|
Post by sofastarch on May 13, 2010 7:18:48 GMT -5
The assumption in sharonw's post is that Criminal Sexual Conduct (CSC)= Rape This is an inaccurate statement. If it were rape, how could the charge be lowered to 4th degree CSC?! The definition of rape according to Webster's dictionary is: "sexual intercourse forced on a person without his or her permission." In Michigan law, law.justia.com/michigan/codes/mcl-chap750/mcl-328-1931-lxxvi.html 1st degree CSC is the only one that includes any kind of sexual penetration. PM was never charged with 1st degree, therefore, the word rape does NOT belong in this conversation at all. All I'm asking is that you don't exaggerate the criminal's actions just because you feel emotionally wound up about the situation. Be rational... or maybe not, that's some other dude on here. Be reasoning rather than sensational. Facts only, please. Sharonw, maybe you'd consider editing your above post so it doesn't look like I wrote all of the comments in the white box... I didn't.
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on May 13, 2010 7:28:26 GMT -5
The assumption in sharonw's post is that Criminal Sexual Conduct (CSC)= Rape This is an inaccurate statement. If it were rape, how could the charge be lowered to 4th degree CSC?! The definition of rape according to Webster's dictionary is: "sexual intercourse forced on a person without his or her permission." In Michigan law, law.justia.com/michigan/codes/mcl-chap750/mcl-328-1931-lxxvi.html 1st degree CSC is the only one that includes any kind of sexual penetration. PM was never charged with 1st degree, therefore, the word rape does NOT belong in this conversation at all. gz's post includes the possibility of 12 year olds. Michigan law states that all degrees of CSC include 13 to 16 yr. old victim(s) (except in school situations which opens up higher age categories as well). All I'm asking is that you don't exaggerate the criminal's actions just because you feel emotionally wound up about the situation. Be rational... or maybe not, that's some other dude on here. Be reasoning rather than sensational. Facts only, please. Sharonw, maybe you'd consider editing your above post so it doesn't look like I wrote all of the comments in the white box... I didn't. For your information I was NOT the one who mentioned "date rape" at all, I merely pointed out that in the case of multiple victims the "date rape" would have to be called "serial rape", as far as I know there was NO pure rape involved....there was CSA though and multiple victims in 2 states.....as I said it is ridiculous to consider CSA "date rape" esp. when it s a supposedly celibate man!
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on May 13, 2010 7:36:59 GMT -5
The assumption in sharonw's post is that Criminal Sexual Conduct (CSC)= RapeI was NOT assuming it was rape...rational is the one who mentioned "date rape". I responded to the ridiculous thought that multiple victims could be thought of as "date rape" and said IF that were so, then it should be called "serial rape"! Otherwords Rational and I both were talking about the action not the perpatrator. Though emotionally CSA is "rape" of the innocent children! IMOThis is an inaccurate statement. If it were rape, how could the charge be lowered to 4th degree CSC?! The definition of rape according to Webster's dictionary is: "sexual intercourse forced on a person without his or her permission." In Michigan law, law.justia.com/michigan/codes/mcl-chap750/mcl-328-1931-lxxvi.html 1st degree CSC is the only one that includes any kind of sexual penetration. PM was never charged with 1st degree, therefore, the word rape does NOT belong in this conversation at all. All I'm asking is that you don't exaggerate the criminal's actions just because you feel emotionally wound up about the situation. Be rational... or maybe not, that's some other dude on here. Be reasoning rather than sensational. Facts only, please. DITTO![/b]
Sharonw, maybe you'd consider editing your above post so it doesn't look like I wrote all of the comments in the white box... I didn't.
