NE to Parents: We're Better at Raising Your Kids

Post by **GORDON** » Mon Aug 01, 2005 10:08 pm

From here.

Edited By GORDON on 1124740910

Post by **TheCatt** » Mon Aug 01, 2005 10:27 pm

I hate government.

Paul · Post by **Paul** » Tue Aug 02, 2005 9:16 am

(There's not a lot of info on the family, so I made a lot of presumptions. So I'm basically judging a book by it's cover here.)

Any 21 year old irresponsible and *criminal* enough to knock up a 13 year old is not going to be a bread winner. He's going to be an irresponsible loser with no grasp of consequence... the worst kind of loser.
He should either go to jail or join the armed forces to learn a lesson in maturity.

I think the girl's parents are screwed up, and they raised a screwed up daughter. I really doubt that sending the father to jail will result in the mother/baby being in a worse situation. Daddy won't be using their welfare checks for booze and weed.

I think that if the 21 year old had a bit of stability and he'd set up a stable living environment, that the Nebraska authorities would have decided not to persue the case.

Lets say he beat the shit out of her and sent her to the hospital. Then, six months later, they become boxing partners so he could legally punch her. That doesn't excuse the previous crime. A 21 year old had sex with a 13 year old in Nebraska. According to Nebraska state law, that's pedophelia, and he can be convicted.

I see 21 year old impregnating a 13 year old girl as about the same as him beating the shit out of her. Only, being punched-up one day may hurt less than giving birth, and it won't keep you out of school or be a financial/emotional bourdon for the next 18 years (or more).

Post by **GORDON** » Tue Aug 02, 2005 12:03 pm

I think that if the 21 year old had a bit of stability and he'd set up a stable living environment, that the Nebraska authorities would have decided not to persue the case.

You don't know the Nebraska authorities the way I do.

I know enough to give the couple the benefit of the doubt... and you also have to realize that life is different out there in the backwaters of Nebraska. Life hasn't changed a lot out there for the last 50 years.

Post by **GORDON** » Tue Aug 02, 2005 2:11 pm

By the way, Paul, given our limited information, I will recognize that you could be right, and I'm wrong.

Just to get that out there.

Mommy Dearest · Post by **Mommy Dearest** » Tue Aug 02, 2005 3:08 pm

By the way, Paul, given our limited information, I will recognize that you could be right, and I'm wrong.

Just to get that out there.

I know your opinion of the Nebraska authorities also and commiserate with you.

However, Paul said exactly what I was thinking the moment I read the post. The parents should also be in prison and the young girl given as much support as possible.

And, I don't care how backwards Nebraska is the girl was raped, and 13 year olds can not consent to marriage, or any other legal matter.

PS: Your parents were both 17 and consenting

Post by **GORDON** » Tue Aug 02, 2005 3:20 pm

1. So where's the line where it's OK for the State to raise your kids for you? Apparently it's somewhere between the ages of 14 and 17.

2. Let's just all be happy that Ohio didn't decide to throw <s>you both</s> your parents in jail because their arbitrary line was at 18.

Edited By GORDON on 1123010578

Paul · Post by **Paul** » Tue Aug 02, 2005 3:24 pm

PS: Your parents were both 17 and consenting

Pxplzthx!

Post by **TheCatt** » Tue Aug 02, 2005 8:18 pm

Still, if the PARENTS agree, wtf is the government doing?

Post by **Vince** » Tue Aug 02, 2005 10:00 pm

Still, if the PARENTS agree, wtf is the government doing?

I think the problem here is that reasonable people can disagree with where the line should be, but most agree that there should be a line.

You may disagree with the Nebraska authorities, but where do you draw the line? What if another state allows a 10 year old to marry with parental consent? How about 7? 5? 2?

At some point, most people would want their standards of what's decent to apply to what is acceptable and legal.

Then the question just becomes "Where do we draw the line?"

Mommy Dearest · Post by **Mommy Dearest** » Tue Aug 02, 2005 10:35 pm

Laws and the adherance to them is what makes us civilized. Check out what goes on in Utah these days and let me know that it is acceptable.

Malcolm · Post by **Malcolm** » Tue Aug 02, 2005 11:56 pm

Laws and the adherance to them is what makes us civilized. Check out what goes on in Utah these days and let me know that it is acceptable.

You mean the state w\ the porn czar?

