Britney's 16 Year Old Sister Pregnant

Discussion in 'Law and Justice System' started by Eightball, Dec 20, 2007.

  1. Eightball
    Offline

    Eightball Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Messages:
    1,359
    Thanks Received:
    252
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +252
    I'm a Californian, and here's my take on this situation. It is pitiful in so many ways, but this Spear's family seems to just unravel, and unravel.
    ******
    Unless it's changed, a California girl 17 years and under is under-age, and if the male counterpart is 18 or older, he can be charged with statutory rape in that state.

    We knew some folks whose 17 year old daughter was dating a 17 year old boy from the same high school in California where we live. The two kids had your typical break-up, and the girl told her parents that she had been having sex with her ex-boy friend in a way to make her look like an innnocent, forced victim. Her boyfrined had turned 18 just a few months before the break-up. The parents of the girl went on a vendetta after the ex-boy friend, and had the boy arrested for statutory rape.

    As far as I know the boy didn't get felony jail time, but was put on 3 years probation. The district attorney felt that though the girl was a minor, that the sex seemed to be consensual. The girl, after the breakup, tried to convince her parents that the sex had been forced on her, and the girl's parents went with wild abandon to nail this boy. These parents were upstanding church going folks, and I think they were in denial, that their precious little girl could consensually have sex before marriage or under 18. The case really was the parents of the girl versus the boy. Also the boy's parents were really put through the "ringer", with the possiblity of their son facing felony jail time, and also having a criminal record over this.

    The girl obviously was afraid to admit complicity in the sexual liason part of her relationship with her parents, and told Mommy and Daddy that this was a very bad boy. Funny how this little going-steady with the bad boy went for about a 1 1/2 years?

    Even though, I think the boy was wrong as well as the girl, I'm glad that the courts showed some leniency on the boy, as the girl and he had been carrying-on sexually when both were under age before the break-up happened when the boy had turned 18.

    Felonies in California mean state prison, and an 18 year old boy sentenced behind bars in a California state prison for turning 18 before his girlfriend does, and being charged with rape would have ruined the kid in my opinion. He would have been "ripe" USDA Prime for the perverts in our California state prisons.
    **********
    Now if the guy who got Spears Jr., pregnant is 19 that's a little different. That's one big old age difference, and a 19 year old, having sex with a 16 year old, and capping it off with a pregnancy does push the limits of leniency in my opinion. I think the 19 year old Papa needs more than a slap on the hand, and should face some judicial encounter. Also a 16 year old girl may have the body of a mature "of age" women, but mentally, and emotionally she's just a pubescent girl in my opinion. She's ripe for being taken advantage of sexually by older men, if her at- -home parental modeling has been lacking in morals, integrity, etc...

    Male, sexual predators, prey on Lynn's age group. They are so vunerable to the older, mature, guy, who gives them that fatherly love image that alcoholic (Spears Papa), absent papa Spears didn't.

    There is a reason in California and many states why kids that commit some pretty terrible crimes aren't sent to prison or charged in the same way as the state considers an adult.

    There is an accountability level that has an onset with humans, and children often don't see or understand the magnitude of their actions, because of their mental, and emotional maturation levels. They still need some lawful discipline, and that's where there are sentences given out to juveniles, but with some altered approaches, or enactments.

    Obviously the state has to put a starting-point for adulthood somewhere, although I'll have to admit that there are a lot of 20,30,40,50 year olds and above that have stunted mental emotional levels stuck back in their childhood years because of drug addiction, or lousy parental teaching/modeling of accountability.

    Anyway, statutory rape laws weren't made to protect the victim's or her parent's honor, but to draw a line between accountability and inability to be accountable in the biggest of life decisions; namely procreation and personal human conduct or behaviour. It also has it's cultural impact on the society, because limits must be drawn in sexual behaviour so that society doesn't undo itself at the seams of behavior that divide us from unreasoning animals, and wisdom endowed creatures.

