We really didn’t want to even begin talking about that Florida case where an 18 year old girl had allegedly consensual sex with a 14 year old girl because, seriously, don’t we have better things to talk about than teenagers being teenagers?
But then we read this article which, for the pile of liberal dreck that is Slate, is actually fairly evenhanded. Until you reach the end of it where the author reveals what she really thinks, but that’s par for the course with propaganda broadsheets like that.
The offender, one Kaitlyn Hunt, is now staring at a maximum of 15 years in the pen because she refused to cop to a plea which would have given her 2 years of house arrest, proving that having sex with a minor isn’t the only item on her Stupid Menu. However, in her defense, she was probably encouraged by the howling of outrageously outraged liberal pedophiles signing by the tens of thousands a petition demanding that she go scot free. Here’s a hint, Katie: 45,000 morons saying that the law shouldn’t be the law doesn’t magically make the law not the law.
But what really got our goat was the predictable cries of “homophobia” and “gay rights” from the pedophile left.
Er, no. While it’s perfectly possible, but far from proven in any way (and at any rate it’s not a crime no matter how much you leftist swine would like to make it so), that the parents of the victim are “homophobes”, it’s also completely and utterly irrelevant.
The law doesn’t say that sex with minors is statutory rape “unless you’re gay in which case it’s right bloody wonderful”, and Kaitlyn is not charged with conspiracy to be gay, she’s charged with having had sex with a minor.
So no, it’s not about “homophobia.” It’s also not about “gay rights”, because there is no such thing. Gays do not, and should not, have any “rights” specially designed for them and not attainable for anybody else, anymore than there is or should be such a thing as “straight rights”, “left handed redheads’ rights”, “Buffy the Vampire Slayer fan rights” or “people wot like to eat squirrel stew rights.”
Gays have exactly the same rights as anybody else. No more, no less. They’re also known as “human rights.”
Unless, of course, the people howling about “gay rights” in this case are advocating for the exclusive right of gays to have sex with children. We’d prefer to hold on to our belief that that’s not what those people are agitating for. Please don’t disabuse us of this our perhaps naive belief. You wouldn’t like the consequences if you did. Then again, we can’t imagine this kind of furor if Kaitlyn had been an 18 year old boy, so perhaps… No, we are not going there. At least not at this point.
Kaitlyn broke the law. If you don’t like the law, change the law, but the fact remains that she broke it and now faces the consequences thereof.
Now, if you believe that a possible 15 years in the slammer and an eternity in the sex offender registry is overly harsh for kids being irresponsible and fooling around, then we could talk about that. His Majesty, but keep in mind that he grew up in a culture a bit different than this country’s, would agree with you. We can say for sure that if it had been the law of the land where we came from, we’d have spent a lot of time behind bars because of our teenage hormones and their tendencies to throw reason, caution and common sense to the wind.
If, as is alleged, Kaitlyn and her girlfriend’s liaison was entirely consensual, then we do agree that slamming the prison doors on Kaitlyn for fifteen bloody years is rather harsh. But it’s the law. We also think that it’s blatantly and utterly ridiculous that the Imperial Heirs can’t legally have a drink until three years after they’re eligible to vote and go die in foreign wars, but it’s also the law. A stupid law, but that doesn’t make the following thereof optional.
So if people really want to have a discussion about the age of consent, then maybe we should have that discussion. But not as a separate “gay issue”, because that’s ridiculous. And we would also warn anybody wanting to have that discussion that it’s not going to be a pleasant one. If you remove one “line in the sand”, you have to place it somewhere else. So where should we put it? 16 years? 14? 12? We don’t even pretend to know, but we can assure you that the debate over it is going to be… Spirited.
Doesn’t change the facts in this case, though. You can’t retroactively change the law because you don’t like the outcome in one particular case, and the case here is one 18-year-old having sex with a 14-year-old which, when it happened, was against the law and still is.
Discuss, if you want.