Mommy Dearest · Post by **Mommy Dearest** » Wed Aug 03, 2005 12:06 am

Laws and the adherance to them is what makes us civilized. Check out what goes on in Utah these days and let me know that it is acceptable.
You mean the state w\ the porn czar?

No where the 50 and 60 year old men take 12 and 13 year olds as wives. Against the law but the govt turns their heads. Sorry but I think the young ones do deserve the law to protect them.

Mommy Dearest · Post by **Mommy Dearest** » Wed Aug 03, 2005 12:07 am

Laws and the adherance to them is what makes us civilized. Check out what goes on in Utah these days and let me know that it is acceptable.

You mean the state w\ the porn czar?

No where the 50 and 60 year old men take 12 and 13 year olds as wives. Against the law but the govt turns their heads. Sorry but I think the young ones do deserve the law to protect them.

And I should add one of many wives. O but I forget. They are protecting them and taking care of them so the state doesn't have to. Well guess what guys. Let them grow up and get an education and they can take care of themselves. Unless it is against your religion to allow that.

Edited By Mommy Dearest on 1123042096

Post by **Vince** » Wed Aug 03, 2005 2:05 am

Sorry but I think the young ones do deserve the law to protect them.

Like I said, it's just tricky to decide where "protection" ends and "interference" begins.

Mommy Dearest · Post by **Mommy Dearest** » Wed Aug 03, 2005 8:26 am

Sorry but I think the young ones do deserve the law to protect them.
Like I said, it's just tricky to decide where "protection" ends and "interference" begins.

Very Hard

Post by **Vince** » Wed Aug 03, 2005 9:34 am

I have to say I prefer the states each deciding this rather than the federal government.

At least this way there are options.

mbilderback · Post by **mbilderback** » Wed Aug 03, 2005 9:53 am

I really don't think state's rights enter into question here, nor do I think that NE ignored a legal marriage contract. The 21 year old should have been arrested for what he did to a 13 yr old girl. It doesn't matter what happens afterwards, the fact is, he broke the law by raping a 13 yr old girl when they were not married. He's a pedophile and if any of you think a 13 yr old has the maturity to decide upon whether to have sex or not, MUCH LESS get married, you need to spend some time around 13 yr olds. Yes, the parents helped make the decision, but that was completely after the fact. What it boils down to for me, when it comes to NE stepping on the parent's toes, is that they obviously weren't very good parents in the first place, THEY LET THEIR 13 YR OLD DAUGHTER GET PREGNANT! I don't give a damn where you live, that's bad parenting. NE should charge the parents with contributing to the delinquency of a minor, the 21 yr old pedo with rape, and put that child into protective custody.

So...in a nutshell, G, you're wrong.

Post by **GORDON** » Wed Aug 03, 2005 10:51 am

He's a pedophile and if any of you think a 13 yr old has the maturity to decide upon whether to have sex or not, MUCH LESS get married, you need to spend some time around 13 yr olds.

If you think you can control what a 13 year old does 24 hours a day, you need to spend some time around 13 yr olds.

I've heard plenty of parenting nightmares where,m in my opinion, the parents did everything they could (within the law), and the kids were fuckups, anyway.

And, all other things being equal (assuming the guy has a job, and isn't abusive), it's best for everyone if the baby's daddy is in jail? Nebraska says it is. Both sets of parents think it isn't. To assume the man is abusive is to assume the parents don't care that the girl, their daughter, is getting smacked around. I, for one, didn't automatically assume that. I assumed that parents kind of liked their kids.

mbilderback · Post by **mbilderback** » Wed Aug 03, 2005 11:26 am

Let me re-iterate, Gordo. 13. This girl isn't even in high-school yet, the parents HAD to know that their daughter was dating or at least seeing a 21 year old boy. That, in and of itself, would land any daughter of mine in a prison cell of a room for the two months it would take for the 21 yr old to loose interest. And, then, afterwards, to even DREAM that a 13 yr old would be ready for marriage is absolutely dispicable. I have a step-sister who was dating a 15 yr old at 13. Even then the differences were extremely apparent in maturity levels, the two were NEVER left alone together, and all interactions between them were monitored. Personally, I wouldn't let a 13 yr old date at all, but that wasn't my call. So, could my 13 yr old step-sister have gotten pregnant? Sure, maybe, but she sure as hell wouldn't have gotten married afterwards. She would have gone to a private, all-girl school, had the child, and had help raising it from her parents. She would have never again seen the boy. And this was a 15 yr old, where neither of them could be called rapists.