Reminder: Roman Polanski raped a child

I would think yes, it would absolutely make a difference. If someone had a 16 year old daughter who had sex with her 19 year old boyfriend, I doubt they'd feel as badly about it as if someone broke into their house, pointed a gun to her head, and raped her.
 
RStringfield said:
I will argue it. Stat rape, which implies consent, is different than forcible rape. If you don't understand that then you are clearly a retard.

If you drugged your victim, without her knowledge and even with her knowledge when we are talking about a child, then consent is in question. What's wrong with that?

Stat rape is a crime and should be, but it is not the same as forcible rape. With stat rape we are talking about a criminal that fails to control their impulses in a consensual act, consent is not given legally but in reality. In the other case we are talking about a violent criminal who does not care about consent. That's a distinct difference.

Your great grandmother may well have been married and bearing children before she was able to fully consent, by today's law. Due to culture we NOW take a dim view of that and, probably, rightfully so. But, It is still different than forcible rape.
Click to expand...


Bottom line: the statute was at the time of the incident that 13 was well below the age of consent.

There was a trial where the girl testified that Polanski continued his sexual advances after she repeatedly said no and asked to leave. Her will to physically resist (and how much could that have been....a 13 year old child against a grown 40-something man?) was impaired by a Qaulude and booze (also illegal to distribute to a minor).

That's when it becomes rape. Plain and simple.

Polanski fled before receiving his final sentence. Therefore, his punishment will be based on that, because the girl, now a woman, did NOT recant her testimony or drop the charges before he fled.

IMHO, guys who want to have sex with kids should be taken out to a field and shot...high school is over guys...if you didn't get laid by the hot girl in your chem class then, TFB. Live with it.

And to all those who make excuses or justifications for this shit.....let's see your reaction when some 30-40 year old comes knocking at your door for your jr./sr. high school daughter/sister/niece. And if that's okay with you, then I'll reserve a hole in the ground next to the bastard for you.
 
Last edited:
To drug a girl at age 13 and then have sex with her after she is telling you no, there is no possible justification for that. That is some sick sh*t.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
This conversation started with and should stay with a 13 year old.
Are you throwing out the 17.99 year old; because you can't defend your same comments when it's a 13 year old?
Click to expand...

are you resorting to this because you can't debate the points i raised?

dude....you're overboard on this....it is not pedophilia, it is rape according to all the facts and the supposed admission.
 
Taichiliberal said:
Bottom line: the statute was at the time of the incident that 13 was well below the age of consent.

There was a trial where the girl testified that Polanski continued his sexual advances after she repeatedly said no and asked to leave. Her will to physically resist (and how much could that have been....a 13 year old child against a grown 40-something man?) was impaired by a Qaulude and booze (also illegal to distribute to a minor).

That's when it becomes rape. Plain and simple.

Polanski fled before receiving his final sentence. Therefore, his punishment will be based on that, because the girl, now a woman, did NOT recant her testimony or drop the charges before he fled.

IMHO, guys who want to have sex with kids should be taken out to a field and shot...high school is over guys...if you didn't get laid by the hot girl in your chem class then, TFB. Live with it.

And to all those who make excuses or justifications for this shit.....let's see your reaction when some 30-40 year old comes knocking at your door for your jr./sr. high school daughter/sister/niece. And if that's okay with you, then I'll reserve a hole in the ground next to the bastard for you.
Click to expand...

Ignorant proles like you should not defame the name of liberalism.

Go join the Republican party... and kill yourself, you piece of human excrement.
 
Yurt said:
are you resorting to this because you can't debate the points i raised?

dude....you're overboard on this....it is not pedophilia, it is rape according to all the facts and the supposed admission.
Click to expand...

Where in the hell did you draw the conclusion that I was talking about pedophilia.
He committed statutory rape, fled before sentencing, and deserves what ever the court's hand down.
 
post_new.gif
Today, 11:42 PM Remove user from ignore list
[ame="http://www.justplainpolitics.com/member.php?u=498"]Just Plain Politics! - View Profile: USFREEDOM911@@AMEPARAM@@View Profile: USFREEDOM911</title>@@AMEPARAM@@USFREEDOM911[/ame] This message is hidden because USFREEDOM911 is on your ignore list.
 
Yurt said:
yes....are you telling me that is someone is 17.99 years of age.....that makes a moral difference between 18......

you do realize that during Jesus' time....before and after.....Women and Men married much younger, girls had children in their early teens.....look up Jesus' culture.....
Click to expand...

USFREEDOM911 said:
This conversation started with and should stay with a 13 year old.
Are you throwing out the 17.99 year old; because you can't defend your same comments when it's a 13 year old?
Click to expand...

Yurt said:
are you resorting to this because you can't debate the points i raised?

dude....you're overboard on this....it is not pedophilia, it is rape according to all the facts and the supposed admission.
Click to expand...

USFREEDOM911 said:
Where in the hell did you draw the conclusion that I was talking about pedophilia.
He committed statutory rape, fled before sentencing, and deserves what ever the court's hand down.
Click to expand...

see above
 
Yurt said:
are you resorting to this because you can't debate the points i raised?

dude....you're overboard on this....it is not pedophilia, it is rape according to all the facts and the supposed admission.
Click to expand...

You are wasting your time attempting to debate with him, it is not possible as he is just too damned thick.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top