Last week two young teachers get arrested

[Guest]

Hey DoubtingThomas,

I read the material you linked. It's actually not a book -- it's the introduction to a collection of essays. I might pick up a copy -- sounds interesting.

I'm not sure I buy the thesis of the book, given that the introduction starts by listing all the ways sexual freedom has expanded over the past few decades. Rather than an overall war on sex, I came away from the introduction feeling like it was more of a number of discrete circumstances in which the way society deals with sex has become increasingly dysfunctional. For example, if the introduction is correct and the main effect of human trafficking laws has been to punish sex workers, then that's a problem we should deal with. Similarly, the whole notion of labeling teenagers who sext pictures to each other as sex offenders is, in my opinion, insane. At this point, having read only the introduction, I'm not buying into the framing.

The introduction is very good at picking out extreme examples of what appears to be injustice and highlighting them. Are they representative? I don't know. I hope the articles themselves would shed some light on that.

Climbing up to 60,000 feet on this issue, I strongly believe that the rate we throw people into prison is crazy. I think the place to start with that is non-violent drug crimes. I heard a republican congress critter talk about prison reform to move more toward rehabilitation, which I hope is a good sign that the pendulum is swinging back from an extreme emphasis on punishment.

Maybe reform is needed in the area of sentencing for sex crimes. I'm aware that there are cases that seem very unjust on their facts, but a I've explained, that's a very difficult problem to deal with in our system. Handing back to judges a little more discretion in sentencing would, I think, help reduce the occurrence of those extremes. Otherwise, pardons and commutation of sentences are all we have.

I don't know what the statistics are on how often people convicted of sex crimes become homeless. Elimination of or reforms to sex offender registries would likely help reduce whatever rate that is. It may be more effective to reduce the problem by addressing homelessness in general rather than one category of homeless folks. I don't have a good enough grasp of the facts to figure that out.

I have to admit I haven't read that entire book (or essays), but I will likely get a copy soon. It is just not available for an easy pick up at Barnes and noble, but the fact that it is a book (or essays) published by a University Press means it is scholarly.

I guess me and you agree after all.

[_DoubtingThomas]

Glad that Chap, EAllusion, Res Ipsa agree with me, and thank you EAllusion for defending me.

[_cafe crema]

I'm not sure what DoubtingThomas thinks should happen either and the teacher in his OP is facing 2 counts that could result in 12 months each, so 2 years max if jail time is given.

In the OP I mentioned two teachers, but video is talking about other teachers, sorry for the confusion.
I agree they need to get fired, but sending them to prison is unnecessary. Prison should be for rapists and violent criminals, not harmless 20 year old girls.

I don't see that a prison sentence is off the table, and I would go beyond simply firing them and revoke their teaching licenses across every state. Time for them to look into a new career.

[_The CCC]

I never said I was cool with it. I'm glad we no longer practice it. All I've ever said is that marrying a 14 year old in early 19th Century America was not illegal. You are entitled to your opinion. What those teachers did is illegal in 21st Century America.

I said Joseph Smith committed various crimes, one of which was literally bigamy. I literally wanted an answer to that and you're justifying bigamy because he married a 14-year-old.

He was a literal criminal.

Are you cool with him being a criminal bigamist, and subsequently lying about?

- Doc

I also said if you can't afford to do the time don't commit the crime. Joseph Smith was never charged with bigamy. He was held on a charge of treason, and murdered before he could come to trial. Glad to see that you support the murder of someone before charge or trial.

[_Themis]

I also said if you can't afford to do the time don't commit the crime. Joseph Smith was never charged with bigamy. He was held on a charge of treason, and murdered before he could come to trial. Glad to see that you support the murder of someone before charge or trial.

Try to be honest. Regardless of whether Joseph was ever charged, did Joseph break any bigamy laws?

[_moksha]

Thank goodness these two teachers were not burnt at the stake, even if they were breaking the law.

[_The CCC]

Try to be honest. Regardless of whether Joseph was ever charged, did Joseph break any bigamy laws?

Glad to see you are for murdering someone before charge or trial. Who else do you want to murder, or it is just limited to Mormons?

[Guest]

I guess this the extent of The CCC's "fact-based" and "logical" arguments. His defense of Joseph Smith being a criminal is to say that you're cool with murder because Joseph Smith wasn't charged with bigamy for marrying other women, teens, and other men's wives behind Emma's back. One will also note that he never denounces Joseph Smith for his dalliances with teens, married or not, because the age of consent was so low.

So. While denouncing these women for breaking the law AND violating the public trust The CCC can't bring himself to be honest about Joseph Smith's behavior and character because "claptrap" or some such nonsense.

When religion allows you to exist in a Roy Moore state of double standards instead of getting upset with others for pointing out the conundrum a bit of genuine moral circumspection is probably due.

- Doc

[_Gunnar]

For any teachers to take sexual advantage of their current students, whether by mutual consent or not, ought to be regarded as unethical and immoral, regardless of the relative ages of the teacher and student, and certainly ought to be grounds for, at least, firing the teacher, it seems to me. Once the student-teacher relationship is ended, and they are both of consenting age and mutually consenting, it is no one's business but their own if they decide to begin a sexual relationship.

Of course, this is not quite the same as what Roy Moore is allegedly guilty of, except that he used his power as DA to intimidate at least some of his victims into compliance with and silence about what he did (allegedly).

[_The CCC]

I guess this the extent of The CCC's "fact-based" and "logical" arguments. His defense of Joseph Smith being a criminal is to say that you're cool with murder because Joseph Smith wasn't charged with bigamy for marrying other women, teens, and other men's wives behind Emma's back. One will also note that he never denounces Joseph Smith for his dalliances with teens, married or not, because the age of consent was so low.

So. While denouncing these women for breaking the law AND violating the public trust The CCC can't bring himself to be honest about Joseph Smith's behavior and character because "claptrap" or some such nonsense.

When religion allows you to exist in a Roy Moore state of double standards instead of getting upset with others for pointing out the conundrum a bit of genuine moral circumspection is probably due.

- Doc

FACT Joseph Smith was never charged with bigamy. FACT Joseph Smith was brought to Carthage jail because it was felt that he would escape punishment by remaining in the location of the supposed bigamy. Joseph Smith was held for trial for Treason, not bigamy. FACT a group of Carthage Gray's though it was OK to murder Joseph, and Hyrum, and nearly murdered their friend. FACT Joseph Smith is long dead, and you still are OK with his murder.

I never said those women were guilty of violating the public trust. I said don't commit the crime. That takes a jury of their peers to establish. I'm more than willing to let the courts do their job, and if found guilty spending quality time in jail.

I've never said Roy Moore was guilty of a crime. At this point it seems very hard, if not impossible, to prove in a court of law. What I have advocated for him is not to vote to put him in the US Senate.