- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Hill incident videotaped?
Posted on 1/14/11 at 10:37 am to bigsister
Posted on 1/14/11 at 10:37 am to bigsister
quote:
No I wouldn't allow my child to be at the same school, but if that were the case, somebody (a parent) forgot to teach morals!
No one set of morals is like the other. Hell, my grandparents got married with one being 18 and the other being 15.
This post was edited on 1/14/11 at 10:38 am
0
Posted on 1/14/11 at 10:38 am to LSUthrilla
THe situation would be the same if the were reversed. Yes parents failed especially her's I can't deny that.
Posted on 1/14/11 at 10:42 am to bigsister
quote:
THe situation would be the same if the were reversed.
Haha would it be really? You know deep down that this is just not true.
Posted on 1/14/11 at 10:43 am to LSUthrilla
From a legal stand point maybe not, but based on my morals yes, it would. Too many parents are forgetting teaching their daughters to keep their pants on and mouths shut!
Posted on 1/14/11 at 10:44 am to LSUthrilla
THe situation would be the same if the were reversed.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Haha would it be really? You know deep down that this is just not true.
I'm thinking that if an 18 year old girl was giving blowjobs to a 14 year old boy, it would be an issue with the law.. if his parents wanted to pursue that.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Haha would it be really? You know deep down that this is just not true.
I'm thinking that if an 18 year old girl was giving blowjobs to a 14 year old boy, it would be an issue with the law.. if his parents wanted to pursue that.
This post was edited on 1/14/11 at 10:46 am
Posted on 1/14/11 at 10:45 am to bigsister
quote:
From a legal stand point maybe not, but based on my morals yes, it would.
Why do you keep bringing morality into this? I just gave an example of my grandparents having relations and getting married at this age... Do my grandparents have bad morals?
This post was edited on 1/14/11 at 10:45 am
Posted on 1/14/11 at 10:45 am to LSUthrilla
I'm kind of on the fence about this one because I see both sides. I realize the law if the law, doesn't mean it's perfect, and it needs to be followed. But I also think of this as two highschool students. As a freshman at a catholic school I remeber there being a couple of girls messing around with seniors. One of my friends was sleeping with a 18 year old junior by the end of the year and we all thought he was just a pimp. As a senior, an 18 year old senior that played football with me was nailing the girls basketball coach's daughter who was a freshman. He knew about it and while he didn't approve, nothing ever came of it. These type of situations do happen and to act like this kid is a piece of trash is foolish without knowing the facts first. I hope for Hill's sake it was consentual and his punishment isn't too harsh, though I do think something needs to be done to make sure a message is sent.
This post was edited on 1/14/11 at 10:48 am
Posted on 1/14/11 at 10:47 am to bigsister
quote:
Too many parents are forgetting teaching their daughters to keep their pants on and mouths shut!
other than the rare case of STDs via oral sex, if they're not having actual sex, what is the potential harm?
there are the social mores involved (being a slut)
but you cannot compare having vaginal intercourse to oral sex. 2 completely different ballgames
Posted on 1/14/11 at 10:47 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
SlowFlowPro
In your opinion is he looking at prison time?
I think that he should be punished (expulsion) but prison time would be ridiculous.
Posted on 1/14/11 at 10:50 am to Mr. Wayne
Mr. Wayne has it nailed... Everyone here realizes Hill and his friend screwed up and made a bad decision (as did probably everyone on this board at 18) and he will have to face the consequences as the law is written for very little interpretation. Everyone is saying the law is just too harsh. We also have example after example of this happening all too often btwn seniors and freshman. I believe alot of these problems could be mitigated by merely moving the 9th grade to the middle school.
I am in no way trying to say what Hill did was not a problem, becuase I think it is a big deal. Just not a 10-25 yrs in jail and registered sex offender big deal.
I am in no way trying to say what Hill did was not a problem, becuase I think it is a big deal. Just not a 10-25 yrs in jail and registered sex offender big deal.
Posted on 1/14/11 at 10:50 am to LSUthrilla
No, they don't and my opinion in that matter is not relevant. That was acceptable in that time period. THere were no laws about this then. My grandparents did the same thing!
Posted on 1/14/11 at 10:52 am to bigsister
quote:
That was acceptable in that time period.
So somehow between now and 60 yrs ago one is now considered a sexual predator?
Posted on 1/14/11 at 10:56 am to LSUthrilla
quote:
So somehow between now and 60 yrs ago one is now considered a sexual predator?
maybe unfortunatly, but yes.
40 years ago, I could drink, legally, at 18. Now no one can.
Laws change. Are they always right? No. But they are what they are until they are changed.
Posted on 1/14/11 at 10:57 am to AcetylCoA
quote:
In your opinion is he looking at prison time?
i doubt the DA will go to trial on oral sexual battery, and he'll offer a plea to felony carnal knowledge or misdemeanor carnal knowledge. the misd. being by far the best for everyone
i seriously, seriously doubt a DA in BR tries to play hardball with a kid on this charge
if hill has other run-ins with the law, this changes things, obviously
Posted on 1/14/11 at 10:58 am to LSUmomma
quote:
40 years ago, I could drink, legally, at 18. Now no one can.
drinking underage is a minor, minor offense
hell, driving while drunk is a minor offense
what happened in this situation is a minor offense, but it is treated as a very, very harsh offense
Posted on 1/14/11 at 11:01 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
40 years ago, I could drink, legally, at 18. Now no one can.
drinking underage is a minor, minor offense
hell, driving while drunk is a minor offense
what happened in this situation is a minor offense, but it is treated as a very, very harsh offense
I'm not arguing against any of that.. my only point is that LEGALLY this activity in this setting lables someone as a sexual predator. I'm not entering the fray as to how "just" the law is.. only that it's now the law...
Posted on 1/14/11 at 11:05 am to LSUmomma
quote:
I'm not arguing against any of that.. my only point is that LEGALLY this activity in this setting lables someone as a sexual predator. I'm not entering the fray as to how "just" the law is.. only that it's now the law...
Thank you for that profound statement
For sure he is guilty of breaking the law.
Posted on 1/14/11 at 11:11 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
but you cannot compare having vaginal intercourse to oral sex. 2 completely different ballgames
in terms of sluttiness?
Posted on 1/14/11 at 11:14 am to Elleshoe
quote:
in terms of sluttiness?
in terms of anything
first and foremost, vaginal sex opens the possibility of pregnancy. this is a social, moral, and societal disruption
secondly, vaginal sex is more likely to result in STD transfer (compared to oral, not compared to anal)
Posted on 1/14/11 at 11:17 am to SlowFlowPro
eh, in those regards... I'd probably tend to look down on a girl more who has blown a whole slew of guys over one who has fricked them (assuming she's smart enough to have used contraceptives)
Page 13 of 19
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News