luchs@ihldt.UUCP (07/20/83)
I can't believe that they are talking about running for re-election!
Can you imagine the campaign slogans?
Make Illinois a safe place to raise your children...
Send Crane to Washington!
Crane: A good family man who *loves* children.
-Sarahluchs@ihldt.UUCP (07/21/83)
>From Tim Maroney's article of 7-20-83:
"How just is it that we condemn a person for having sex with a teenager?"
If I had teenage children, I would not object to them having sex.
I *would* object to them having sex with a middle-aged member of Congress.
I would worry that he/she was using his/her position of power to intimidate
the teen into having a sexual relationship.
Or, the young impressionable (they often are at that age) teen would be
so flattered by the attentions of this person in a position of authority
that the teen could be easily seduced.
There is such a thing as taking *advantage* of another person (of any age.)
That is what I object to!
Then again, I understand that Daniel Crane is only human and who knows who
was actually doing the pursuing...
Anyway, I think we could do better than to re-elect these people.
If not, this country is in even worse shape than I had guessed.
-Sarah Luchstim@unc.UUCP (07/23/83)
>From Tim Maroney's article of 7-
20-83:
"How just is it that we condemn a
person for having sex with a
teenager?"
If I had teenage children, I would not object to
them having sex. I *would* object to them having sex
with a middle-aged member of Congress.
I would worry that he/she was using his/her
position of power to intimidate the teen into having a
sexual relationship.
Is there any reason to suspect that a Congressman would not be able
to do this with an employee of any age? The pages, as has been shown,
are not without recourse to the press and the law, the same as the
other employees.
Or, the young impressionable (they often are at
that age) teen would be so flattered by the attentions
of this person in a position of authority that the
teen could be easily seduced.
I have exactly the same objection to this as to your statement just
above. The teenagers are no more or less liable to this than anyone else
who works for a Congressman.
There is such a thing as taking *advantage* of
another person (of any age.) That is what I object to!
You have just undermined your entire argument with three simple
words: "of any age". The potential for abuse exists in any sexual
encounter. Certainly a liason between people of widely differing ages
is more suspect, but that is not grounds for automatic condemnation.
Anyway, I think we could do better than to re-
elect these people. If not, this country is in even
worse shape than I had guessed.
Why? I don't understand your use of "anyway" here. That implies
that there is some deeper reason than the ones you have given. What
is it?
______________________________________
The overworked keyboard of Tim Maroney
duke!unc!tim (USENET)
tim.unc@udel-relay (ARPA)
The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill