Horrifying story

[BlueWizard]

Posted: 6/2/04 at 12:03pm

Isn't this news report horrific? I was appalled when I read it. What's wrong with the world?
Gay teen case in Kansas

[DAME]

Posted: 6/2/04 at 12:06pm

I am just so disgusted by the whole thing. This is why it is so important to be involved. To voice your opinion. To not be a Mr Roxy.

[DAME]

Posted: 6/2/04 at 12:06pm

I am just so disgusted by the whole thing. This is why it is so important to be involved. To voice your opinion. To not be a Mr Roxy. To Vote. To get rid of the Nazi running our country.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 6/2/04 at 12:17pm

It sounds more like a statutory rape case than simply teens having sex. Regardless, the sentencing for that particular crime does sound like it is a discriminatory decision for a normally lesser charge. But then again, it's Kansas, so it's not too surprising. Not exactly the San Francisco of the midwest.

[SueleenGay]

Posted: 6/2/04 at 12:21pm

I remember this case from a few years ago and am glad to see it is getting a new hearing. But the fact remains the kid already spent 4 years in jail for this "crime".

[MatthewAddison]

Posted: 6/2/04 at 12:23pm

Maybe Dorthy oughta re-think that "there's no place like home" thing

The story is sick.

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 6/2/04 at 12:32pm

as much as the nazi in me wants to say they're right (just because i'm always in the corner of the "man" against the people), i can't defend it. it's discriminatory because the law as written would sentence heterosexual youths to a lesser sentence.

under the kansas law, consensual oral sex between two teens is a lesser crime if the younger teenager is 14 to 16 years old (which the alleged victim in this case was), if the older teenager is under 19 (which the alleged perpetrator was), if the age difference is less than four years, if the sex is consensual, if there are no third parties involved, and if the two teenagers "are members of the opposite sex."

a heterosexual teen would serve 15 months for the same crime under kansas's so-called "romeo and juliet law."

since i'll be in kansas this weekend i'll make sure to voice my displeasure with this decision to any kansans i come across.

[ckeaton]

Posted: 6/2/04 at 12:35pm

This story seems so ... uh ... draconian.
The laws in Kansas are older than our current President's term though. Don't use every problem in this country as a case against the current administration. When JFK2 probably wins the presidency, nothing will change in Kansas.

Sadly that is the fate of our world. Change is slow moving.

Updated On: 6/2/04 at 12:35 PM

[~FloweryFriend~]

Posted: 6/2/04 at 2:25pm

What a great plan!

Gay kid has sex (considered rape).
You want him to stop.
You send him to JAIL!
The perfect place for people who need to be separated from gay (rape) sex acts!

[Zola Q. LaPlaya]

Posted: 6/2/04 at 3:40pm

This is horrendous. While electing John Kerry might not change Kansas law, the story points out that having a sympathetic (and in this case, Democratic) governor, Kathleen Sibelius, should matter.

Things are only slow to change if we allow it to be so. I'm not so complacent, and I'm not so satisfied with the state of our union to resign myself to inaction just yet.

[ckeaton]

Posted: 6/2/04 at 3:53pm

Ah, but did I suggest that you should resign yourself to inaction? No, not at all.

I just must point out that there is a big difference in the cast list when dealing with state and federal laws.

It's very easy to blame this all on the worlds most visible republican, but that simply not the case.

[BlueWizard]

Posted: 6/3/04 at 3:39pm

I'm glad I posted the story for all of you to read. I was in shock that such things still happen in North America, especially to someone so young. Imagine being that age and spending 4 years of your life in jail for have shared one intimate, consensual moment with someone.

Just to make clear, I didn't post the story for any political reason or to point out anything about the presidency (but let me digress and say that Bush is a dangerous idiot). I'm a Canadian, so I'm not following the US election that closely (we have our own election happening here right now). I'm just appalled at the lack of civil rights displayed by this punishment, and how little media coverage it's received. I'm just wondering how civil rights can vary so much from state to state in the US, and how something like this can receive so little press coverage - I would have expected it to be all over the news. If something like this happened in Canada, even in the most conservative provinces, there'd be a huge public outcry across the country. How often does this kind of thing happen?

