Ex nfl cheerleader charged with rape of a 15 year old

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those saying that there's nothing wrong with a 47 year old woman seducing a 15 year old boy, here's another way to think about it: Would you be ok if this happened to your son? Or, for those with daughters, would you want your teenage daughter to date this boy now?

That's just cruel. The boy was raped. So, you're saying he's damaged goods now and isn't "datable"? You're mean.

I thought they had oral sex. Is that considered rape? I thought it falls under "I did not have sex with that woman!" defense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It wasn't that long ago when it was acceptable to get married and have children shortly after puberty. This practice was accepted and condoned by governments and religions. Somehow over the years this practice migrated from being morally acceptable to being one of the most reprehensible crimes possible. Age of Consent was also much lower years ago. Delaware for example, where this incident occurred, the Age of Consent was 7 in 1895. Yes, only 7.

Strange how quickly morals can change.

Our society is slowly beginning to value children. That's why morals change.

Is it value children or more due to sex becoming more taboo? You can do all sorts of things to kids today that is legal. You can tickle them, you can kiss them, you can hug them, you can hold their hand, you can spank them, you can give them candy, ... But, if you touch them in on particular spot it's suddenly a terrible thing.

Why are these certain spots so much different than any other? Why are there such a taboo morals associated with them? What truly is the difference between this cheerleader sucking the 15 year old boys finger or toe and sucking his penis? Other than it being taboo?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A lot depends on the maturity of the teenager. All 15-16 year olds are not the same.

I actually agree with you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It wasn't that long ago when it was acceptable to get married and have children shortly after puberty. This practice was accepted and condoned by governments and religions. Somehow over the years this practice migrated from being morally acceptable to being one of the most reprehensible crimes possible. Age of Consent was also much lower years ago. Delaware for example, where this incident occurred, the Age of Consent was 7 in 1895. Yes, only 7.

Strange how quickly morals can change.

Our society is slowly beginning to value children. That's why morals change.

Is it value children or more due to sex becoming more taboo? You can do all sorts of things to kids today that is legal. You can tickle them, you can kiss them, you can hug them, you can hold their hand, you can spank them, you can give them candy, ... But, if you touch them in on particular spot it's suddenly a terrible thing.

Why are these certain spots so much different than any other? Why are there such a taboo morals associated with them? What truly is the difference between this cheerleader sucking the 15 year old boys finger or toe and sucking his penis? Other than it being taboo?

It wasn't "this cheerleader" - it was the 47 year old parent - the adult supervisor - when his father picked him up at their beach house, he trusted Molly was there as the adult supervisor - not the predator that would rape their son

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It wasn't that long ago when it was acceptable to get married and have children shortly after puberty. This practice was accepted and condoned by governments and religions. Somehow over the years this practice migrated from being morally acceptable to being one of the most reprehensible crimes possible. Age of Consent was also much lower years ago. Delaware for example, where this incident occurred, the Age of Consent was 7 in 1895. Yes, only 7.

Strange how quickly morals can change.

Our society is slowly beginning to value children. That's why morals change.

Is it value children or more due to sex becoming more taboo? You can do all sorts of things to kids today that is legal. You can tickle them, you can kiss them, you can hug them, you can hold their hand, you can spank them, you can give them candy, ... But, if you touch them in on particular spot it's suddenly a terrible thing.

Why are these certain spots so much different than any other? Why are there such a taboo morals associated with them? What truly is the difference between this cheerleader sucking the 15 year old boys finger or toe and sucking his penis? Other than it being taboo?

You sound as rational as a pedophile.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For those saying that there's nothing wrong with a 47 year old woman seducing a 15 year old boy, here's another way to think about it: Would you be ok if this happened to your son? Or, for those with daughters, would you want your teenage daughter to date this boy now?

That's just cruel. The boy was raped. So, you're saying he's damaged goods now and isn't "datable"? You're mean.

I thought they had oral sex. Is that considered rape? I thought it falls under "I did not have sex with that woman!" defense.

OK..... Well, let's put it this way. According to law enforcement officials and prosecutors in the State of Delaware, if she did what she's accused of doing, it meets the legal definition of rape. And she'll be in jail a long time.

[Anonymous]

If the person is underage then it is rape.

However, I am more horrified that it is a mother who has committed this crime. Maybe I expect less deviant behavior from a woman who has given birth. Becoming a mother changes a female biologically and psychologically. That she could look at any friend of her son in this way seems unnatural to me.

[Anonymous]

I'm weirded out by how many people thnk this is a boys dream come true. I have 3 teenage boys and am horrified at the idea of a kids friends mother doing this. The double standard is intense-I can't imagine the people in here thinking a 15 yo girl and a 47 yo father of a friend would be okay.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It wasn't that long ago when it was acceptable to get married and have children shortly after puberty. This practice was accepted and condoned by governments and religions. Somehow over the years this practice migrated from being morally acceptable to being one of the most reprehensible crimes possible. Age of Consent was also much lower years ago. Delaware for example, where this incident occurred, the Age of Consent was 7 in 1895. Yes, only 7.