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on May 13, 2010 7:39:22 GMT -5
If it's date rape and there's more then one victim, though only charged with one incident...doesn't sound like love-lust, sounds like serial rape to me! I don't know if there was more than one victim. Do you? I was reacting to the statement that parents with teenage daughters would be weary of having him to dinner as if there was a chance he would pull a gun and rape the daughters. At some point the facts will be known and then you can accuse him of serial rape if that is the case. FOR your information SOS, this is the comments in regard to the "date rape" and the "serial rape"...it really had not very little to do with the perpatrator and accusations or speculations, it was a discussion about rape.
|
|
|
Post by sofastarch on May 13, 2010 7:47:00 GMT -5
The assumption in sharonw's post is that Criminal Sexual Conduct (CSC)= Rape This is an inaccurate statement. If it were rape, how could the charge be lowered to 4th degree CSC?! The definition of rape according to Webster's dictionary is: "sexual intercourse forced on a person without his or her permission." In Michigan law, law.justia.com/michigan/codes/mcl-chap750/mcl-328-1931-lxxvi.html 1st degree CSC is the only one that includes any kind of sexual penetration. PM was never charged with 1st degree, therefore, the word rape does NOT belong in this conversation at all. gz's post includes the possibility of 12 year olds. Michigan law states that all degrees of CSC include 13 to 16 yr. old victim(s) (except in school situations which opens up higher age categories as well). All I'm asking is that you don't exaggerate the criminal's actions just because you feel emotionally wound up about the situation. Be rational... or maybe not, that's some other dude on here. Be reasoning rather than sensational. Facts only, please. Sharonw, maybe you'd consider editing your above post so it doesn't look like I wrote all of the comments in the white box... I didn't. For your information I was NOT the one who mentioned "date rape" at all, I merely pointed out that in the case of multiple victims the "date rape" would have to be called "serial rape", as far as I know there was NO pure rape involved....there was CSA though and multiple victims in 2 states.....as I said it is ridiculous to consider CSA "date rape" esp. when it s a supposedly celibate man! You're correct, you weren't the first one to mention date rape. Shame on rational for putting the word "rape" into this conversation at all. Also, you'll find a blatantly inaccurate paragraph of mine in the above quoted post which you quoted in the 9 minutes it was up before I edited it out. I had missed the line in the law above the 13-16 age group line that includes the under age 13 (which I thought was probably included in a different law for children younger than teen). Just the facts, please, sofastarch, just the facts ma'am.
|
|
|
Post by rational on May 13, 2010 11:15:55 GMT -5
For your information I was NOT the one who mentioned "date rape" at all, I merely pointed out that in the case of multiple victims the "date rape" would have to be called "serial rape", as far as I know there was NO pure rape involved....there was CSA though and multiple victims in 2 states.....as I said it is ridiculous to consider CSA "date rape" esp. when it s a supposedly celibate man! I mentioned 'date rape' and then, as I stated in reply #31: When I mentioned 'date rape' I was thinking of non-forcible rape and should have used the term statutory rape instead.Sharon had commented on my use of date rape before I made the correction.
|
|
|
Post by rational on May 13, 2010 11:22:37 GMT -5
Shame on rational for putting the word "rape" into this conversation at all. As Sharon stated, it was more in thee line of discussion since neither 2 nd nor 4 th degree CSC involve sexual penetration. But then, you knew that.
|
|
eaglesnest
Junior Member
Never look down on someone, unless you are helping them up.....Jesse Jackson
Posts: 69
|
Post by eaglesnest on May 14, 2010 19:59:07 GMT -5
Hi everyone ~ I am not into gossip and I would like to mention 2 things that I know for facts. One is that when PM was transferred from MI to WI, it had absolutely nothing to do with any misconduct in MI. The people that know that as a fact probably don't even visit this site. I know it for a 100% fact. The other thing I know for sure is this; that we reap what we sow. If PM has done something wrong, as with any of us, if we are honest with ourselves and owe up to what we have done, we accept the consequences, whatever the consequences are. It is a law of nature that we reap what we sow.
