In article ,
Gunner Asch wrote:

On Fri, 23 Apr 2010 22:10:03 -0400, Joseph Gwinn
wrote:


As I recall, it was not forcible, it was statutory.

Was it rape? yes/no

Apparently not, as discussed by other posters. I don't really recall the
details anymore, as I didn't live in Mass then.


Doesnt spell good things for your Mom, did it?

It was the lesser of the evils.

Joe Gwinn

So your mom voluntarily voted for a rapist.

Seems pretty unlikely, doesn't it. I don't recall her ranting about rape.
If it were, I would have heard about it.

Nope..not if it occured in an area where the age of consent is over 16.

And getting the kid drunk..is definately illegal.

But it isn't rape of any kind.


So, what's the point of this exchange? She was there. You were not.

What is the point? Good question. Why DID you join in?

I used Studds as an example of Leftwing degeneracy..and you go defending
it.

So you approve of degeneracy..or do you simply give leftwingers a pass
on it?

Well, in this particular case, I have direct information, which was in short
supply.

And the voters in Studds' district clearly didn't think it was as serious as you
do, and they were there, and had a direct stake in the outcome.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerry_Studds

"Studds received two standing ovations from supporters in his home district at
his first town meeting following his congressional censure." I actually recall
reading about this back then.


I have no idea why leftwing versus rightwing would matter in this 1973 case.
It's more a matter of all politics being local.

Joe Gwinn