Strange how quickly morals can change.

Our society is slowly beginning to value children. That's why morals change.

Is it value children or more due to sex becoming more taboo? You can do all sorts of things to kids today that is legal. You can tickle them, you can kiss them, you can hug them, you can hold their hand, you can spank them, you can give them candy, ... But, if you touch them in on particular spot it's suddenly a terrible thing.

Why are these certain spots so much different than any other? Why are there such a taboo morals associated with them? What truly is the difference between this cheerleader sucking the 15 year old boys finger or toe and sucking his penis? Other than it being taboo?

my only response to you -

You are a sick mother fucker.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It wasn't that long ago when it was acceptable to get married and have children shortly after puberty. This practice was accepted and condoned by governments and religions. Somehow over the years this practice migrated from being morally acceptable to being one of the most reprehensible crimes possible. Age of Consent was also much lower years ago. Delaware for example, where this incident occurred, the Age of Consent was 7 in 1895. Yes, only 7.

Strange how quickly morals can change.

Our society is slowly beginning to value children. That's why morals change.

Is it value children or more due to sex becoming more taboo? You can do all sorts of things to kids today that is legal. You can tickle them, you can kiss them, you can hug them, you can hold their hand, you can spank them, you can give them candy, ... But, if you touch them in on particular spot it's suddenly a terrible thing.

Why are these certain spots so much different than any other? Why are there such a taboo morals associated with them? What truly is the difference between this cheerleader sucking the 15 year old boys finger or toe and sucking his penis? Other than it being taboo?

my only response to you -

You are a sick mother fucker.

Maybe so, but why are you unwilling to answer the questions? Is it perhaps the case you don't have a logical response to correlate with your morals?

[Anonymous]

Another life ruined by the criminal acts of a selfish and messed up adult.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It wasn't that long ago when it was acceptable to get married and have children shortly after puberty. This practice was accepted and condoned by governments and religions. Somehow over the years this practice migrated from being morally acceptable to being one of the most reprehensible crimes possible. Age of Consent was also much lower years ago. Delaware for example, where this incident occurred, the Age of Consent was 7 in 1895. Yes, only 7.

Strange how quickly morals can change.

Our society is slowly beginning to value children. That's why morals change.

Is it value children or more due to sex becoming more taboo? You can do all sorts of things to kids today that is legal. You can tickle them, you can kiss them, you can hug them, you can hold their hand, you can spank them, you can give them candy, ... But, if you touch them in on particular spot it's suddenly a terrible thing.

Why are these certain spots so much different than any other? Why are there such a taboo morals associated with them? What truly is the difference between this cheerleader sucking the 15 year old boys finger or toe and sucking his penis? Other than it being taboo?

my only response to you -

You are a sick mother fucker.

Maybe so, but why are you unwilling to answer the questions? Is it perhaps the case you don't have a logical response to correlate with your morals?

So you agree that you're a sick mother fucker.

good to know, as someone should probably report your sorry ass

As far as justifying behaviors of a pedophile, which seem to fit your MO, you must realize that there's a pattern in brain development, yes?

Teen brains have not yet developed far enough to control impulses. So any adult - like you, for example - who takes advantage during this stage of growth is indeed sick mother fucker.

Research the prefrontal cortex. Google is your friend.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It wasn't that long ago when it was acceptable to get married and have children shortly after puberty. This practice was accepted and condoned by governments and religions. Somehow over the years this practice migrated from being morally acceptable to being one of the most reprehensible crimes possible. Age of Consent was also much lower years ago. Delaware for example, where this incident occurred, the Age of Consent was 7 in 1895. Yes, only 7.

Strange how quickly morals can change.

Our society is slowly beginning to value children. That's why morals change.

Is it value children or more due to sex becoming more taboo? You can do all sorts of things to kids today that is legal. You can tickle them, you can kiss them, you can hug them, you can hold their hand, you can spank them, you can give them candy, ... But, if you touch them in on particular spot it's suddenly a terrible thing.

Why are these certain spots so much different than any other? Why are there such a taboo morals associated with them? What truly is the difference between this cheerleader sucking the 15 year old boys finger or toe and sucking his penis? Other than it being taboo?

my only response to you -

You are a sick mother fucker.

Maybe so, but why are you unwilling to answer the questions? Is it perhaps the case you don't have a logical response to correlate with your morals?

Not that poster but nobody's answering because the answers are obvious to everyone but you apparently. You seem to see sex as a solely physical act when in reality it's extremely emotional. Survivors of sex abuse often suffer PTSD, engage in self harm, suffer from depression and in extreme cases personality disorders like bipolar disorder. They often have attachment issues. Physically they were out at rick of contracting STD, some of which can be lifelong and/or impair fertility. They often struggle to have normal intimacy. That's just the beginning but I hope you get the idea.

[Anonymous]

I'd bet that she was molested as a child or teenager. Every no good woman is no good because of a no good man. And some like to put the blame on Eve.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

If that came onto me, I'd hit it too!

LOL