Louisiana mother ordered to pay child support, give full custody to her rapist

[Anti Federalist]

To my friend [MENTION=3169]Anti Federalist[/MENTION], when we do "peaceful separation" you get this one.

I'm missing something here...

How does wanting peaceful political separation from the Marxist mob lead to more child rape?

How does acknowledging that is has become necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, lead to weird child custody rulings?

 

[jmdrake]

I'm missing something here...

How does wanting peaceful political separation from the Marxist mob lead to more child rape?

How does acknowledging that is has become necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, lead to weird child custody rulings?

I didn't say anything of the sorts. I just said "You get this one." It's like playing pick up basketball. Some people nobody wants on their team. In other words....I was making a joke...lighten up.

 

[jmdrake]

only have to be 16 to drive.

and I was served in bars at 16.

And the Point is.. Establish a Promiscuous pattern and Rape Goes away.

The Guy was supporting his Daughter,, until this issue was PUSHED.

Not statutory rape. You apparently don't know how that law works.

When I was in High school I was dating a girl that was younger (didn't know it)..never did get together with her,, but she wanted to.

After we broke up,, I heard she turned 12 and was dating a Guy in the Air Force,, he had a car.

And the guy in the Air Force with a car, assuming that he was over 18 and didn't get in through some sort of age exception, was guilty of statutory rape if he slept with her. If we cross the line with "It ain't so bad when men sleep with 12 year old girls if they really really want it and are promiscuous" then we can't complain when the rainbow coalition lets NAMBLA back in. Glad you weren't over 18 when you were dating her and glad you ultimately didn't sleep with her. Chalk one up for good morals saving your butt. No need to be hypothesizing over "what if" you had been a bit more carnal.

 

[Anti Federalist]

I didn't say anything of the sorts. I just said "You get this one." It's like playing pick up basketball. Some people nobody wants on their team. In other words....I was making a joke...lighten up.

I misread your comment...my mistake.

 

[asurfaholic]

From the article:

Abelseth did not explain whether or not she physically consented to the sexual encounter in 2015 which occurred when she was 16 - a year under the legal age of consent in Louisiana.

In her 2015 police report, she described how she was 'highly intoxicated' when Barnes took her back to his home after meeting her in the bar where she'd been drinking with friends.

'On December 13th, 2005, I was out at a bar with friends. We were drinking and highly intoxicated. The driver left [the other friend] and I at the bar.​

If someone is too drunk to give consent that counts are rape regardless of age. I know of a case of a Vanderbilt football player who was convicted of rape even though everyone admitted he was too drunk at the time to know what was going on too.

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=vanderbilt+football+player+drunk+rape&t=raspberrypi&ia=web



Ummm....girl was under legal age and drunk. It's not a "rape card." It's rape. So what if she didn't press charges? This isn't a case where there are any material facts in dispute. You know her age at the time because you know the age of the daughter. You know his age at the time because he's the father as proven by DNA and his own admission. Maybe she wasn't drunk. That's the only think possibly in dispute. Regardless, awarding this dude full custody makes no freaking sense.

If it was rape and she was so traumatized by it she wouldn’t have waited so long to make that claim. She’s weaponizing her own sexual and irresponsible
decisions to shut the dad out of his daughter’s life.

 

[jmdrake]

If it was rape and she was so traumatized by it she wouldn’t have waited so long to make that claim. She’s weaponizing her own sexual and irresponsible
decisions to shut the dad out of his daughter’s life.

OMFG! People react to trauma different ways! You have NO clue as to what the hell you are talking about! I was molested as a child and I blocked it out of my mind until the molester apologized years later. And you and [MENTION=982]pcosmar[/MENTION] are full of crap talking about her trying to shut this man out of her daughter's life. HE WAS THE ONE GOING FOR FULL CUSTODY! This isn't a "if it was rape" case. IT WAS RAPE! There is NO denying that fact. The POS that did this to her can't deny the fact. Saying "I didn't know she was only 16" doesn't change the fact that it was rape. I hope you don't have a daughter.

 

[jmdrake]

I misread your comment...my mistake.

That's cool. On a side note you also get Judge Roy Moore and anybody in this thread that thinks that a grown ass man impregnating a 16 year old girl somehow might not be rape. Sorry but I don't won't allow that in my partition. I've got to find a way to claim R Kelly is white. Let me think on that.

