God Bless RI!!!!
- Thread starter Its_Me
- Start date
Am I the only one who can see something wrong with this?
Lungzyn
Die For Me
jod0565
Member, you member...
"Establishments with city liquor licenses need to keep the teenagers from the booze, but not the stage. “You can’t serve alcohol if you’re under 18,” Weston said, “but you can be the target of a man’s groping hands at age 16.”
Wow, this is strange.
Personally, I believe the gals should be 18 plus.
Wow, this is strange.
Personally, I believe the gals should be 18 plus.
Will E Worm
Conspiracy...
Apparently, not long enough. Fire this guy and give him life in prison.
It is to someone without a fully functioning brain that just wants to exploit children.
OK, I'd better go book a trip to Rhode Island and get off this thread before I get myself banned from the board. 
What is really the significance of being 18 years old??? Why is there so much difference in a year or two? I don't know where anyone else is from, but where I'm at you can be emancipated at 16! That of course means you can live your life as an adult as well as get tried in the courts as one. There has always been a strong sexual fetish for teens anyway. With all the porn dedicated to schoolgirls and teen-themed content being such big sellers, I struggle to see how folks have a big problem with this?
I personally do have a problem with porn themed to suggest chicks are under aged. I personally don't get it but to those who do, knock yourselves out as it's at least "legal".
The problem/difference with emancipation versus under aged people working in this capacity is the exploitative nature of the type of work. Who should want to sanction someone who isn't an adult performing in an adult oriented capacity?
I know the argument is some of these chicks look older than they are but there has to be some basis for limiting certain types of things and in this case it should be the age of majority.
Give what guy life in prison? The cop?
And I am going to play devil's advocate here.......who's being "exploited"? If the age of consent in RI to HAVE SEX is 16, what's the big deal if she is just up on a stage dancing? I don't see the problem. Look, at 16, no, you don't know much, but you do know enough, at least I did.......if someone 16 year old tart wants to dance naked in front of strangers, I say fine, go ahead. Morality is in the eye of the beholder.
It's not like there are raiders going around kidnapping wholesome youths and forcing them to swing around poles.....no pun intended......if she wants to do it, I say go for it, make a ton of money.........
Will E Worm
Conspiracy...
It's wrong, just admit it.
Tell that to the judge.
This government, who oversteps their bounds, believes they have the right to make the laws. Even when their "laws" supersede the Constitution, Bill of Rights, and States laws.
Tell that to the judge.
This government, who oversteps their bounds, believes they have the right to make the laws. Even when their "laws" supersede the Constitution, Bill of Rights, and States laws.
Facetious
Moderated
Mega, is it really you ? :tongue: :nanner:
Exploitative is a highly subjective term, and in todays society, so is adult. So if a 16 yo is old enough to decide to be emancipated, and does so, does she not then have the right to choose stripping as her profession? Why is that we can accept this persons legal right to adulthood, but can't accept her working in an adult business? I don't know man...
Well despite what you may assume about ol 'Mega, the right I hold in the greatest regard is the right to self determination. That is, the right of the individual who is legally capable of doing so to decide what is in their best interests as long as those interests don't violate directly or proximately the rights of others. That is the foundation of liberal/libertarianism, whose principles are clearly in deed (or in practice) represented in the founding of the US.
"Exploitative" very well may be subjective but the concept does exist. With respect to your assumptions you've overlooked one flaw in them. A 16 y/o becoming emancipated is not the exclusive product of their decision. It is a condition based circumstance. You do though make a valid point. But I believe the age of consent per the article there is 16. That's what I have a problem with. You may well determine for yourself that the age of consent being 18 is an arbitrary and subjective one and that certainly may be so. However, it is a consistent one and as such I just fall back on my belief that in this case it can be exploitative. You don't know how much it bothers me to even apply the concept as the concept relies on an idea I'm generally opposed to. That being the assigning of victimhood to someone who is apparently cognizant enough to not assign it to themselves.
ChefChiTown
The secret ingredient? MY BALLS
This can't be real.
I definetly see your concerns on that. Real talk.
So now the AOC varies by state? This'll make dating younger women awfully confusing!!!!
The age of consent has always varied by state.
Several years ago there was a stip club owner in Illinois, in a town near me, that got in a little bit of trouble for having a legally emancipated 17-year-old dancing at the club. He said that he was advised by attorneys and a judge that it was legal. He didn't get in any real trouble for that. He did agree to close the club.
I'm kind of surprised that 1.) the law hasn't been changed, and 2.) that the strip clubs would just simply not do it, since it could pose a liability for them.
I'm kind of surprised that 1.) the law hasn't been changed, and 2.) that the strip clubs would just simply not do it, since it could pose a liability for them.
