

I started a discussion of a news story. And few here seem to be the least bit concerned with that ten year age gap that this law change only exacerbates.

Sounds an awful lot like the supposed slippery slope of "accepting gays will lead to accepting pedophilia" has proven completely true.

Nope. You went straight for the jugular. Why, because you didn’t do what you expect everyone else to do…fact-checking.

Nothing there is a-factual. Not putting someone on the sex offender registry is more accepting (even if only incrementally), people often use "pedophilia" as a catch-all for "sex with a minor", and that ten year age gap wouldn't have been broadened to more sexual activity without LBGT activism.

Why don't you go tell a statutory rape victim how enlightened and "equal" their underage (and likely first) oral or anal sexual experience really was? You know, those poor kids who were groomed, manipulated, or didn't even know how to object to it.

So not only has California allowed what many other states would call vaginal pedophilia (technically hebephilia) since 1944, likely contributing to thousands of Hollywood #MeToo stories, now it similarly condones gay pedophilia. Who in their right mind thinks it's okay for a 24 year old having any kind of sex with a 14 year old not warranting being put on the sex offender registry?

Yeah, that's from my OP, where I explicitly mentioned the ten year age gap.
You look really stupid saying I didn't start a discussion about that and then quoting my OP.

Unlike some states, California doesn't allow sex with anyone under the age of 18. We were the first state to enact a sex offender registration law. We’re only one in four states that require lifetime registration. Judges can still force them to register, if they so choose. It’s been that way for awhile and we haven’t heard any complaints from victims or district attorneys.

And now, it’s all about your ego, isn't it? What can Syne do or say to get out of this little pickle? Oh, I know. He’ll start playing the ole narcissistic shame and blame game.

Like I said, don't let your disdain of homosexuals make you a fool.

Yes, like I said in my OP, Cali has allowed discretion on registering a sex offender with a ten year age gap since 1944...before they started their sex offender registry. And such registries have faced questions of constitutionality, only ruled on by SCOTUS in 2002 & 2003. Victims have had zero recourse in California...since 1944...and DAs can't change laws.


Wait, in all that hand wringing you still couldn't manage to condemn a 25 year old having sex with a 15 year old? Or are all your excuses about Cali being first, and what not, you actually defending it? See, in California, it's just part of the cultural background.

[Secular Sanity]

Same old song and dance. *yawn

It does not shield anyone from the requirement to register as a sex offender. That decision will be up to the presiding judge.

[Syne]

Same old song and dance. *yawn

It does not shield anyone from the requirement to register as a sex offender. That decision will be up to the presiding judge.

So that makes it all fine to you, huh? So long as there's a judge, you never have to take a moral stance on anything. Not really surprised.

And your "same old song and dance" is what you do every time you no longer have a refute. You always start by quoting and responding to my latest post, then you devolve to responding to much older posts, finally to not quoting or responding to anything specific I've said at all..and just making some sweeping dismissal. And that pattern is how I know exactly when I have you stumped. Yeah, it is boring.