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on May 14, 2010 20:31:46 GMT -5
Hi everyone ~ I am not into gossip and I would like to mention 2 things that I know for facts. One is that when PM was transferred from MI to WI, it had absolutely nothing to do with any misconduct in MI. The people that know that as a fact probably don't even visit this site. I know it for a 100% fact. The other thing I know for sure is this; that we reap what we sow. If PM has done something wrong, as with any of us, if we are honest with ourselves and owe up to what we have done, we accept the consequences, whatever the consequences are. It is a law of nature that we reap what we sow. Thank you, eaglesnest....whether the incidents in MI go with the ones in Wisc. is neither here nor there....CSA is an illness with the perpatrators...there has been NO discovery of anything that cures this illness....the sooner people in the f&w's understand that this is an illness, the sooner things will start getting set to right. CSA is NOT about sex! CSA is about controlling a weaker member of society! It is an illness...it should never be considered to be handled like secret sexual behaviour at all! It is NOT like sex between consenting parties whether it is hidden or whether it is out in the open...IT IS NOT about SEX! It is an illness! The quicker people seek to help stop the perpatrators the sooner there will be less victims which can and do become perpatrators themselves due to the horrible psychological damage it does to them! If not that, then their whole lives are ruined pyschologically and emotionally! So you idea of a perpatrator "owning" up to his/her errors of CSA and things coming out all right, is a dream, it doesn't work that way....it'd be nice if that is all it'd take...but very seldom does that really "cure" anything.
|
|
|
Post by rational on May 14, 2010 20:39:57 GMT -5
I agree but I thought the charge was CSC and not CSA. Sometimes CSC is about sex. In our town 2 high school seniors (1 male, 1 female) were charged with CSC for their behavior with other students. They were over 18 and were found having sexual relations with younger students.
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on May 14, 2010 20:56:52 GMT -5
I agree but I thought the charge was CSC and not CSA. Sometimes CSC is about sex. In our town 2 high school seniors (1 male, 1 female) were charged with CSC for their behavior with other students. They were over 18 and were found having sexual relations with younger students. In young teenagers, perhaps so...but in an adult male who knows quite well he has taken a vow of celibacy? No, Rational...it isn't about sex, if it was about sex, most young workers have all the young females gathered around them quick as a wink and if there is any encouragement on part of the male worker, it's there to be had...just like in the everyday world! Yes, I know the "ages" of victims makes a difference as well...but still CSC would certainly be ruled by the authorities in considering the ages other then that, it'd likely be statutory rape wouldn't it? And yes, I've seen 13/14 y/o girls hang onto the young bro. workers...still it wouldn't be statutory rape...it'd be CSC whereas if they were under 16 it likely would be indecent exposure or some sort of other minor charge! And as someone has said before, some of the uneligible young ladies behaviour needs be controlled by the parents somehow someway....for I know for certain that my Gram pinned down on us girls and I was only 4 y/o when I learned right quick, young girls do not hang around men that are not their parents...we weren't even allowed to do that with an uncle who was close to us and actually was the only "father" figure I knew! So I know parents can teach their young girls quite young to protect themselves....and they should do so.
|
|
|
Post by rational on May 14, 2010 22:31:14 GMT -5
In young teenagers, perhaps so...but in an adult male who knows quite well he has taken a vow of celibacy? No, Rational...it isn't about sex, if it was about sex, most young workers have all the young females gathered around them quick as a wink and if there is any encouragement on part of the male worker, it's there to be had...just like in the everyday world! This is, I believe, expressing your opinion without any facts to back it. Just to play devil's advocate, how can you know it was not about sex? That a young man fell in love with a 17 year old and they made out? Not likely. Statutory rape charge almost always requires penetration and the charges were CSC 2 nd degree which was plead to CSC 4 th degree, neither of which is based on penetration. 2 nd degree and 4 th degree require proof of "sexual contact". Since neither of us know what the activity was, this would fall into the area of gossip. This has no bearing at all on the case. That is equivalent to saying "She was asking for it". So it is the parent's fault? And you statement regarding the CSA charges - don't you feel a correction would be in order?