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 6/3/04 at 4:46pm

hey blue, where's the outcry against those sharia tribunals for muslims in ottawa? you know the ones where clerics are making decisions based on the qur'an in cases of family disputes. of course their decisions can technically be appealed to canadian authorities, but in reality, the threat of ostracization hanging over those heads in their burqas will keep the ladies in line. thanks for brining a little slice of the middle ages to the new world, hoser.

[dramaqueen]

Posted: 6/3/04 at 5:36pm

oy-thats awful-oy

[BlueWizard]

Posted: 6/3/04 at 6:39pm

Besides the fact that I didn't know about the story from Ottawa, must you, papalovesmambo, attack me and my entire country by calling me/us "hoser"? That's very immature and uncalled for. I never called your country's people names for electing Bush. :)

Updated On: 6/4/04 at 06:39 PM

[BlueWizard]

Posted: 6/4/04 at 8:21pm

But back to the original topic, any other comments?

Updated On: 6/4/04 at 08:21 PM

[krisjoseph]

Posted: 6/5/04 at 3:29am

The outcomes of many Sharia tribunals are illegal in Canada (and the tribunals are trumped by Canadian law), mambo, but freedom of religion is not. You may or may not be surprised to learn that Canadian society allows for aboriginal sentencing circles, Jewish Talmudic tribunals, and even Catholic canonical tribunals. In all cases, ALL involved parties must consent to the process before it begins. Chew on the moral and legal implications of this; if they prove too complex for you (or, conversely, too easy to solve)... well, you're best left living in a country founded in the righteousness of Christianity and Lincolnian democracy.

You're basing a gross generalization on one isolated, uninformed example... pure baiting. I've taken the bait but I won't bite hard, because it's not worth the effort.

BlueWizard doesn't know that Canada DID (and perhaps still DOES) have similar age-of-consent laws for gay sex vs. heterosexual sex... they were challenged a few years ago and I don't recall what the outcome was.

Horrible human rights violations take place here all the time, and there is generally no outcry (dig into the record on the treatment of Aboriginals, if you are interested in peeking into the darkest corners of Canadian society). We're no better than anyone else, and you're certainly no better than us.

Updated On: 6/5/04 at 03:29 AM

[Corine2]

Posted: 6/5/04 at 8:44am

Wow. I can't believe that. It really is sick.
Would a teenager get arrested for the same thing in NY.
I was stunned reading that story. That poor kid.
That is wrong.
What an outrage!

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 6/7/04 at 12:06am

c'mon, kris, you can't tell me that you actually expect that these women will appeal verdicts from sharia courts or that they are in any position to not consent to them. they are promulgating the darkest parts of a ridiculously patricarchal society in which women are treated as property and men are allowed if not encourage to beat their wives. but that's not what really bothers me here. it's just one more indication that more elements of muslim society are unwilling to subject themselves to the laws of the country in which they reside. you watch, today it's tribunals and in less than 5 years you'll have "honor killings" in large numbers and a backlash against law enforcement for trying to stick it's nose into their business. this is not traditional islam, this is wahhabism and it's the door that leads to kids dressed in semtex and stonings.

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 6/7/04 at 12:19am

It is sick to think of ANY teens being sent to jail for consensual sex--have their parents deal with it or give them community service, but good grief--jail time??? And THEN, of course, the double standard between heteros and homos. 17 YEARS? There are people who have done WAY worse than that and gotten less jail time.

It may or may not be right for two teens to go past first base, but most teens do. I wonder if the people who prosecuted and sentenced that boy (or any other case) had ever done the same or more in their youth? Hypocrites!!

Updated On: 6/7/04 at 12:19 AM

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 6/9/04 at 5:27pm

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1086646213053&call_pageid=968332188492&col=968793972154

here's>http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1086646213053&call_pageid=968332188492&col=968793972154>http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1086646213053&call_pageid=968332188492&col=968793972154

here's what the toronto star has to say about the canadian sharia law.

[JakeB]

Posted: 6/9/04 at 6:07pm

Whoah, I just scan read that story, but from what I grasped - you get sent to jail for having sex under NINETEEN even if you're straight?? Christ! I'm glad I don't live in Kansas! God, I love the UK sometimes / God, I hate America sometimes.

[dramaqueen]

Posted: 6/9/04 at 6:08pm

jsut a question-is this the same post about this articleas before ora new one? but yea that really pissed me off-would they ever enforce that law for straighteens -ya right-i dont think so!