 

[Invisible Man]

If someone is too drunk to give consent that counts are rape regardless of age.

I disagree. If a person voluntarily gets drunk, then when they make that choice they take on the responsibility of the choices they make in the inebriated state they chose to get in. If he had somehow manipulated her to get drunk or roofied her that would be different. And the fact that she had just been in a bar where she apparently was able to pass for drinking age (again, by her own choice) makes it really hard for me to blame him for treating her like an adult.

Ummm....girl was under legal age and drunk. It's not a "rape card."

Under an age that politicians arbitrarily made up, and drunk because she went to a bar, pretended to be older, and got herself drunk there.

She needs to take responsibility for her own choices. 16-year olds have sex all the time. Almost half of all teenagers are sexually active by that age. They're not all rape victims.

 

[Invisible Man]

Not statutory rape. You apparently don't know how that law works.

You started this thread off by saying the following:

To my friend @Matt Collins, please explain why this "justice" is better than what the so called "anarchist mob" would do.

And now you're appealing to the made up laws of the state of Louisiana as the basis for calling what happened rape.

I don't think there's any dispute that what happened is something that those made up laws call "rape." What is disputed is whether or not it really was rape.

 

[Invisible Man]

Regardless, awarding this dude full custody makes no freaking sense.

I would need to know more facts about both him and her as parents in the here and now, as opposed to focusing on something they both did 16 years ago, before I could pass judgment on that point.

It's very possible that the reason it makes sense to give him custody is because it makes even less sense to give her custody. There had to be some reason he was granted full custody, and it's sure not because the system is biased in favor of dads for that.

 

[jmdrake]

I disagree. If a person voluntarily gets drunk, then when they make that choice they take on the responsibility of the choices they make in the inebriated state they chose to get in. If he had somehow manipulated her to get drunk or roofied her that would be different. And the fact that she had just been in a bar where she apparently was able to pass for drinking age (again, by her own choice) makes it really hard for me to blame him for treating her like an adult.

So....if you allow yourself to get drunk....and someone decides to set you on fire as a prank....you've consented to being set on fire? That....that's your argument? If you voluntarily get drunk....pass out....someone takes you to a gay bar (and you're NOT gay)...and let's everyone there sodomize you....and you get HIV and monkeypox.....that...that's OK in your book? Mmmmm.....okay.

Edit: And before you say "Well that's different in this case" I put the part that I'm disagreeing with you in bold. I'm disagreeing with the ridiculous premise that someone is responsible for anything that happens to them when they are drunk. People sometimes drink to the point when they are passed out. At that point they aren't even making "decisions." She claimed to have woken up naked. That's something that happens to someone passed out drunk. If you wake up naked in a gay bar, arse up and pain coming out of your rectum, you didn't "consent."

Under an age that politicians arbitrarily made up, and drunk because she went to a bar, pretended to be older, and got herself drunk there.

And under an age that the dude involved knew about. So what age do you think it should be? We have an implication that 12 might be old enough to treat as an adult. Are you going to go lower? How about 4?

She needs to take responsibility for her own choices. 16-year olds have sex all the time. Almost half of all teenagers are sexually active by that age. They're not all rape victims.

LOL. Taking responsibility != letting the state give full custody of your child to your rapist just because your rapist you didn't mind having sex with a 16 year old is somehow freaked out that his teen daughter has a cell phone. That's right. He got full custody over a cell phone. It's in the article that you apparently didn't read.

You started this thread off by saying the following:


And now you're appealing to the made up laws of the state of Louisiana as the basis for calling what happened rape.

I don't think there's any dispute that what happened is something that those made up laws call "rape." What is disputed is whether or not it really was rape.

ROLFLMAO. You TOTALLY missed the point. We have a judge, who gave full custody (until he was shamed in to changing his mind) to a father that he knew or should of known broke the law of his state based on nothing more than the mom doing something legal (giving her daughter a cell phone). That shows the judge isn't following the law. That's not an invitation for a treatise on what the law should be. If we have judges "enforcing the law" then they should enforce the laws as written unless they have a damn good reason not do. (And in that case they probably should resign from being judges).

I would need to know more facts about both him and her as parents before I could pass judgment on that point.

It's very possible that the reason it makes sense to give him custody is because it makes even less sense to give her custody. There had to be some reason he was granted full custody, and it's sure not because the system is biased in favor of dads for that.