|
|
|
Post by emy on May 14, 2010 22:48:28 GMT -5
Hi everyone ~ I am not into gossip and I would like to mention 2 things that I know for facts. One is that when PM was transferred from MI to WI, it had absolutely nothing to do with any misconduct in MI. The people that know that as a fact probably don't even visit this site. I know it for a 100% fact. The other thing I know for sure is this; that we reap what we sow. If PM has done something wrong, as with any of us, if we are honest with ourselves and owe up to what we have done, we accept the consequences, whatever the consequences are. It is a law of nature that we reap what we sow. ... So you idea of a perpatrator "owning" up to his/her errors of CSA and things coming out all right, is a dream, it doesn't work that way....it'd be nice if that is all it'd take...but very seldom does that really "cure" anything. It seems you breezed right over eaglesnest mention of accepting consequences following the owning up.
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on May 16, 2010 8:54:43 GMT -5
... So you idea of a perpatrator "owning" up to his/her errors of CSA and things coming out all right, is a dream, it doesn't work that way....it'd be nice if that is all it'd take...but very seldom does that really "cure" anything. It seems you breezed right over eaglesnest mention of accepting consequences following the owning up. NO, I didn't breeze over it, Emy! My whole point is that CSA is an illness, not an action to be considered "cureable" by owning up to anything! It is uncureable...no treatment that works has been discovered at this point.....Yes, one should pay their debt to society which the authorities have sentencing for that cause...but when the perps are released back into society, most of them will repeat their offenses, even thought they have to register as a sex offender! The sooner people get it into their heads that CSA is NOT about sex and and rape is NOT about sex...the sooner things can be set to right within the fellowship, the Catholic church and any other group that hides the perpatrators....thus decreasing the number of unwilling and unwitting victims!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 16, 2010 9:11:52 GMT -5
It would be wonderful if CSA perpetrators could just say "I made a mistake, sorry, I won't do it again" but we have discovered over the last couple of decades that it just isn't that simple. It wasn't just a mistake or some temporary dumb behaviour. No matter how apologetic a CSA perpetrator is, he still wants to do it again, and will if given the opportunity.
I suspect that the desire to offend varies amongst perpetrators and those with a lower level of the motivation can apologize and never do it again, while others will roam forever looking for fresh victims.
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on May 16, 2010 9:29:24 GMT -5
It would be wonderful if CSA perpetrators could just say "I made a mistake, sorry, I won't do it again" but we have discovered over the last couple of decades that it just isn't that simple. It wasn't just a mistake or some temporary dumb behaviour. No matter how apologetic a CSA perpetrator is, he still wants to do it again, and will if given the opportunity. I suspect that the desire to offend varies amongst perpetrators and those with a lower level of the motivation can apologize and never do it again, while others will roam forever looking for fresh victims. It seems part of the illness is the fact that the perps get this great feeling of doing something that is a "no-no"....some kind of great high, is what I've heard from some of them!
|
|
|
Post by snow on May 16, 2010 12:17:19 GMT -5
It would be wonderful if CSA perpetrators could just say "I made a mistake, sorry, I won't do it again" but we have discovered over the last couple of decades that it just isn't that simple. It wasn't just a mistake or some temporary dumb behaviour. No matter how apologetic a CSA perpetrator is, he still wants to do it again, and will if given the opportunity. I suspect that the desire to offend varies amongst perpetrators and those with a lower level of the motivation can apologize and never do it again, while others will roam forever looking for fresh victims. Many are just as disgusted with themselves but continue to do it anyway. There is no cure. Chemical intervention is likely the only thing that will work with any effectiveness at all. Even that is not 100% because some of it is obviously psychological.
