Denys raises a good question here -- what age, exactly, constitutes an
"adult"? However, just because "adulthood" isn't defined in the U.S.
Constitution, doesn't mean that there are no federal laws that cover the
topic. I don't know where an "adult" is legally described, but
considering the fact that child pornography and other sexual
exploitation of children are federal offenses, it's obviously defined
somewhere.
There may or may not be a federal law against murder. I must say, it
would be weird if there was not.
Art Frank
Manager of Information Systems
OHSU Foundation
[log in to unmask]
(503) 220-8320
>>> Denys Beauchemin <[log in to unmask]> 11/18/03
05:49PM >>>
Would someone be nice enough to enlighten me as to where in the US
constitution, the definition of an adult is to be found? I am not
being
flippant here; I would just like to know if it's in the US
constitution.
I understand that each state has laws that define "adult" as being
someone who has reached a certain age. It is not the same for every
state, and for every purpose (marriage, drinking, driving, contracts,
etc...)
If the definition of an adult is in the constitution, then there is no
problem. If it is not, if it is instead defined by various states,
then
the ruling from the supreme court that two adults can do whatever they
want in the bedroom (i.e. overturning a state law) may turn out to be
a
dangerous precedent.
Also, I cannot find in the US constitution where murder is prohibited.
I am sure it's because I am not looking hard enough. But let's
suppose
that is also (just) a state law. What is to stop duels in the
bedroom?
For that matter, define "bedroom."
Denys
-----Original Message-----
From: HP-3000 Systems Discussion [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On
Behalf Of Jay Maynard
Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2003 4:12 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [HP3000-L] OT: Enlightenment?
On Tue, Nov 18, 2003 at 04:59:21PM -0500, Tim Cummings wrote:
> > This is fully as repugnant morally as not allowing racial
minorities
to
> > marry whom they wish, and for the identical reason.
> My guess is the next case to be heard will be filed by NAMBLA.
> Then this comment will appear again.
Nice try. My comment was directed only to the case of consenting
adults.
Equating gay marriage to pedophilia is a favored tactic of religious
zealots
who can't see the difference between consenting adults and children
who,
by
definition, can't consent.
Your comment is especially offensive to me, as I have a close relative
who
was a victim of childhood sexual abuse. It was, also, one of the much
more
common cases: the assault was by a teenage relative on a young girl.
Heterosexual child ause is much more common than that between a man
and
a
boy.
* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
|