Nope. You have all the information you need to make an intelligent decision on this if you actually want to. The rapist, again under the laws of the state of Louisiana (and if you want to argue for 4 year old age of consent go right ahead) got full custody over a teenage girl being given a cell phone. Those are the facts. Do you think that was a good call yes or no? And don't give me that crap of "A judge wouldn't be that asinine." YES HE WOULD! THAT'S MY POINT! Look up the case of James Younger, the father that lost custody of his son to his sicko ex wife because he wouldn't go along with her forcing their son to dress like a girl! Read over the Younger case and then come back and explain to me why you think the judge in THIS case is incapable of making a stupid decision.

 

[Invisible Man]

So....if you allow yourself to get drunk....and someone decides to set you on fire as a prank....you've consented to being set on fire?

No. Unless I willingly chose to go along with that while I was drunk. Then, yes, my choice to get drunk in the first place doesn't relieve me of the responsibility for that second choice that I made while I was drunk.

If I cause an accident because of drunk driving, saying, "I couldn't help it, I was drunk," is not a valid defense.

 

[Invisible Man]

under the laws of the state of Louisiana

The laws of the state of Louisiana have no bearing on my position. Nor should they.

 

[jmdrake]

The laws of the state of Louisiana have no bearing on my position. Nor should they.

Then you have no business in this discussion. This isn't about the woman or her rapist. It's about the judge. A judge is supposed to uphold the laws of his state. But since you butted your way into the discussion anyway, what age of consent would YOU set?

 

[Invisible Man]

And under an age that the dude involved knew about. So what age do you think it should be? We have an implication that 12 might be old enough to treat as an adult. Are you going to go lower? How about 4?

Those are fair questions. I'm not completely sure where justice draws that line. But I'm pretty comfortable with saying that it's at an age where a person would not be able to go to a bar and pass themselves off as 21 or older to be able to drink there.

 

[Invisible Man]

A judge is supposed to uphold the laws of his state.

I disagree. An unjust law is no law at all. A judge should uphold justice.

And again, compare what you're saying here with how you started off the thread by saying:

To my friend @Matt Collins, please explain why this "justice" is better than what the so called "anarchist mob" would do.

Now you're saying that the injustice was the failure to judge in accordance with the make believe laws of the state of Louisiana. There's a disconnect between these two positions.

 

[tebowlives]

OMFG! People react to trauma different ways! You have NO clue as to what the hell you are talking about! I was molested as a child and I blocked it out of my mind until the molester apologized years later. And you and @pcosmar are full of crap talking about her trying to shut this man out of her daughter's life. HE WAS THE ONE GOING FOR FULL CUSTODY! This isn't a "if it was rape" case. IT WAS RAPE! There is NO denying that fact. The POS that did this to her can't deny the fact. Saying "I didn't know she was only 16" doesn't change the fact that it was rape. I hope you don't have a daughter.

She wasn't raped. That's just woke drama kicking in. Victimhood mentality. IF he is being honest about thinking she was of age is the issue and not some garbage technicality.

 

[Invisible Man]

Then you have no business in this discussion. This isn't about the woman or her rapist. It's about the judge. A judge is supposed to uphold the laws of his state. But since you butted your way into the discussion anyway, what age of consent would YOU set?

I would make it more about the adult who is responsible for her than about her exact age. Did she live on her own? If so, then being old enough to live on her own meant she was old enough to be responsible for her choice to have sex. Was she under the care of her father? If so, where was he when all this happened? Is he taking responsibility for allowing his daughter to go out and pretend to be adult, get drunk at a bar, and have sex with an older man? If he wasn't around, then why not? If she was under the care of her mom and not her dad, then where was she in this? If her parents were ok with her pretending to be 21, going to a bar, and drinking there, then they should bear the accountability as her parents for the predictable consequences of that, if you really believe that she herself shouldn't. If her own parents can't be responsible for her because she's old enough to be capable of doing things on her own without their being able to know or control it, then how could strangers at a bar where she's successfully tricking people into thinking she's 21 be more responsible for treating her like a child than her own parents are?

 

[jmdrake]

I would make it more about the adult who is responsible for her than about her exact age. Did she live on her own?

There are 10 year old street children that live "on their own." Fair targets for sexual encounters in your book?

 

[GlennwaldSnowdenAssanged]

If a 10 year old boy can get on hormones and identify as a girl, why can't a 16 year old girl identify as a woman?