    Rome was just one example of gradual creeping anarchy and/or splintering of a cohesive society that became sexually amoral, and fuzzied the lines of appropriate and and inappropriate human/societal behaviour.

    If anyone wanting a little understanding of the Rome case; just rent the HBO series called, "Rome" that ran for two years. I understand, that though there was some liberality involved in the drama as far as non-fiction accounts go, the depiction of Roman society was not at all blown out of proportion from reality.
     
  2. trobinett
    Offline

    trobinett Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2004
    Messages:
    1,832
    Thanks Received:
    162
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Arkansas, The Ozarks
    Ratings:
    +162
    The Judge will have to take into consideration the dysfunctional Spears family.

    As to the "boy", well, thats just what he is, a "boy, and that too should be taken into consideration.

    I hate to see someone have a "tag" hung on them at an early age, for something, that later in life is not even a blip on the radar screen.

    We'll just have to see how it all shakes out.:rolleyes:
     
  3. jillian
    Offline

    jillian Princess Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2006
    Messages:
    69,552
    Thanks Received:
    13,012
    Trophy Points:
    2,220
    Location:
    The Other Side of Paradise
    Ratings:
    +22,428
    You're all over the place on this one. Do you or don't you think your friend's kid should have gone to jail? I don't think he should have been jailed, charged or anything else. And most states now have Romeo and Juliet laws to protect kids from that type of abusive prosecution.

    Kids are not going to stop having sex. The whole concept of abstinence only is absurd because they get pregnant because they don't know how to prevent it and don't understand what needs to be done.

    Kids have always had sex. They will always have sex. Thisisn't the fall of Rome. That's just silliness.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  4. Eightball
    Offline

    Eightball Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Messages:
    1,359
    Thanks Received:
    252
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +252
    I think you should stop, take a breath and then write a reply before jumping to conclusions about my "take".

    First of all, I think that the similar ages of the two kids should have ended any court or legal case right their. That is easily extracted from my "take". I'm also considering the fact that both of the kids were very close to the legal California age for voting, which is 18. That would make them adults, and to some extent, very close to legal considered accountability.
    ******
    Secondly, there is this "thingy" with folks on the forum that if they are philosophically at odds with another person, they "must" assume that they will be disagreeing with any and all posts of any and all topics from that person of different philosophical/political persuasion.

    So they start off with........."your all over the place" with your post.

    Actually, I can't possibly believe that you actually read my post, even though our copy pasted some of it. I think you extracted what you didn't like, as you expected my post to be philosophically against or cross-grains to you to start with.

    I happen to find myself giving reps to both those that philosophically are opposite or on opposite poles from me when I feel they've made some sense.

    This "Them versus Us" stuff is polarizing our society in such ill ways.

    "Kids will always have sex"...........What a philosophical triumph of posted wisdom! Well, duh!

    Abstinence is unworkable...............right? No matter how parents model their lives to their kids............they'll have sex before marriage.............etc..... right?

    Condoms are the answer.........since we can't control human urges in kids...........and we as parents are doing everything possible to model the right kind of life, filled with integrity, honesty, "owning up", accountability........right? Yeah, sure! With philosophies like.............You can't stop'em, or they'll do it somewhere if you don't provide the condoms............

    You know........providing the condoms is not much different that being an "enabler" to an addict. As long as the addict has a "fall back" or an "enabler" to protect them from individual responsibility, they never maturate into normal, functioning, responsible, conscientious adults in our society. They will flaunt or fight authority, even if it's beneficial, cause their just spoiled little brats in adult biological earth suits.

    I'm tired of all the excuses. In stead of it being a "wrong" its a "mistake".
     
  5. jillian
    Offline

    jillian Princess Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2006
    Messages:
    69,552
    Thanks Received:
    13,012
    Trophy Points:
    2,220
    Location:
    The Other Side of Paradise
    Ratings:
    +22,428
    Actually, I've read enough of your posts to have a take on your philosophy. You went from talking about what happened to your friends' son all the way to ancient rome. hence my saying you were all over the place. You were.