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on May 16, 2010 13:41:50 GMT -5
It would be wonderful if CSA perpetrators could just say "I made a mistake, sorry, I won't do it again" but we have discovered over the last couple of decades that it just isn't that simple. It wasn't just a mistake or some temporary dumb behaviour. No matter how apologetic a CSA perpetrator is, he still wants to do it again, and will if given the opportunity. I suspect that the desire to offend varies amongst perpetrators and those with a lower level of the motivation can apologize and never do it again, while others will roam forever looking for fresh victims. Many are just as disgusted with themselves but continue to do it anyway. There is no cure. Chemical intervention is likely the only thing that will work with any effectiveness at all. Even that is not 100% because some of it is obviously psychological. Different medication have been used but with little success! Course some of that failure could be pure non-compliance...once the perp gets out f the penal system and on his/her own, then it is easy for them to find all kinds of excuses not to take the medication that's been presecribed.
|
|
|
Post by emy on May 16, 2010 14:10:04 GMT -5
My whole point is that CSA is an illness, not an action to be considered "cureable" by owning up to anything! It is uncureable...no treatment that works has been discovered at this point.....Yes, one should pay their debt to society which the authorities have sentencing for that cause...but when the perps are released back into society, most of them will repeat their offenses, even thought they have to register as a sex offender! The sooner people get it into their heads that CSA is NOT about sex and and rape is NOT about sex...the sooner things can be set to right within the fellowship, the Catholic church and any other group that hides the perpatrators....thus decreasing the number of unwilling and unwitting victims! Nothing to do with the topic of Peter M, but I see you still discount God's power to heal.
|
|
|
Post by emy on May 16, 2010 14:11:41 GMT -5
It would be wonderful if CSA perpetrators could just say "I made a mistake, sorry, I won't do it again" but we have discovered over the last couple of decades that it just isn't that simple. It wasn't just a mistake or some temporary dumb behaviour. No matter how apologetic a CSA perpetrator is, he still wants to do it again, and will if given the opportunity. I suspect that the desire to offend varies amongst perpetrators and those with a lower level of the motivation can apologize and never do it again, while others will roam forever looking for fresh victims. And some who fall at God's feet and beg may be healed, God willing?
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on May 16, 2010 16:02:08 GMT -5
My whole point is that CSA is an illness, not an action to be considered "cureable" by owning up to anything! It is uncureable...no treatment that works has been discovered at this point.....Yes, one should pay their debt to society which the authorities have sentencing for that cause...but when the perps are released back into society, most of them will repeat their offenses, even thought they have to register as a sex offender! The sooner people get it into their heads that CSA is NOT about sex and and rape is NOT about sex...the sooner things can be set to right within the fellowship, the Catholic church and any other group that hides the perpatrators....thus decreasing the number of unwilling and unwitting victims! Nothing to do with the topic of Peter M, but I see you still discount God's power to heal. Emy, I won't answer that for it'd probably lead in to pre-destination, etc.
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on May 16, 2010 16:04:12 GMT -5
My whole point is that CSA is an illness, not an action to be considered "cureable" by owning up to anything! It is uncureable...no treatment that works has been discovered at this point.....Yes, one should pay their debt to society which the authorities have sentencing for that cause...but when the perps are released back into society, most of them will repeat their offenses, even thought they have to register as a sex offender! The sooner people get it into their heads that CSA is NOT about sex and and rape is NOT about sex...the sooner things can be set to right within the fellowship, the Catholic church and any other group that hides the perpatrators....thus decreasing the number of unwilling and unwitting victims! Nothing to do with the topic of Peter M, but I see you still discount God's power to heal. Those who want help will seek it! m But most mental illnesses are that the majority of the sufferers do not know they have the problem!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 16, 2010 16:10:15 GMT -5
It would be wonderful if CSA perpetrators could just say "I made a mistake, sorry, I won't do it again" but we have discovered over the last couple of decades that it just isn't that simple. It wasn't just a mistake or some temporary dumb behaviour. No matter how apologetic a CSA perpetrator is, he still wants to do it again, and will if given the opportunity. I suspect that the desire to offend varies amongst perpetrators and those with a lower level of the motivation can apologize and never do it again, while others will roam forever looking for fresh victims. And some who fall at God's feet and beg may be healed, God willing? Christian "healing" of homosexuality is a well known hoax. Why? Probably because it isn't a disease. Is attraction to the opposite sex a disease? Of course not. Neither is attraction to children a disease either, but we don't really know what it is either. God will be the perfect judge sooner or later. In the meantime, we have to protect our children from the people whom God has shown no desire to "cure".
