Bart,
Definitely you can do live radio. It worked very very well.
 
On the last segment you asked about sex and teen age boys.....and adults. 
You did not include girls in it.

That was intentional.
I've never been a teenage girl.

 
Several questions. First, one woman who is pregnant with the teen's child has married the kid. 
Maybe he was ready for parenthood, maybe not, but now at 15 the price he pays for giving into his 
15 year old passions is pretty large. The teacher was supposedly the adult there, and the kid should have 
been able to trust the adult to behave like one. Adults weigh consequences...15 year old boys do not. 

Is this a crime? I think so. 
What if my impressionable 15 year old geeky kid who barely understands life, but has great promise in this world 
is seduced by such a woman? Can I really comfort myself with the fact that my horny kid is getting some? Doubt it.

Your point is valid, but what if your impressionable 25 year old geeky kid who barely understands life, 
but has great promise in this world, is seduced by such a woman? 
 

No one will argue that teen age boys are legendary for sex drives. So?

 
And, you did not include girls. Girls wish to have romantic lovers who are dashing and handsome. 
Can we now open the door for male teachers whose resources far outweigh those of teen age boys 
to romance their female students and even seduce them into marriage? Impregnate them? 
Just because they are now mature enough to have a sex drive as well, no matter how much less defined that is?

Part of the topic was "Boys are different than girls."
I'm not for older men seducing teen girls.

 
It comes down to the same question, who has the maturity and the responsibility in the relationship? 
What should the laws be governing that? Maybe changed, maybe not.
 
And, let me add here, you do not make the same question concerning possibly gay young men and priests. 
Why not allow gay priests to give it to gay young men who are also equally sexually arroused, one can argue.
 
What if America wasn't a "sex is bad" country?
What if parents talked to their kids about sex, instead of letting them learn the facts of life from guys 
at the pool hall or girls hearing about the Coca-Cola "morning after pill" at a slumber party?
 

The problem in both of these instances is that the adult is entrusted with underage children that are 
part of families who are trusting that adult to be a role model and to do no harm to our kids.
 
Now, if you change the rules, and make it a free for all, then kids can be prepared to live in that world by their parents. 
If we were to declare 15 the age of majority, then, we would have to change our viewpoints on what we teach our kids when. 
Maybe that is the way to go, but so far, that is not the world we teach kids to live in yet.

If I had a kid, we would talk about sex and drugs and cigarettes loooong before it was necessary.

 
There is a school of thought that older people should initiate younger people into sexuality in a safe environment 
(emotionally and safe from disease and pregnancy), but such thoughts are radical feminist in their origins. Call some 
right wingers and ask them what they think about that? Until we depoliticize sex, such a system would not work anyway 
since sex in our society is reserved for the achievers and the beautiful, as you so aptly described by calling sex with a 
beautiful woman a winning poker hand. Sex is a reward. Check with the congress critters and see if they like those brothels on the hill.
 
What you have hit upon is a contradiction that social science has recognized long ago, kids mature at ages appropriate 
for breeding in early teen years in a society which is asking them to put off that task until a decade or more passes.
 
Think of The Blue Lagoon and how much backlash that suffered. What we social scientists have always said is that kids
of that age will be sexually active and we need to give them all the info they need to do so without a lifetime of guilt and 
consequences. We give them little power in the world, they certainly cannot be responsible if they do not have the tools
to carry out the tasks responsibility requires.
 
So, IMO we have to say no to adults in roles of public trust having sex with kids, or adults having sex with kids period. 
Penalties may be up for modification, but the whole thing is unacceptable. And, if a person finds they cannot help 
themselves, then they need to find another career. Ethical behavior may not be convenient, but it protects the majority 
of the people. Throwing them away endangers the majority. No matter if you find areas of disagreement and contradiction, 
you must cut the issue somewhere, and this is where I cut it.

Rather than opt for a free for all adult seduction of kids, inviting pedophiles into teaching etc, 
why not fight for sexual freedom for adolescents? Makes more sense and fixes more problems to boot.
 
I will save your casual sexual objectification and ranking of women for another discussion. 
However, consideration has been given to the fact that you are an Okie.
 
ha ha

Mags
 

Mags, I'm not for adults having "sex with children."
I don't want to "make it a free for all."

I'm just saying I remember being a boy at 14, and 15 and 16 and the press 
is throwing gas on these fires because they know people want to read about it.

Lastly, as far as my "casual sexual objectification and ranking of women,"
if men didn't have that, I don't think either of us would be here without it.
 
 

 back to  bartcop.com