Man charged for sex with wife
--posted by Tony Garcia on 7/29/2005
Strange story.
Matthew Koso, 22, was charged Monday with first-degree sexual assault, punishable by up to 50 years in prison. He was released on $7,500 bail pending an Aug. 17 preliminary hearing.
Koso had pre-marital sex with his wife-to-be. And Nebraska is charging him for it?
The couple were married in May by a judge in Hiawatha, Kan., just across the state line from Falls City.
Nebraska allows people as young as 17 to marry if they have parental consent.
Kansas law, however, sets no minimum marriage age, although case law sets the minimum age at 14 for boys and 12 for girls. The marriage must be approved by both parents or guardian, or by a district court judge, said Whitney Watson, spokesman for Kansas Attorney General Phill Kline. A judge also must approve if only one parent approves.
Uh oh. I don't like where this is going. She had to cross state lines to get married because she is a minor. Well, he was 21 at the time. If she was 16 then I guess that would be not-so-bad. Besides, the parents gave permission and they have to be watching out for her welfare, right.
Oh, I missed the first paragraph of the story.
A 22-year-old man faces criminal charges in Nebraska for having sex with an underage 13-year-old girl, although he legally married her in Kansas after she became pregnant.
So my question really is why are the parents not being charged with endangerment? Why allow her to marry the man who is 150% the age of the girl? More than that, why encourage her to cross state lines.
Worse than that...why is Kansas not being ridiculed for this practice of allowing child molestation.
See, we as a society have to decide. Is it molestation under the age of consent (18)? If so, how is it justifiable to allow a marriage that would allow what otherwise would be a registerable sex offense? If Koso took pictures of his youthful wife during their wedding night why would that not be considered child pornography?
The larger concept is that this society must pick ONE age at which everything is allowed. You pick the age, but make it for everything. Drinking, smoking, marriage, contracts, eligibility for prison, graduation from juvenile criminal systems, sex industry, driving, firearms, joining the military...EVERYTHING should be at that age. That ONE magical birthday makes the person 100% adult with all of the privileges and responsibilities.
There, now that I got that off of my chest, what age should it be?
5 Comments:
Hey Tony,
When did I move up from "watching for potential" to "Worth frequenting"?
Thanks!
ABS
Let's make it 8 or 10. Get 'em serving in the military young! :)
There's no magic, one size fits all age. There will always be a significant percentage of those not really ready for a given adult responsibility, if John Kerry is any example.
18, if you're doing one age fits all. People who can die for their country should be able to legally have a drink.
Driving at 18 doesn't sound too bad either. Although a 2 year gap between driving and drinking.
Tracy, in this question we assume that we can move EVERYTHING "adult" to this magical age. So, we can move enlistment age to 16 or 20 if you choose.
Do you want to keep "18"?
R-Five, I am not implying that ALL people are adults at a magical age. I am asking what one age should all rights, responsibilities and privileges, etc, of adulthood (as far as legal definitions).
As it is now not all people are ready for their driver's license at 18, but the law affords them that privilege at 18 cuz they are an adult. You see, what I mean?
Trillin,
45? That will do wonders for our military! Contracts will be kind of a bear to work out, huh.
Becket...when you started agreeing with me is when you moved up. LOL.
Post a Comment
<< Home