EmberEyes wrote:
vermontsavant wrote:
its a legal technicality concerning concent,not an intentional indorsment of raping developmentaly disabled people.like in the US when someone who is clearly guilty walks on legal technicality.i would not interperate this a pre meditated bigotry towards people with developmental differences
Thank you. This is exactly what it is.
There is no law that specifically say 'But if the victim has a disability, there will be no legal repucussions'. I am sure there are cases similar to this all over the world, where even though it is evident that a crime has been comitted, the evidence or some legal jargon allows the perpitrator to walk.
Personally, I would be fine with comitting innocent people to jail for the mere suspicion of certain crimes; I'd rather have 200000 innocently suspected pedofiles or rapists or murderers or abusers rot in jail, than let a singe guilty one go, but the law is the law.
we also must be carefull because society has desexualized disabled people.in some places a person with aspergers,autism,downs syndrome or anything more serious then adhd or bi polar as a minor cant consent to sex.meaning;if a 16 year old with a developmental disability has a consensual relationship with another,the other person can be charged with statuatory rape.
these beliefs punish those were were open minded and not prejudiced in there dating habbits and stigmatize disabled people as unsophisticated and non sexual
_________________
Forever gone
Sorry I ever joined