I don't like it. It is a slippery slope. I believe that college professors can get canned for this as well. You shouldn't meddle where you have a fiduciary duty to the other party. There are too many conflicts of interest. If it is true love, (can't say that I see how) and not lust, wait. Graduation dates come and go.

But by the rule of law, the constitutional right, if two people are of LEGAL age they have the right to have a sexual relationship like anyone else without it being criminalized. That is the other issue here, you can't take your personal opinion and force it on others if it goes againts their right by the constitution. And you gave your opinion by saying "can't say that I see how", so are we now going to have courts/groups that will look into what is true love or not, who is in love and who just have lust? It's doesn't matter, two ADULTS have the constitutional right to have sex, reguardless of the reason. That is why the Arkansas law was recently struck down, not sure if anyone challenged it in KY or not.

I guess people are too quick to post tnat they don't read what was already posted. A couple of hours ago we were posting in this thread of how if you are in a position of authority it doesn't matter if the kid is of legal ago or not.

I read the earlier posts.

But by the rule of law, the constitutional right, if two people are of LEGAL age they have the right to have a sexual relationship like anyone else without it being criminalized. That is the other issue here, you can't take your personal opinion and force it on others if it goes againts their right by the constitution. And you gave your opinion by saying "can't say that I see how", so are we now going to have courts/groups that will look into what is true love or not, who is in love and who just have lust? It's doesn't matter, two ADULTS have the constitutional right to have sex, reguardless of the reason. That is why the Arkansas law was recently struck down, not sure if anyone challenged it in KY or not.

 

Last I checked, I wasn't the legislature. I did give my opinion, and it was, if you really like each other wait until graduation. Even then, I hardly find it ok for a 30 year-old to date his 17 year-old student, or whatever. I also don't find it ok for a lawyer to engage in sex w/ a client. I also didn't say anything about criminalization. I posted the Regulation that as far as I could tell, only covered suspending or revoking of a teacher's license. That is Constitutional. You are allowed to hold professionals to a code of ethics, and fire them for violations.

 

So, to be short, I find it wrong for a high school teacher to mess around w/ one of his/her students. I find it wrong for a father to mess around with a barely legal friend of his daughters, (or a mother and son's friends). Just because two people consented doesn't mean that the older person should stop being the adult in the situation.

o

So it doesn't apply if the person is over 18.

 

The Regulation makes no mention of age, just pertaining to duties owed to a "student"

Last I checked, I wasn't the legislature. I did give my opinion, and it was, if you really like each other wait until graduation. Even then, I hardly find it ok for a 30 year-old to date his 17 year-old student, or whatever. I also don't find it ok for a lawyer to engage in sex w/ a client. I also didn't say anything about criminalization. I posted the Regulation that as far as I could tell, only covered suspending or revoking of a teacher's license. That is Constitutional. You are allowed to hold professionals to a code of ethics, and fire them for violations.

 

So, to be short, I find it wrong for a high school teacher to mess around w/ one of his/her students. I find it wrong for a father to mess around with a barely legal friend of his daughters, (or a mother and son's friends). Just because two people consented doesn't mean that the older person should stop being the adult in the situation.

 

Sounds like you have an issue with people dating persons that aren't their same age.

Again, people have to put their personal opinion aside and look at the constitutionality of the law. The LAW says they are both adults. Age doesn't matter as long as both parties are of legal age, who am I or anyone else to say what two people of legal age can or cannot do with each other, it's no ones business.

Sounds like you have an issue with people dating persons that aren't their same age.

 

I would have to agree with Mex...think in the situations of most mentors/teachers/ministers/coaches/parents/bosses/etc, it's completely irresponsible and pretty unethical to say it's okay for them to go after their corresponding underling.

Sounds like you have an issue with people dating persons that aren't their same age.

 

Uh, when it is 30 and 17...yeah a little bit of one.

 

There is a world of difference between 45 and 32 and 30 and 17.

Again, people have to put their personal opinion aside and look at the constitutionality of the law. The LAW says they are both adults. Age doesn't matter as long as both parties are of legal age, who am I or anyone else to say what two people of legal age can or cannot do with each other, it's no ones business.

 

Incorrect. When it comes to holding onto her job, it is legal to terminate her. That has nothing to do w/ my opinion of the creepiness of people who do this type of thing. It has everything to do with the Code of Ethics that teachers agree to teach under.

 

If there isn't a fiduciary relationship, then I don't care what they do. I will not agree with it though.

Uh, when it is 30 and 17...yeah a little bit of one.

 

There is a world of difference between 45 and 32 and 30 and 17.

 

From your previous post you said a guy/women going after one of their son's/daughter's barely legal (I would assume 18) friends. When does it become okay for an older person to attempt to date someone they're attracted to that is younger, but of a legal age? How small of a gap must their be for it to be acceptable? How old must the younger person be?

The Regulation makes no mention of age, just pertaining to duties owed to a "student"

Actually, the statute he posted did say "under 18." However, that may have been changed by later statutes.

Channel 12 is trying to make the school out to be the bad guy in this, because they were wise enough not to give them any juicy information. Of course, they used the open records law to get what they wanted.

Channel 12 is trying to make the school out to be the bad guy in this, because they were wise enough not to give them any juicy information. Of course, they used the open records law to get what they wanted.

 

From what I read, the school isn't talking to parents either. Has anything been communicated?

I don't know for sure on this statue but I think what it does is increase the age of consent from 16 to 18 for "caretakers" which teachers are a part of. I am not sure if there is anything (by KRS) that says a teacher can't have "relations" with someone 18 that is a student. Sure ethically and I am sure by a million teachers codes that is off limits but I mean something you can be criminally prosecuted for. I am all for anyone in the know on this statute to weigh in?

 

To be clear, under normal circumstances the age of consent is 16 in KY so if someone is 16 they can have sex with whoever they please unless this statue regulates it.

From your previous post you said a guy/women going after one of their son's/daughter's barely legal (I would assume 18) friends. When does it become okay for an older person to attempt to date someone they're attracted to that is younger, but of a legal age? How small of a gap must their be for it to be acceptable? How old must the younger person be?

 

Ask Woody Allen or Morgan Freeman?