    As for why I might have made assumptions, and since we're busy being critical of each other, I'm sure others have told you that coming from a holier-than-thou perspective and fantasizing that religion keeps kids from having sex or that abstinence-only eduction is in any way effective is kind of pipe-dreaming. I have no doubt that you are well-intentioned.

    Kids will always have sex might not be a triumph of philosophy and wisdom, but it is true and realistic. I figure that's smarter than taking untenable and unrealistic positions because we "wish" the world were a certain way.

    Giving a condom is not enabling. Kids who aren't inclined to have sex aren't going to simply because someone shows them a condom. They're more likely to make water baloons out of them. However, denying a "kid" (and who are we kidding, 16 and 19 year-olds are not "kids") a condom isn't going to keep them from having sex. They'll just get knocked up. Gee, that'll show 'em.

    I don't see sex as wrong. I see it as a mistake if the person isn't emotionally ready. (And no, we're not talking about true statutory rape where an adult takes advantage of a teen, we're talking about teen sex, so don't put words in my mouth). The way to curb teen sex has been through education, not holiness... absinence only is a failed concept that religious types like to hold onto because then the kids have to *pay* for their mistake.

    By the by, I get and give rep from and to many who disagree with me, as well. *shrug*
     
  6. jillian
    Offline

    jillian Princess Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2006
    Messages:
    69,552
    Thanks Received:
    13,012
    Trophy Points:
    2,220
    Location:
    The Other Side of Paradise
    Ratings:
    +22,428
    A little education on abstinence-only:

    MORE

    http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/publications/stateevaluations/index.htm
     
  7. Skull Pilot
    Offline

    Skull Pilot Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2007
    Messages:
    31,737
    Thanks Received:
    4,487
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Ratings:
    +10,052
    the fact that you are all spending so much time on a pregnant 16 yr old piece of trailer trash is pathetic. the real question is, "Who gives a rat's ass?"

    the only good thing about ids that since big sister is rich we the tax payers won't get stuck supporting her
     
  8. jillian
    Offline

    jillian Princess Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2006
    Messages:
    69,552
    Thanks Received:
    13,012
    Trophy Points:
    2,220
    Location:
    The Other Side of Paradise
    Ratings:
    +22,428
    Actually, she doesn't need Britney's money. She has her own.
     
  9. Dr Grump
    Offline

    Dr Grump Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2006
    Messages:
    19,284
    Thanks Received:
    3,051
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Location:
    From the Back of Beyond
    Ratings:
    +4,228
    If you actually bothered reading the thread you'd see that NO time has been spent on Spears' sister other than your post...
     
  10. Shogun
    Offline

    Shogun Free: Mudholes Stomped

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2007
    Messages:
    30,495
    Thanks Received:
    2,224
    Trophy Points:
    1,043
    Ratings:
    +2,260
    Nick Mulling Post-Spears Pregnancy Show

    NEW YORK (AP) - Nickelodeon is considering a special for its young audience about sex and love following the news that 16-year-old "Zoey 101" star Jamie Lynn Spears is pregnant.

    The television network has made no announcement about the future of "Zoey 101," its popular program aimed primarily at youngsters aged 9- 14. Filming for the show's fourth and final season has finished, and episodes are scheduled to begin airing in February.

    For the special, Nickelodeon said it's talking with Linda Ellerbee, the veteran newswoman who has stepped in frequently in the past with shows on talking to children about difficult issues in the news. She's done shows about same-sex parents, AIDS, the Columbine shooting and President Clinton's impeachment scandal.

    "I think it's important that something be done," Ellerbee told The Associated Press on Thursday. "But I think it's important that it be done in a measured way, and not just to feed the beast of news stories.

    A Nickelodeon spokesman, Dan Martinsen, confirmed the discussions but said no decision had been made.


    more...

    http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8TLBMT00&show_article=1
     

Share This Page