Well I think her parents signed the papers plus I also think 1 or 2
of Lorettas daughters married very young. Even after watching the
movie I don't have enough information to make a legal decesion.On the
other hand I would advice my children to not have a relationship with
someone over 18, not have sex until they get married and not get
married until they are 18 or over. If they are going to have sex
after they get 18 without being married then don't sleep around.
Since I don't have children i'm not really sure what I would say. I
did help raise 3 nephews who I did tell to watch out for perverts,
told them not to have sex until they were married but it was better
they not marry until they were at least 30 so they probably would
want to have sex with a woman, if they did use protection, don't get
her knocked up, if you get her pregnet offer to marry her at least
until the baby is born, either way support the child finacially and
be there for the child as much as possible. I suppose the advice I
gave nices would been a bit diffrent. I would say I'm a bit sexist I
know when I was 14 I would have loved to go to bed with 1 or 2 of my
women teachers and I think I really could have handled it if it had
just been sex instead of a love affair. What I mean about being
sexist if my nephews at 14years old had said they went to bed with a
30 year old woman just for sex I probably would have thought " way to
go young man" and probably would have told them ok but don't make a
habit of it and don't get attached to her. If i'd had nieces and it
had been a 30 year old man teacher I probably would have wanted to
kill the bastard and probably would have tired to at least get him
fired.So you see why we need third party juries and
judges. What does Loretta and her
daughter (s) think?--- In [email protected], "jamie
petroskas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> What was Loretta Webb's marriage to Doolittle Lynn? She was 13 or
14 at the
> time. Would you classify Loretta's husband as a pedophile?
> Watch the movie Coal Miner"s Daughter with your children and
explain to
> them what is going on.
> Thanks!-Jamie
>
>
> On 11/18/06, terry12622000 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > if the sex is conentual then its not pefophilla and non of the
> > sexpartners are children, if any of the sex partners is a child
and
> > the other is an adult the adult is agressing against the child,
the
> > jury and courts can determine if the male or female is a child or
> > adult, legislation on age of consent might help at the county
level
> > in most states or even the state level in a small compact state
like
> > New Hampshire, Vermont, Maine or Delaware but the legislation can
> > only be a guideline for contracts and giving law enforcement
> > officers and prosecutors some protection against lawsuits but
> > legislation should never be the last word over due process in any
> > matter including age of consent.--- In
[email protected]<Libertarian%40yahoogroups.com>,
> >
> > Vic Cinc <vicc@> wrote:
> > >
> > > ma ni [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > > Vic,
> > > >
> > > > I what you are saying is you don't think libertarian
philosophy
> > > > views pedophilia as aggression, you would be incorrect.
> > > > Pedophilia, being a non-consensual sex crime that has a direct
> > > > victim, is true initiated aggression. (Just curious: where did
> > > > you get the idea that is wasn't?)
> > >
> > > I think youll find that most paedophiles work on getting what
they
> > want
> > > in a consensual manner. there is rarely aggression, when there
is
> > > agression it make headlines and is not good for business. you
are
> > > probably thinking of men in coats nabing kids into cars after
> > > offering them lolies.
> > >
> > > most acts are done from relatives, friends, neighbours or
employs
> > etc winning trust of
> > > parents and seducing a child when the parents are not about. the
> > harm
> > > only occurs in the eyes of the parents and others. its not
until the
> > > child sees the response in others that they consider any harm
has
> > taken place.
> > >
> > > what you have here in the usual cases, is no real physical
agression
> > > but a moral agression.
> > >
> > > a simple non agression pact does not cover this case, because
what a
> > > parent wants is a moral pact, that says you dont apply your
morality
> > > on my child.
> > >
> > > Vic
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
