Omaha Red Sox wrote:byfrcp wrote:Omaha Red Sox wrote:
You feel this should be handled differently? I'm sorry, but I don't have a problem with the way this was handled, but if it were the other way around I would.
How does making him pay child support make this handled correctly?
He cannot legally consent to having sex with the girl. Therefore she raped him. So the boy was raped by the girl, the girl had a baby, and now the court wants to boy to pay for the child he legally could not have. There's clearly something wrong with that.
According to the law he was raped. According to our logic he was not. There's a 3 year difference in age here folks. Think about it. It is ok to think outside the box a little bit.
So the courts can now throw out laws and just go by logic? I'm not saying the law that a 15 year old can't consent to sex is right, but it is the law.
This reminds me of that 11 year old boy who killed a girl "fake wrestling". And the court tried him as an adult. The kid was in elementary school and getting tried as an adult. I don't really understand how the law can say you need to be 18 to be an adult (go to war/vote), yet they can try an 11 year old as an adult?