|
|
|
Post by emy on May 16, 2010 19:58:51 GMT -5
And some who fall at God's feet and beg may be healed, God willing? Christian "healing" of homosexuality is a well known hoax. Why? Probably because it isn't a disease. Is attraction to the opposite sex a disease? Of course not. Neither is attraction to children a disease either, but we don't really know what it is either. God will be the perfect judge sooner or later. In the meantime, we have to protect our children from the people whom God has shown no desire to "cure".Not a disease? I agree, but Sharon says it's an incurable mental illness. I firmly believe that there have been people who subject their sexual desires to a greater cause, if they are stable. Didn't Jesus say so? Sounds like the jury is still out on God's healing power. I find this statement greatly lacking in faith: from the people whom God has shown no desire to "cure".
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 16, 2010 22:07:19 GMT -5
Like I said, we really don't understand what it is, that's why there is no effective treatment as yet as Sharon pointed out. What we are only becoming to understand now the devastating effect it has on the victims.
You are right. Some people have the willpower to discipline their sexual desires. In fact, that's a key factor in keeping a marriage together. However, put together a high desire with low willpower and you have a disaster waiting to happen.
How so? We see healing every day, we experience it. God caused it all.
Faith without reason to believe is called "blind faith". So yes, that statement is completely lacking in blind faith.
|
|
|
Post by rational on May 17, 2010 4:19:48 GMT -5
How so? We see healing every day, we experience it. God caused it all. I see the wind blowing every day as well. Generally I think it is the movement of air between masses of different air pressure and the data supports my belief and the theories allow predictions. But there are some people who say god causes the wind. We do see healing but there is no data that supports your claim that god was responsible. Not for the disease not its healing.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 17, 2010 5:14:48 GMT -5
How so? We see healing every day, we experience it. God caused it all. I see the wind blowing every day as well. Generally I think it is the movement of air between masses of different air pressure and the data supports my belief and the theories allow predictions. But there are some people who say god causes the wind. We do see healing but there is no data that supports your claim that god was responsible. Not for the disease not its healing. That wasn't the point of the post. The point was that we see healing of many diseases on a regular basis which gives us reason to attempt to attribute the source of the healing: God, man, or otherwise....it's a matter of faith if God. We do not see healing of pedophiles, so how can we credit God or man for healing which does not occur? As for data, millions will testify that God has spoken to them in one form or another. Obviously that kind of data is invalid in your books.
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on May 17, 2010 6:56:25 GMT -5
Christian "healing" of homosexuality is a well known hoax. Why? Probably because it isn't a disease. Is attraction to the opposite sex a disease? Of course not. Neither is attraction to children a disease either, but we don't really know what it is either. God will be the perfect judge sooner or later. In the meantime, we have to protect our children from the people whom God has shown no desire to "cure".Not a disease? I agree, but Sharon says it's an incurable mental illness. I firmly believe that there have been people who subject their sexual desires to a greater cause, if they are stable. Didn't Jesus say so? Sounds like the jury is still out on God's healing power. I find this statement greatly lacking in faith: from the people whom God has shown no desire to "cure".Emy, that is not lacking in faith, that is being realistic...again as I said to answer you it would take going into predestination again and I'm not the scholar on that...Jason is....
|
|